? 1- ' ¦* l"

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

STMBOLISMi

EXPOSITION

U F THE

DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN
CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS,
AS EVIDENCED BY THEIR SYMBOLICAL WRITINGS,
BT
JOHN ADAM MOEHLER, D.D.
KEAN OF WUHZBURG, AND LATE PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MUNJCU.
TRANSLATED FROM! THE GERMAN,
WITH A MEMOIR OF THE AUTHOR,

SRECEBED EY AN HISTORICAL SKETCH OF THE STATE OF PHOTESTANTISM AND CATHOLICISM
IN GERMANY FOR THE LAST HUNDRED TEARS.

BT
JAMES BURTON ROBERTSON, Esq.,
TBANSLATOB OF SCHLEGEL's FHTLOSOPHT OF HISTORY. V ::'

TWO VOLUMES OP THE LONDON EDITION IN ONE.

new-York:
published by ed-ward dunigan,
NO. 151 FDLTOK-STREET. 1844.

^ALE

TO THE
RIGHT REV. THOMAS GBIFFITHS, D.D.
BISHOP OF OtKX.i, .*>'n rK'.\R ,4FOSroI.IC OF THK
i.O.\rO.\ DISTRICT,.
THIS rR.\NSHTU'N IS MOST RESFBCTPUI,!, V DKDICATKn,
I.S A TKSTIMOJfV or PROKOlNr KKSFKCT,
Br HIS tORDSHIp's >'OST HUMBLE JIND DEVOTED SKBV.\NTj
THE TRANSLATOR,

INTRODUCTORY NOTICE

THE TRANSLATOR.

Some years ago I presented the pubUc with a translation of Frederick
Schlegel's Philosophy of History, which may be termed a sort of " Dis
course on Universal History," adapted to the actual state and wanti
of Catholic Science. I now venture to bring forward a translation of
a work that has heen called by a French critic a necessary supplement
to Bossuet's " History of the Variations of the Protestant Churches" —
a work well suited also to the present necessities of the Catholic
Church, and fitted for the existing state of controversy between the two,
great religious parties in Europe.
The kind reception which my former task experienced from the Brit
ish public, at a time when all Catholic productions were still viewed
with peculiar distrust and aversion, encourages me to hope that now,
when so happy and so remarkable a change has come over the Protes
tant mind of England, the sarae indulgence will not be refused to my
present effort. The work, indeed, whereof a translation is now offered
to the public, enters far more deeply into the discussion of those great
questions, which divide the minds and the hearts of our countrymen.
The moral wound that for three centuries hath disfigured the aspect,
crippled or misapplied the energy, and exhausted the vital forces of our
country, is here probed with a firm and dexterous, though most gentle
hand. Yet Dr. Moehler's book is more historical, explanatory, and ana
lytical, than really polemical. And the spirit of eminent charity, which
breathes through his pages — the mild accents wherewith error is re
buked — the aversion from all exaggeration, that will never push beyond
their legitimate bearing the words of an adversary — the exquisite sense
of justice, that never fails to award to merit, wherever it is found, its
due recognition ; that is ever ready to make allowance for human
fiailty ; that amid the greatest aberrations of the human mind, points
with pleasure to the truths which tempered them, as well as to the
truths which they abused ; that even in the most hideous caricatures
of fanaticism loves to seek ^©ut some trait of the Divine original, which

vi INTRODUCTORY NOTICE
that fanaticism strove to realize or restore ;— all these qualities, I trust,
will not fail to obtain from the author, even from the most prejudiced
Protestant, an impartial and attentive hearing.
A distinguished English Protestant writer once characterized Bos-
suet's " History of the Variations," as a book " where a Catholic might
study his religion, and a Protestant learn logic." The same remark
applie.s in an equal, perhaps more eminent, degree, to Moehler's Sym
bolism ; yet with this difference, that the latter is a work, where a Pro-
testant, too, may study his religion. The Protestant of every denomi
nation may here see the tenets of his own religious community on the
controverted points stated and e.xplained according to the most solemn
and unexceptionable of all authorities — the public formularies of that
religious community itself. The declarations of such formularies are
placed in juxta-position with those of the Catholic Church. By this
means, the better understanding of the doctrines of either Church is
promoted ; mutual misconceptions are obviated ; the points of agree
ment, as well as the points of divergence, are more prominently brought
out ; the means for the reconciliation of religious parties are at once
laid open and facilitated ; and as a clearer knowledge of error leads of
necessity to a better appreciation of truth, the return to the true Church
is thus at once rendered more easy and more certain.
This work, in its apologetical parts, noticing but cursorily or inci
dentally the historical and traditionary proofs of the Catholic faith, and
confining Itself in general to an apriori vindication of our tenets, I re
commend the Protestant reader, who happens to be totally unacquainted
with writings of Catholic controversy, to consult, prior to the perusal
of the Symbolism, one or more of the approved books of Catholic evi
dences ; where the external, as well as intrinsic, arguments in favour of
our Church are more fully and elaborately entered into. Among these,
I may particularly recommend three excellent works, which, though
differing in their plan, will furnish the Protestant with the proofs re
quired. I mean the Right Rev. Dr. Milner's solid and instructive book,
The End of Religious Controvers-y ; Dr. Kirk's learned work, The
Faith of Catholics ; and the ingenious, learned, and eloquent Lectures
on the Principal Doctrines and Practices of the Catholic Church, by my
illustrious friend, the Right Rev. Dr. Wiseman. If, besides one or
other of these works, the Protestant reader has leisure to consult the
history by Bossuet, above referred to, he will then derive from the pe
rusal of the Symbolism more spiritual advantage and intellectual profit ;
and will find but few passages that will present a difficulty. In the
course of perusal it will be well for him frequently to refer to the decrees
of the Council of Trent.

BY THE TRANSLATOR. vii
¦
The word " Symbolism," or, as the Germans say, " Symbolik," has,
it is proper to observe, a two-fold signification. Sometimes it means
the science, that has for its object to explain the symbol, or outward
signs used in the religions of antiquity ; and in this sense it is em
ployed by Creuzer, as the title to his celebrated work on that subject.
At other times, the word is used by German divines, Catholic and Pro
testant, to signify the science of comparative inquiry into the Confes
sions, or Symbohcal writings, of the different Christian Churches ; and
this is the sense it bears in the title to the book here translated.
There is a small, but learned work, entitled Confessions of Faith, by
my lamented friend, the late Mr. Charles Butler, where the reader will
find an interesting literary history of the formularies of the different
CJiristian communities.
It was my wish that this translation should have appeared two years
a.go ; but other literary occupations have, contrary to my hope, retarded
its publication. The Protestant mind, however, I flatter myself, is now
better prepared for the reception of the work, than at the period referred
to ; and if, in the great moral ferment which now pervades my coun
try, it should be the means of allaying and reconciling, in any degree,
the agitated elements of religious strife ; if it should extricate but one
spirit from the difficulties, the distractions, and the anguish of doubt,
wherein so many are now involved, and should help him on to the solu
tion of that great problem, whereon all depends, I shall consider my
labour to be more than sufficiently recompensed. May He, from whom
every good gift descends, shed his blessing on the present undertaking,
and enable all to come to fhe perusal of the work with the suitable dis
positions !
WimzBDHG, Bavaria,
August, 1843.

AUTHOR'S PREFACE

TO THE FIRST EDITION.

EvEHT book has a two-fold history ; a history before, and a history
after its publication. The first can be described only by the author
himself; and respecting this, the public imposes on him the duty to
make no mystery, and, accordingly, to relate to it partly the outward
occasions that induced him to undertake the composition of his work ;
and partly to assign the more intrinsic reasons, by which he was deter
mined to the undertaking. Hereupon I have now to communicate to
the indulgent reader the following remarks.
The present work has arisen out of a course of lectures, that for
several years I have delivered on the doctrinal differences between
Catholics and Protestants. On this subject it has been the custom, for
years, in all the Lutheran and Calvinistic universities of Germany, to
deliver lectures to the students of theology ; and highly approving of
this custom, I resolved to transplant it to the Catholic soil, for the fol
lowing reasons. Certainly those, who are called to take the lead in
theological learning, may be justly expected to acquire a solid and
comprehensive knowledge of the tenets of the religious communities,
that for so long a time have stood opposed to each other in mutual
rivalry, and still endeavour to maintain this their position. Justly are
they required not to rest satisfied by any means with mere general, un
certain, obscure, vague, and unconnected notions upon the great vital
question, which has not only, for three hundred years, continually
agitated the religious life of Europe, but has in part so deeply and
mightily convulsed it.
If the very notion of scientific culture makes it the duty of the theo
logian to enter with the utmost possible precision and depth into the
nature of the differences that divide religious parties ; if it imperiously
requires him to set himself in a condition to render account of, and
assign the grounds for, the doctrinal peculiarities of the different com
munions ; so, regard for his own personal dignity and satisfaction of

X PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
mind, presses the matter on him ; nay, on every well-instructed Chr
tian, with a still more imperious claim. For what is less consistent w
our own self-respect, than to neglect instituting the most careful a
accurate inquiry into the grounds and foundation of our own religic
belief; and convincing ourselves whether, and how far, we stand oi
firm footing, or whether we have not placed ourselves on some treach
ous covering, that conceals beneath it an enormous abyss 1 How is
possible to enjoy a true and solid peace of the soul, when in the mii
of great ecclesiastical communities, that all pretend alike to the poss
sion of the pure and unmutilated truth, we stand almost without refli
tion, and without possessing any adequate instruction ? There is,
deed, in this respect, a quiet, such as they possess, in relation to a fut\
life, who are utterly heedless whether there be such a state. This i
quiet that casts deep, indelible disgrace on any being endowed w
reason. Every man, accordingly, owes it to himself, to acquire
clearest conception of the doctrinal peculiarities, the inward power t
strength, or the inward weakness and untenableness of the rehgi
community, whereof he acknowledges himself a member ; a concept
which entirely depends on a very accurate and precise knowledge
the opposite system of belief. There can even be no solid acquisili
nor confident use of the arguments for any communion, unless they
conceived in relation to the antagonist system. Nay, a sohd acqua
ance with any confession, must necessarily include its apology, ii
least that confession make any pretensions to truth. For every e
cated Christian possesses such general notions of religion and Ch
tianity — he possesses such general acquaintance with Holy Writ — 1
so soon as any proposition be presented to him in its true hght, an(
its general bearings, he can form a judgment as to its truth, and im:
diately discern its conformity or its repugnance to the fundamei
doctrines of Christianity.
We are also at a loss to discover, how a practical theologian, espi
ally in countries where conflicting coiiiniunions prevail, can adequal
discharge his functions, when he is unable to characterize the disti
tive doctrines of those communions. For public homilies, indeed, on r
ters of religious controversy, the cycle of CathoUc festivals, conform.
to the origin and the nature of our Church, happily gives no occasion .
the festivals established by her have reference only to facts in the lii
Jesus Christ, and to those truths, whereon all our faith and all our h(
depend ; as well as to the commemoration of those highly meritor
servants of God, who hold a distinguished place in the history of
Church, such, in particular, as were instrumental in the general pr
gation and consolidation of Christianity, and in its special introduc

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xi
into certain countries. For the office of preaching, accordingly, the
Catholic pastor, with the exception of some very rare and peculiar
cases, can make no immediate use of his knowledge of other creeds.
On the other hand, we may hope that his discourses on the doctrines of
the Catholic faith, will be rendered more solid, more comprehensive,
more animated, and more impressive, when those doctrines have been
studied by him, in their opposition to the antagonist confessions in the
strict sense of that word. That the highest class of catechumens
should receive solid instruction, nay, a far more solid one than has
hitherto been given, on the dogmas controverted between Christians ;
nay, that in this instruction, the doctrinal differences should be ex
plicitly, and as fully as possible attended to, is a matter on which I
entertain not the slightest doubt. Whence proceeds the deplorable
helplessness of many Catholics, when, in their intercourse with Protes
tants, the concerns of religious faith come under discussion ? Whence
the indifference of so many among them towards their own religion 1
From what other cause, but from their almost total ignorance of the
doctrinal peculiarities of their Church, in respect to other religious
communities ? Whence comes it, that whole Catholic parishes are so
easily seduced by the false mysticism of their curates, when these hap
pen to be secretly averse to the doctrines of the Church 1 Whence
even the fact, that many curates are so open to the pietistic errors, but
because both, priest and congregation, have never received the adequate,
nay, any instruction at all, respecting the doctrinal differences between
the Churches ? How much are Catholics put to sharae by the very
great activity which Protestants display in this matter ! It is of course
to be understood, that instruction on these points of controversy must be
imparted with the utmost charity, conciliation, and mildness, with a sin
cere love of truth, and without any exaggeration, and with constantly
impressing on the minds of men, that however we be bound to reject
errors (for the pure doctrine of Jesus Christ, and the Gospel truth, is the
most sacred property of man), yet are we required by our Church to
embrace all men with love, for Christ's sake, and to evince in their re
gard all the abundance of Christian virtues. Lastly, it is clear, that
opportune and inopportune questions, consultations, and conferences, on
the doctrines controverted between the Churches, will never fail to oc
cur ; but, most assuredly, the appropriate reply, the wished-for counsel,
and the instructive refutation, will be wanting, in case the pastor be not
solidly grounded in a knowledge of the respective formularies of the
Christian communities.
But if what I have said justifies the delivery of academic courses, on
the doctrinal peculiarities of the different communions, yet it proves not

xii PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
the necessity of their publication, at least as regards their essential su
stance. On this subject I will take the liberty of making the followu
remarks. In the Protestant Church, for many years, a series of mar
als, on Symbolism, have been published. The elder Plank, Marheine
(in two works, a larger and a smaller), Winer, Clausen, and others, ha
tried their effbrts in this department. The Catholics, indeed, on th,
part, have put forth a great multitude of apologetic and such like wori
having for their object to correct the misrepresentation of our doctrin
as set forth by non-Catholics. But any book containing a scienti
discussion of all the doctrinal peculiarities of the Protestant Church
has not fallen within my knowledge. Accordingly, in communicati
to the public the substance of my lectures, I conceived I should fill
a very perceptible void in Catholic literature.
During my researches into the authorities required by the subject
my lectures, I thought I had further occasion to observe, that the ter
tory I had begun to explore, had not by any means received a sui
ciently careful cultivation, and that it was yet capable of offering mu
useful and desirable produce. This holds good even when we rega
the matter from the mere historical point of view. But it cannot f
to occur, that by bringing to light data not sufficiently used, becat
they were not thoroughly understood, or had been consigned again
oblivion : the higher scientific judgment, on the mutual relations of f
Christian communities, will be rendered more mature and circumspe
Whether my inquiries, in either respect, have been attended with a
success, it is for competent judges to decide. Thus much, at least,
beheve I may assert, that my labours will offer to Catholic theologJB
especially, many a hint, that their industry would not be unrepaid, if
this department they were to devote themselves to sohd researches. I
several decades, the most splendid talents spend their leisure, nay, gi
up their lives, to inquiries into the primitive religions and mythologi
so remote from us both as to space and time ; but the efforts to ma
us better acquainted with ourselves, have evidently been more rare a
less perseverant, in proportion as this problem is a matter of nearer cc
cern than the former. There are not, indeed, wanting a countli
multitude of writings, that dilate in prolix dissertations on the relatic
between the different Churches. But alas ! their authors too oft
possess scarcely the most superficial knowledge of the real state
facts ; and hereby it not unfrequently comes to pass, that treatis
which would even perhaps merit the epithet of ingenious, tend only
render the age more superficial, and to cause the most important qu
tions that can engage the human mind and heart, to be most frivolou;
overlooked. Such sort of writings are entitled " Considerations

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.

xni

while, in truth, nothing (objective) was at all considered; but mere
phantoms of the brain that passed before the writer.
Pacific objects, also, induced me to commit this work to the press ;
and these objects I conceived I should be able to attain, by giving the
most precise and the most unreserved description of the doctrinal differ-
ences. I did not, indeed, dream of any peace between the Churches,
deserving the name of a true reunion, as being about to be established
m the present time. For such a peace cannot be looked for in an age,
which is so deeply degraded, that even the guides of the people have
oftentimes so utterly lost sight of the very essence of faith, that they
define it as the adoption of what appears to them probable, or most
probable ; whereas its nature consists in embracing, with undoubting
certainty, the revealed truth, which can be only one. As many men
now believe, the heathens also believed ; for they were by no means
devoid of opinions respecting divine things. When in so many quar
ters there is no faith, a reunion of faith is inconceivable. Hence, only
an union in unbelief could be attained ; that is to say, such a one
wherein the right is mutually conceded to think what one will, and
wherein there is therefore a mutual tacit understanding, that the ques
tion regards mere human opinions, and that it is a matter left undecided,
whether in Christianity God have really revealed Himself or not. For
with the belief in Christ, as a true envoy of the Father of light, it is
by no means consistent, that those who have been taught by him, should
be unable to define in what his revelations on divine things consist, and
what, on the other hand, is in contradiction to his word and his ordi
nances. All things, not this or that in particular, appear, accordingly,
opposed to a religious union. A real removal, therefore, of the difier-
ences existing between the Christian communities, appears to me to be
still remote. But in the age in which we live, I flattered myself that I
might do something towards bringing about a religious peace, by re
vealing a true knowledge of the great dispute ; in so far as by this
knowledge, men must come to perceive, that that contest sprang out of
the most earnest endeavours of both parties to uphold the truth, — the
pure and genuine Christianity in all its integrity. I have made it there
fore my duty, to define, with the utmost possible precision, the points
of religious difference ; and, nowhere, and at no time, to cloak and dis
guise them. The opinion sometimes entertained, that the differences
are not of importance, and affect not the vitals of Christianity, can
conduce only to rautual contempt : for opponents, who are conscious of
not having adequate grounds for opposing each other, and yet do so,
must despise one another. And, certainly, it is this vague feeling, of
being an adversary of this stamp, that has in modern times given rise

xiv PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
to violent sallies on the part of many Protestants against Catholics, Abi
vice versa ; for many, by a sort of self-deception, think by these sallies
to stifle the inward reproaches of their conscience, and mistake the
forced irritation against an opposite communion, for a true pain on ac
count of the rejection of truth on the part of its adherents. Even the
circumstance is not rare, that an ignorance of the true points of differ
ence leads to the invention of false ones. And this certainly keeps up
a hostile, uncharitable, spirit of opposition between parties, far more than
a just and accurate knowledge of the distinctive doctrines could do ;
for nothing wounds and embitters more than unfounded charges. From
the same cause it so frequently happens, that men on both sides charge
each other with obduracy of will, and with a selfish regard to mere
personal and transitory interests, and ascribe to these alone the divisions
in religious life. Protestants are uncommonly apt, without hesitation,
to ascribe to what they denominate hierarchical arrogance and the plan
of obscuration, any resistance in the Cathohc Church to the full influx
of Protestant light. Many Catholics, on the other hand, are of opinion,
that, in the same way, as at the commencement of the Reformation,
political interests, and the desire to exercise over the Church an abso
lute domination, were the sole inducements that engaged princes
to embrace and encourage the Protestant doctrines ; and domestic
ease, sensual gratifications, hollow arrogance, and a frivolous love of
independence, were the only motives that brought over Churchmen to
the new opinions ; so this is for the most part the case, even at the
present day. These charges, indeed, of pride, arrogance, and the rest,
which parties bring against each other, cannot, alas ! be entirely dis
puted. We know, moreover, from experience, that everywhere there
are very zealous men, who in their conduct towards opposite com
munions, are not actuated by quite base motives, yet have immediately
in view only the interests of a party, a faction, or a system, and not
the cause of Divine truth, especially in its living manifestation in Christ
Jesus, who should alone be the object of our love, and all else, only in
so far as it is nearly or remotely connected with that love. All this,
indeed, is unquestionably true. Yet it would betoken very great nar
rowness of mind, if the duration of the mighty religious contest were
not sought for in deeper causes than in those assigned. Under these
circumstances, I conceived it were no small gain, if I should succeed in
drawing back attention entirely to the matter itself, and in establishing
the conviction, that in the conflict between Catholicism and Protest-
tantism, moral interests are defended ; a conviction, which, as it impUes
in the adversaries earnestness and sincerity, must lead to more concili
atory results, and is alone calculated to advance the plan, which, in the
permission of so fearful a strife, Divine Providence had in view.

PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. xv
Lastly, I must mention also a phenomenon of the age, which, if I
remember right, first inspired me with the thought of committing to the
press my treatises on the distinctive doctrines of the Christian com
munions. For a long time Lutheranism seemed to have entirely
disappeared from Germany,-^at least to possess no voice in public
opinion ; in fact, it was scarcely represented in literature by a single
theologian of any name. In our thoughtful Germany, the gloomier
Calvinism never found itself really at home ; and when it penetrated
into some of its provinces, it was almost always with considerable modi
fications. Its real home has always been a part of Switzerland and of
France ; next Holland, England, and Scotland.
Through the great revolution in public affairs during our times, the
old orthodox Protestantism has again assumed new life, and not only
finds many adherents among the clergy and laity, but in the number of
its partisans can reckon very able theologians. As was natural to be
expected, it immediately marked out its position relatively to the-
Catholic Church, and assailed the latter with all the resources it could
command. The more this party visibly increases, and, partly by its
junction with the Pietistic movement that had previously existed, partly
by the encouragement of one of the most influential cabinets in Ger
many,* begins again to constitute a power ; the more must Catholics
feel the necessity of taking up their right position in respect to it, and
of clearly discerning the true nature of the relation wherein they stand
towards it. This, however, is not so easy, as we might at the first view
imagine. For when from Rationalism and Naturalism we must turn
our thoughts to the old Protestantism as represented in the symbolical
books, we are required to transport ourselves into a totally different re
ligious world. For while for the last fifty years Catholics have been
called upon to defend only the Divine elements in Christianity, the
point of combat is now changed, and they are required to uphold the
human element in the Christian religion. We must now march pre
cisely from one extreme to the other. Yet the Catholic has this advan
tage, that his religious system embraces as well what constitutes an
object of one-sided or exclusive reverence with the rationalist, as what
the orthodox Protestant, with an equally one-sided or exclusive vene
ration, adheres to in Christianity. In fact, these two contrarieties are ir
the Catholic system adjasted, and perfectly reconciled. The Catholic
faith is as much akin to one principle, as to the other ; and the CathoUc
can comprehend the two, because his reUgious system constitutes th<
unity of both.

* Prusaia is here alluded to. — Trans.

xvi PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
The Protestant rationalists are indebted to Luther, only in so far as
he acquired for them the right to profess completely, the reverse of
what he himself, and the religious community he founded, maintained.
And the orthodox Protestants have with the rationalists no tie of con
nexion, save the saddening conviction, that Luther established a Church,
the very nature whereof must compel it to bear such adversaries with
patience in its bosom, and not even to possess the power of " turning
them away." The Catholic, on the other hand, has with either party
a moral affinity, inherent in his very doctrines : he stands higher than
either, and therefore overlooks them both. He has alike what distin-
guishes the two, and is therefore free from their one-sided failings. His
religious system is no loose, mechanical patchwork combination of the
two others, for it was anterior to either ; and when it was first reveal
ed to the Church, organically united the truth, which in the other two
is separated. The adverse parties seceded from the Catholic Church,
breaking up and dividing its doctrine — the one appropriating the human,
the other the divine principle in Christianity ; just as if the indivisible
could be at pleasure divided !
I have further to observe, that German solidity, or German pedantry,
or German distrustfulness, call it by what name we will, appeared to
rae to require that I should give tho passages I quoted at full length.
The reader is thus enabled to form his own judgment, by the materials
brought before him, or at least is furnished with the means for testing
the judgment of the author. I was bound to suppose, that to by far the
greater number of my readers the symbolical books of the Protestants,
the writings of Luther, Zwinglius, and Calvin, were inaccessible ; and
jf I were unable to preserve the true medium between an excess and a
deficiency in quotations, I preferred to offend by the former. He, who
is unable to read the quotations, which are for the most part thrown into
the notes, can easily pass them over. On the other hand, it cannot be
said, that he who would feel desirous to make himself acquainted with
the passages cited, could have easily collected these himself.
Tubingen, 1832.

AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION.
From the attention with which the theological public have been pleased
to favour this work, I have conceived it my duty to endeavour, as much
as the small space of time that intervened between the first and the

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION. xvii
¦second edition, allowed, to improve and even to enlarge it. In the first
part, there are few sections, which, whether in the language, or whether
by additions or omissions in the texts, or in the notes, have not under
gone changes advantageous, as I trust, to the work. Under the article
of faith, the seventeenth section has been newly inserted ; and the
twenty-seventh section, which contains a more precise definition of the
feal distinctive points in the theological systems of Luther and of Zwin-
gUus, was not found in the first edition. The article on the Church
has undergone considerable changes ; the addition of the thirty-seventh
section appeared to me peculiarly calculated to render more clear the
theory of the Catholic Church.
In the second part, the article op the Methodists has been entirely re
cast, as I have now been able to procure Dr. Southey's Life of Wesley.
Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism, which, in despite of many endea
vours, I had been unable to obtain in time for the first edition, but which
has since come to hand, has been less useful for my purpose than I had
expected. In the Introduction, it has appeared to me expedient to enter into
more particulars as to tbe use, which, in a work like the Symbolism, is
to be made of fhe private writings of the Reformers. I have deemed
it useful also to point out there the important distinction, which, in all
Symbolical researches, should be observed between the use of the pri
vate writings of the Reformers, and that of the works of Catholic
theologians.

AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.

The information of my publisher, that the second edition is out of print,
was too sudden to allow me to bestow on this third edition those improve
ments which I would fain have made, and whereof it stood in so rauch
need. There is but one article I can name, v/hich has undergone an
important amelioration ; it is the eighth section, on original sin ; for in
the former editions, there were some historical notices, touching the Ca
tholic views of that doctrine, that much needed correction.
The very ponderous criticisra on my Symbolism, which in the mean
while Professor Baur has put forth, I will leave unnoticed in the present
work, for the necessary discussions would occupy proportionally too
great a space, to find insertion either in the notes or in the text. I have
therefore prefen-ed to write a separate reply, which, please God, will
«oon be sent to press.
2

XVIII PREFACE TO THE FOURTH AND FIFTH EDITION Kv
AUTHOR'S PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION,

Aftek the publication of the third edition, which appeared at the begin
ning of the year 1834, I saw myself compelled to compose a defence of
the Symbolism. It has already appeared, under the title, New Investi^
gatimis, etc, (iYeue Vntersuchungen.) In this work, many subjects
having reference to the controversy, and which in the Symbolism had
been only lightly, or not at all, touched upon, were more fully treated ;
while not a few articles have been investigated under a new point of
view others more precisely defined, and several raore fully established.
From this book nothing has been transferred to the fourth edition of the
Symbolism. I held it to be my duty to make no essential alteration in
the form, under which the present work was originally presented to the
public, and under which it has been favoured with their indulgent atten
tion. To notice in the body of the work the various writings, treatises,
and reviews, that have been directed against it, I conceived to be in
every way unsuitable ; independently even of the fact, that I was un
willing to see the pacific tone of the Symbolism converted into an a;ngry
and warlike tone. Yet some things have been amended in this fourth
edition i others have been added. These are changes which could be
made without any external provocation, and without any alteration of
my orignal plan, and as have formerly been made in every new edi-
tion. By God's providence the Symbolism has hitherto produepd much good
fruit as from many quarters has been related to me, partly by word of
mouth» and partly by writing. Even Protestant periodicals, as, for ex
ample, the Evangelical Church Gazette {Evangelische Kirchen Zeiiung)
of October, 1834, do not in their peculiar way call this fact in question.
May it be still further attended with the blessing of the Saviour, who
from the beginning hath ever chosen weak and imi)erfect things for the
instruments of his glorification !

PREFACE OF THE GERMAN EDITOR TO THE
FIFTH EDITION.

While the fifth edition of this work was in the press, the Catholic
Church of Germany had the afliiction to see its illustrious author snatch
ed away from her by an untimely death. If his loss for Catholic litera-
ture be an event so deeply to be deplored, it is so especially in refer-

GERMAN EDITOR'S PREFACE TO THE FIFTH EDITION, xix
ence to the Symbolism. The lamented author had intended to intro
duce many amendments into this new edition, and so to render it more
complete, — -partly by transferring into it several things frora his work,
entitled, Neiv Investigations of Doctrinal Differences, — partly by incor
porating with it the results of new researches. As regards a very con-
siderable part of the work, his intention he has happily been able to
carry into effect. Many articles and sections — as, for example, that on
original sin — have received from him extension or greater precision, or
have been entirely recast. The like he had designed in respect to the
articles on the doctrine of the sacraments, and the following sections.
Down to the close of his life, this concern of his heart ever occupied
him ; but the final execution of his design was not permitted by Divine
Providence. May this new edition produce those blessed effects, which had ever
been intended by the author, and that have, doubtless, gained a rich
recompense for hira before the throne of God !
Munich, 21 June, 1S33.

CONTENTS OF THE MEMOIR.

Preliminary remarks. Lutheranism, from its origin down to the middle of
the eighteenth century. Rise of Rationalism. Michaelis. The school of
Semler. Morus and the elder Eichhorn, and others. The more open infidels
Nicolai, Bahrdt, and Basedow. Deism the legitimate offspring of the Reform
ation. Reymarus and Lessing assail Christianity. Glance at the German
literature of the eighteenth century, in its relation to the Christian religion.
Anecdotes of Guthe's extraordinary admiration for the Catholic liturgy and
Catholic art. Glance at the philosophy of Kant, Jacobi, and Schelling, in re
lation to Christianity. Further advances of theological Rationalism. Weg-
scheider, Paulus, and others. The ethical principles of Rationalism. Its
influence on life. Partial reaction against Rationalism in the Protestant
Church. Reinhard, Storr, and others. The party called " Old Lutherans.''
Their conflict with the Prussian governraent. The new " Evangelical Church''
founded by the late king of Prussia. It promotes, instead of remedying, reli
gious indifference. The modern Pietists. Their leading divines. Partial
services they render to the cause of Christianity. Degeneracy of Pietism.
Appalling examples of religious fanaticism. The last stage of Rationalism.
The Mythic divines, or Strauss and his followers. Conflicting judgments pro
nounced on this scliool by the theological faculties of the Prussian universi
ties. Hopes of religious regeneration in Protestant Germany. Number of
conversions to the Catholic Church. Transition to Catholic Germany. Its
moral condition, from the treaty of Westphalia down to the middle of the
eighteenth centuiy. Intellectual improvement in the reign of the empress
Maria Theresa. Doctrines of Febionius, and their influence. Joseph II. and
his ecclesiastical policy. Consequences of that pohcy considered. The schis
matical declaration of certain prelates at Ems. Rise and influence of the
order of the Illuminati. French revolution. The moral and political causes
that facilitated the triumph of its arms and its principles in Europe in general,
and in Germany in particular. Its moral and political eflects in the Rhenish
provinces. Spoliation of the Catholic Church in Germany, and its conse
quences. The restoration of general peace in 1814. Commencement of a re
ligious regeneration in Austria. Religious regeneration in Bavaria. Oppres
sion of the Church in the Prussian dominions, in Wiirtemberg, in Baden, and

xxii CONTENTS OF THE MEMOIR.
other minor states. The captivity of the archbishop of Cologne. The gen
eral resuscitation of religious life in Catholic Germany. The anti-celibatists
in Wiirtemberg and Baden. The Hermesians in Prussia. Glance at the lit
erature and philosophy of Catholic Germany in the present century.
Birth of Moehler. liis education, and anecdotes of his early years. His
studies at the university of Tubingen. His ordination. He officiates as chap
lain in two country parishes. Anecdotes of him during his pastoral ministry.
His return to Tubingen. His classical studies. His appointment to the place
of private teacher of theology in that university. His literary journey to the
most celebrated seats of learning in Germany. His acquaintance with the
celebrated Plank. Remarkable consequences of that acquaintance. His re
turn to Tubingen. He publishes his first work, "Unity of the Church." Ex
cellences and defects in that work. He declines the offer of a professorship
at Freyburg. He publishes his " History of St. Athanasius, and of the Church
in his time." Reflections on the Arian contest, and on the life and writings of
the great Athanasius. Moehler declines the offer of a professorship in Prussia.
He is appointed professor in Tiibingen, and lectures on the doctrinal differ
ences between the Catholic and Protestant Churches. Publication of the
" Symbolism." Extraordinary sensation it produced throughout Catholic and
Protestant Germany. Parallel between that work and Bossuet's " History of
the Variations of the Protestant Churches.'' Dr. Baur's controversy with
Moehler. The latter is appointed professor of divinity at Munich. Beneficial
influence of his labours at Tubingen, in a moral as well as intellectual point of
view. His reception at Munich, and his professional activity in that univer
sity. Account of his miscellaneous writings. Of his work entitled " Patrolo-
gy." Moehler's journey to Southern Tyrol for the re-establishment of his
health. His return to Munich. Relapse of illness. The Prussian govern
ment oflfers him a prebendal stall at Cologne, and a professorship at Bonn.
He declines both. He is knighted by the king of Bavaria, and appointed to
the deanery of Wiirzburg. His last illness. His death. Description of his
person. Account of his eminent piety and amiable character. Estimate of
his genius. His influence in the literary and theological world. His most
celebrated theological contemporaries. Conclusion.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.

Majty of the facts related in the following biographical sketch, rest
¦on the authority of two short memoirs of the illustrious writer, the one
by Dr. Ruhn, professor of Catholic theology at the university of Tii
bingen, the other by the anonymous author of the interesting intro
duction prefixed to the fifth German edition of the Symbolism. For
many other particulars, I have been indebted to the kindness of Dr.
Reithmayr, professor of divinity at the university of Munich, as well as
to that of Dr. Benkert, dean of Wiirzburg, and of Dr. Dux, rector of
the ecclesiastical seminary in the same city.
The following memoir is preceded by an historical survey of the
state of Protestantism and Catholicism in Germany during the last
hundred years. To enable the English reader the better to understand
the general scope and tendency of the work I have translated, as well
as the many allusions and references it contains to the great changes
that in modern times have occurred in the Protestant theology of Ger
many, I have endeavoured, according to my humble ability, to take a
rapid historical view of those changes. Though, indeed, only the elder
Protestantism, in its opposition to the Catholic Church, is analyzed in
this work, and the Rationalism, which sprang up in Germany towards
the middle of the eighteenth century, — and which has almost entirely
superseded the old Lutheranism, — is, for the reasons assigned by the
author himself, not here formally investigated ; stiU, as frequent com
parisons are instituted between the older and the more modern systems
of German Protestantism, some degree of acquaintance with the latter
is evidently highly useful for the better understanding and appreciation
of the work now translated. But this great revolution in the German
Protestant Church can be comprehended in all its bearings, and esti
mated in all its results, only through a comparison with the state of
German Catholicism during the sarae period. Under this irapression.

24 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
I have placed, beside the representation of German Protestantism, s
corresponding picture of the Catholic Church. I conceived, too, that
by such an historic portraiture of the latter, the moral and intcllectuaS
influence of the illustrious divine, whose biography I have attempted
to trace, would be better discerned and more fully appreciated.
In drawing up this preliminary historic sketch, the authorities I have
con.sulted, are, on the Catholic side. Dr. Dollinger's continuation of
Hortig's Church History,* the Compendium of Ecclesiastical History,f
In- Dr. Alzog, and Gorres's Hiitorico-political Journal ;X and on the
Protestant side, the Rev. Mr. Rose's Lectures on the State of Prolestani-
is?n in Germany,^ Professor Tholuck's essay, entitled. Historic Sketch
of the Revolution, -which, since ihe year 1750, lias occurred in German
Thcology,\\ and the Manual of Church History,^ by Dr. Hase.
In a work which has recently appeared in Germany, and is attributed
to the pen of an eminent Protestant, we find a passage, where the his
tory of German Protestantism, from the commencement of the Refor
mation, down to the middle of the eighteenth century, is traced in a
few brief, vigorous, and masterly strokes. This passage I prefer to cite,
rather than attempt on my part any delineation of the same subject.
" The first fifty years," says this writer, " that followed on the out
break of the Reformation, witnessed incessant wranglings, disputes,
and mutual anathematizings, between the several Protestant parties ;
first between Luther and Zwinglius, ne.\t between the rigid Lutherans
and the Crypto-Calvinists, and so on. When, after long intrigues, and
tedious negotiations, the Chancellor of Tiibingen, James Andrea, suc
ceeded, about the year 1586, in obtaining acceptance for the so-called
Formulary of Concord, the theological strife receded fi'om the arena of
public life into the school ; and for the whole century that followed, the
Protestant Church was distinguished for a narrow-minded polemica!
scholasticism, and a self-willed, contentious theology. The Lutheran
orthodoxy, in particular, degenerated more and more into a dry, spirit.
less, mechanical formaUsm, without religious feeling, warmth, and unc
tion. The same authors of the new faith, that had with so much vio
lence contested the Church's prerogative of infallibility and her tradi-
, * Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, fortgesetzt von J. Dollinger. Landshut, 1828.
' t Universal. Geschichte der Christlichen Kirche. Mainz, 1841.
} Historisch-politische Blatter, von Phillips und Gorres.
§ Cambridge, 1825.
II Abriss einer Geschichte der Umwalzung, welche Beit 1750 auf dem Gcbicte der
Theologie in Deutschland statt gefunden. Vermischte Schriften von Dr. Tholuck.
Hamburg, 1839.
If Kirchengeschichte von Dr. Karl Hase. Leipzig, 1841.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 25
tion, desired now to claim for their own symbolical books a divine
origin, and an exemption frora error. They, whose religious commu
nity was founded in the principle of recognizing Scripture as the sole
standard of faith, now disputed its right to be the exclusive depository
of the Divine Word. They, who had refused to the Catholic Church
infallibility, now pretended to an absolute and immutable possession
of revealed truth.
In opposition to this Protestant orthodoxy, that had fallen away from
the fundamental principle of the Reformation, and therefore clung
with the greater obstinacy to the letter of its symbolical books, Spener
insisted upon a living faith rooted in the regenerate will, and undertook
to revivify religion, that had perished in the stiff forms of a mechanical
orthodoxy. But from his very confined views on philosophy and
speculative theology, from his aversion to all settled and defined re
ligious notions, from his indifference about dogmas in general, from his
deficiency in a soUd ground-work of learning, and an undue propensity
to a false mysticism (whereby he bears a remote affinity to the Qua
kers, and other sects) ; from aU these defects, Spener was unable to
bring about the completion of the Reformation, which he had promised,
although on several leading points he entertained convictions, which
fitted him for reforming the Lutheran doctrines.
The Protestant orthodoxy having succeeded, by anathemas and per
secution, in reducing to temporary silence the first commotions of the
yet impotent Rationalism, sank into soft repose on its pillow. But, in
the midst of German Protestantism, an alliance had been formed,
which at first appeared to be of little danger, nay, to be even advan
tageous, but which soon overthrew the whole scaffolding of doctrine,
that the old Protestant orthodoxy had raised up, and precipitated Pro
testant theology into that course, which has in the present day led it
entirely to subvert all the dogmas of Christianity, and totally to change
the original views of the Reformers."*
The principle of rationalism is inherent in the very nature of Protes
tantism ; it manifested itself in the very origin of the Reformation, and
has since, to a greater or less extent, and in every variety of form, re
vealed its existence in almost every Protestant community. In the less
vigorous constitution of Lutheranism, it had fewer obstacles to encounter
* Der Protestantismus in seiner Selbst Auflosung. von einem Protestanten. (Pro
testantism in its Self-dissolution, by a Protestant.) SchafFhausen, 1843, pp. 291-3,
vol. ii. This work, which now excites no inconsiderable sensation in Germany, was
first attributed to the pen of the illustrious Hurler ; but it is written by another emi
nent Protestant, who, it is confidently stated, is on the eve of embracing the Catholic
faith.

26 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
than in the Calvinistic Churches, and more particularly in the Anglican
estabUshment. It entered too, undoubtedly, into the designs of Pro-
vidence, that the people, which had been the first to welcome the so-
called Reformation, should be also the first to pay the bitter penalty for
apostacy ; that the land, which had first witnessed the rise of the Pro
testant heresy, should be likewise the first to behold its lingering, pain
ful, and humiliating dissolution.
But the several causes, which, towards the middle of the eighteenth
century, brought about this great moral distemper in the Protestant
Churches of Gerraany, as well as the forms, which the malady suc
cessively assumed, I will now endeavour to describe.
It was in the department of biblical exegesis, that this movement of
rationalism first displayed itself. The school of Michaelis, with its
false, over-fastidious, worldly-minded criticism, treated the Scriptures
with levity and even disrespect, denied the inspiration of some portions
of the Bible, and debased and vulgarized its doctrines. The sarae views
were carried out with much greater boldness and consistency by Semler,
who, abusing the right principle that in the interpretation of Scripture
regard should be had to the language wherein it is written, and to the
history of the times at which it was composed, degraded the dignity of
the Bible, by circumscribing its teaching within mere local and tem
porary bounds, diluted its doctrines, and attached importance to those
parts only, where a moral tendency was clearly visible. From this
period the Lutheran divines became divided into three classes. There
were first, those who remained true to the symbolical books ; secondly)
those v.ho, like Nosselt and Morus, insisted more particularly on the
ethics of Christiamty, and without positively rejecting all its peculiar
dogmas, declared them to be of no essential importance ; and thirdly,
those who, like Reiraarus and the elder Eichhorn, systematically pur
suing the work commenced by Semler, not only assailed the inspiration
of the Bible, but rejected its prophecies, denied most of the miracles it
records, and refused to acknowledge in Christianity aught else than a
mere local and temporary phenomenon. Nay, two celebrated theolo
gians of Berlin, Teller and Spalding, did not hesitate to enter into a
secret confederacy with professed infidels, like Nicolai, Engel, Sulzer,
and the rest, for the purpose of purifying, as they professed, the doc
trines of the Christian religion. This confederacy was entitled, " As
sociation for the diffusion of light and truth." And this is the place to
say a few words respecting " the popular philosophers," as they were
called, who openly and recklessly attacked that revelation, which the
theologians I have described were insidiously and covertly under
mining.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 27
The writings of the EngUsh Deists, in the early part of the eighteenth
century, exercised a very pernicious influence in Protestant Germany ;
and later, the contemporaneous literature of the French infidels, so
much encouraged by Frederic II. excited there a spirit of disastrous
emulation. A society was formed so early as the year 1735, by Knat-
zen and Edelinan, for the diffusion of irreligious pamphlets and writ
ings, in which not only all Christianity was decried, but the most dar
ing atheism unblushingly avowed. Nicolai, whose name has already
occurred, established, about the year 1765, at Berlin, a literary review,
with the object of propagating the pernicious doctrines of a shallow illu-
minism ; and in that infancy of German literature, when this perio
dical had scarcely a rival to encounter, the influence it exerted was more
extensive, than can at present be even conceived. Bahrdt and Base
dow, at the same time, in cheap and popular tracts, scattered among the
lower classes the poison of infidelity ; and they, as well as Nicholai,
were in close communication with Weisshaupt, who, in Bavaria, had
founded the order of the Illuminati, for the purpose of undermining the
foundations of the throne and the altar./ I may here observe, that in
CathoUc countries infidelity assumes a very different aspect, and is
forced to pursue a very different policy, than among Protestant nations.
In the former countries, unbelief, reprobated by the Church, driven from
her communion, finding her on every point a vigilant, unassailable, un-
relaxing, unrelenting adversary, is compelled to hide its head in secret
societies ; or if it brave the daylight, it then wages fierce, immitigable
warfare with Catholicity. But in Protestant states, such a mode of
warfare, on the part of infidelity, is neither necessary nor expedient for
its purpose. As it springs out of the very root of Protestantism ; as it,
is but a natural and necessary development of its doctrines ; as it differs
from the latter not in essence, but in degree only, it is its policy (and
wc see it practise it invariably,) to flatter the Protestant Church, to
court its alliance, to mingle with its teaching, to soften down its own
principles, in order the better to diffuse them, and when threatened with
exclusion, to appeal to Protestant principles, and defy condemnation.
It is objected, that infidelity abounds as much in Catholic as in Pro
testant countries, and that therefore it cannot be said, that Protestan
tism is raore favourable to its growth than the rival Church. But a few
remarks will suffice to show the futility of such an objection. In the
first place, it is true that Voltaire, like Luther, went out of the Catholic
Church; but while the Coryphaeus of French infidelity extolled the
Reformation, eulogized the Reformers, and boasted that he himself
came to consummate the work they had left incomplete, he waged the
fiercest hostility against the Catholic Church and her ministers. And

28 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
the Deists of England and Protestant Germany, though they came iuto
less immediate collision with that Church, than Voltaire and his dis-
ciples, well knew where their most powerful and formidable antagonist
was to be found. Secondly, if Protestantism were not more favourable
than CathoUcity to the growth of unbelief, how doth it happen that in
those ages, when the Catholic Church exerted the greatest influence
over mind and manners, over public and private life — ages, too, be it
remembered, often distinguished for a boldness, an acuteness, and a
depth of metaphysical inquiry, that have never been surpassed — how
doth it happen, I say, that in those ages, infidelity was a thing so rare,
so obscure, so insignificant ? How doth it happen, that it followed so
closely in the wake of the Reformation ; that history makes mention
of a sect of Deists in Switzerland, at the close of the sixteenth century ;
that in Protestant England, during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries. Deism assumed an attitude of such boldness, and attained to
such fearful vigour and e.\pansion, that at the commencement of the
eighteenth century, the Protestant Bayle first introduced it into Catho
lic France ; that Voltaire and the Encyclopedists confessed they bor
rowed the weapons for their anti-Christian warfare from the armoury of
the English Deists ; and that Rousseau, the most dangerous of the
French infidels, was a Protestant by birth, and only developed the prin
ciples of Protestantism, and more than once declared, that if the divinity
of the Christian religion could be demonstrated to him, he would not
hesitate to embrace the Catholic faith 1
Thirdly, it will not be denied, that Socinianism leads by easy grada
tions to unbelief; that some classes of Unitarians are distinguished
from Deists only by their belief in the general credibility of the Bible ;*
and that therefore any Church, which will show itself indulgent towards
Socinianism — any Church which openly or covertly, in a greater or
less degree, will foster its tenets, proves itself thereby favourable to the
propagation of Deism. Now Socinianism, like a poisonous plant, cast
off from the Catholic soil of Italy, took root and flourished in the Pro
testant communities of Poland, attained during the eighteenth century
to a most rank luxuriance in the Church of Geneva,-)- and at the same

» A learned prelate of the Established Church, the late Bishop Heber, character
ized Unitarianism as " a system which leans on the utmost verge of Christianity, and
which has been in so many instances a stepping-stone to simple Deism." See
Travels of an Irish Gentleman, c. xliv.
+ Rousseau, in his Lettres de la Montague, says of the Genevese of his time,
" When asked if Jesus Christ is God, they do not dare to answer. When asked
what mysteries they admit, they still do not dare to answer. A philosopher casts a

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 29
time cast a blighting shade over the Episcopal Establishment of
England. Fourthly, if any doubt remained as to the intimate connexion between
Protestantism and infidelity, it would be dispelled by the history of the
German Protestant Churches during the last hundred years. There
we see men holding important offices in the Church — pastors of con
gregations, superintendents of consistories, professors of theology — not
only reject the authority of the symbolical books, and disavow almost
aU those Catholic dograas which the Lutherans and Calvinists had
hitherto retained, but openly assail the Divine inspiration of the Scrip
tures, deny the integrity and authenticity of large portions of the Old
and the New Testament, allegorize the prophecies, and disbelieve, and
sometiraes even ridicule, the miracles recorded in the Bible. These
opinions, professed more or less openly, carried out to a greater or less
extent, were once held by an immense majority of Protestant theologi
ans, and even in despite of a partial reaction, are still held by the greater
part. Yet they nevertheless retain their functions and dignities in the
Protestant Church ; they are thus enabled to propagate their doctrines
with impunity ; those Protestants, who protest against their opinions,
stiU communicate with them in sacris : and when any attempt has been
made to deprive them of their offices, it has been invariably unsuccess
ful. Against their orthodox opponents, they invariably appeal to the
right of free inquiry, which is the fundamental principle of the Refor
mation ; and on Protestant grounds, the position they take up is per
fectly impregnable. For if the interpretation of the Bible belong to
private judgment, the previous questions as to its authenticity, integrity,
and inspiration, without the settlement whereof the right of interpreta
tion becomes nugatory, must be submitted to the decision of individual
reason. Thus has the most insidious and dangerous form of infidelity
grown naturally, immediately, and irresistibly, out of the very root of
Protestantism. The vampire of rationalism, while it cleaves to the
bosom, and sucks the life-blood of the German Protestant Church,
mocks, with a fiend-like sneer, her impotent efforts to throw off the
monster — efforts which will never be attended with success, till the aid
of the old Mother Church be called in. But I have digressed too long,
and must not anticipate.
While obscure writers, like Nicolai, Barhdt, and Basedow, were car
rying on with the most reckless violence, and with weapons of a most

rapid glance at thera, and penetrates them at once ; he sees they are Arians or So
cinians." A similar account of the Genevese is given by the Protestant writer,
Grenua.

30 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
shameless ribaldry, the warfare against Christianity, which the Protest
ant theologians had insidiously commenced, the great critic, Lessing,
Ahe founder of the modern German literature, lent his powerful support
to the anti-Christian league. While librarian at Wolfenbiittel, he
edited a work exposed by Reymarus, consisting of various irreligious
essays, entitled Fragments of Wolfenbudel, and which, from the tone
of earnestness, and dialectic acuteness wherein they were written, ex
erted a very prejudicial influence over public opinion.
The vigorous miud of Lessing could not rest satisfied with the shal
low illuminism of the eighteenth century, and his irreligious produc
tions seemed oftener to spring out of a desire to torment the orthodox
Lutherans of his day, than to be the result of his own inmost convic
tion. Sometimes he pushed his unbeUef even to the Pantheism of Spi
noza ; and sometimes again he took up the Catholic side, and with that
dialectic art, in which he was so great a master, proved the necessity
of tradition for the right interpretation of Scripture.
The name of Lessing leads me naturally to speak of the German
literature of the eighteenth century, in its relation to religion. This
literature, considered as a whole, if not always decidedly hostile, was at
least perfectly alien from the spirit of Christianity. As the Protestant
theology of the day was fast reviving the doctrines and morality of pa
ganism : so this literature, consciously or unconsciously, strove to awaken
an exclusive enthusiasm in behalf of the moral and social institutions,
the manners, the customs, the feelings, and modes of thinking of the
heathen world. We all know what injurious effects the sudden revival
and too partial cultivation of the old classical literature produced in the
fifteenth century ! Yet if in an age, when, in despite of the growing lax
ity and corruption of manners, the tone of society was stiU eminently Ca
tholic, and the Church yet held such an immense sway over the minds
and conduct of men, an iU-directed classical enthusiasm was attended
with such mischief and danger ; what must be the result, at a time when
Christianity was almost entirely obliterated from the minds of many ;
when the Protestant Church of the day, instead of checking, encour
aged the advances of heathenism ; and when the new Hellenic enthu
siasts called up the genius of paganism, not timidly, but openly and
boldly, — not in mere translations and commentaries as heretofore, but
in the popular poetry, in the drama, the romance, the critical essay,
and the philosophic dialogue ? And when the evocators were endued
with that power of seduction, those irresistible magical spells, that be
longed to the genius of a Lessing, a Herder, a Schiller, a Schelling,
and a Gothe ?
Thus the new literature, which was a child of the new Protestant

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 31
theology, tended much to confirm its authority, and extend its in
fluence. '
Of Herder, Frederic Schlegel, in his history of Uterature, says, " in
his earlier Ufe he had pursued a better path, and sought to find in the
primitive revelation the clue to all traditions, to all sagas, to all philoso
phy and mythology ; and so we must the more regret, that in his later
years he should have abandoned that light, and at last have totally
sunk down into the fashionable ways of a mere shallow and insipid illu
minism." *
Schiller was one possessed of high intellectual endowments, and -J
noble qualities of heart, which, in a more genial clime, and under
kindlier influences, would have, doubtless, produced far different fruits ;
but, as it is, we see a generous plant, whose foliage was too often nip
ped and blighted by the icy breath of a rationalist theology. The most .
pernicious influence, however, over the public mind, was exerted by the
mighty genius of Gothe. His cold, worldly-minded egotism— his epi
curean aversion to all energetic patriotism and self-devoted heroism —
his subtle, disguised sensuality — his utter indifference for all religious
belief — and, on the other hand, his false idolatry for art, and his heathen
ish enthusiasm, arrayed in all the charms of the most seductive poetry,
were most fatal to the cause of Christianity, and of all public and pri
vate virtue. Yet Gothe, too, had occasional glimpses of the truth. In
his autobiography we find an interesting description of the extraordi
nary love for the Catholic liturgy and ceremonial, that had captivated
his heart in boyhood. And even in later years this feeling had not
entirely died away ; for the same work contains some splendid pages
on the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church, where their mutual
connexion, and their exquisite adaptation to the wants of the human
heart, and the necessities of human life, are set forth with a depth
of thought, and a beauty of diction, not surpassed by any CathoUc
divine, j"

* History of Literature (in German,) vol. ii. p. 284. Vienna, 1822.
t There 'is just above Bingen, on the Rhine, a beautiful httle Cathohc church
dedicated to St. Roch, commanding a superb view of the river, and wjiere the scene
abounds with the most glorious recollections in the ecclesiastical and civil history of
Germany. To this church, which Gothe several times visited, he presented an altar-
piece ; and on one occasion he said, " Whenever I enter this church I always wish 1
were a Catholic priest." This great poet was also a fervent admirer of the old
German Catholic schools of painting, of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries. That
eminent convert. Dr. William von Schiitz, relates the following remarkable observa
tion which Gothe once made to him on this subject. On contemplating a painting
of the old German school, Gothe observed, " Down to the period of the Reformation,

32 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
But if the polite literature of this period was so propitious to tho
growth and spread of Rationalism, the remark applies with far greater
force to the systems of philosophy that exerted so great an influence
in the latter half of the eighteenth century, and the early part of the
present. " The new philosophic systems," says Dr. Dollinger, " con
ceived, born, and bred in Protestantism, aided and promoted the pro-
gress of Rationalism. The Kantian philosophy declares the religion
of reason to be the only true one. The ecclesiastical faith, that is to
say, faith in the truths of a positive revelation, is there opposed fo
the religious faith whose purport may be derived from every man's
own reason. Revealed religion, according to this system, can and
ouo-ht to be nought else, but a mere vehicle for the easier introduction of
rational religion : the ecclesiastical faith will by degrees become ex
tinct, and give place to a pure religion of reason, ahke evident to all
the world. In conformity with these principles, a new rule was set up
for the interpretation of Scripture: to wit, that nothing was to be
looked for in the Bible, save the mere religion of reason, and that every
thing else was to be regarded as a mere veil, or as an accommodation
to the popular notion of the time, or as the private opinion of the sacred
writer. All these theories perfectly harmonized with the favourite opin
ions of the day ; and hence we may account for the extraordinary ap
probation which this philosophic system received on the part of so many
Protestant theologians. By the side of the Kantian philosophy, the
rival system of Jacobi found its partisans among the Protestant divines ;
and this philosophy was no less incompatible with the Christian religion
than that of Kant. According to Jacobi, religion, like all philosophic
science, depends on a natural immediate faith — an indemonstrable per
ception of the true and the spiritual ; and any other revelation besides
this inward one doth not exist. " To the true religion," says he,
in his work on Divine things, " no outward form can be ascribed, as
the sole and necessary shape of its substance ; on the contrary, the
utter absence of all forms is characteristic of its very essence. As the
glory of God lay hidden in Christ, so it lies hidden in every man."
Lastly, as regards the philosophy of identity,* " Some of its disciples,
especially the theologian Daub, have, doubtless, raore justly appreciated
the speculative value of some Christian dogmas. But none have suc-
a spirit of indescribable sweetness, solace and hope, seems to live and breathe in all
these paintings — every thing in thom seems to announce the kingdom of heaven.
But," he added, " since the Reformation, something painful, desolate, almost evil,
characterizes works of art; and, instead of faith, scepticism is often transparent." —
Katholische Stimmen, p. 82.
* This is the name given to the pantheistic philosophy of Schelling.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 33
ceeded in demonstrating the compatibility of the general principles
of this philosophic system with the fundamental doctrines of Chris
tianity ; on the contrary, the followers of this philosophy put forth
assertions, which are at open variance with the primary dograas of that
religion. Araong these we may include the doctrine, that it is only in
history the absolute first becomes personally conscious of himself, and
that all things divided will finally return to identity : a doctrine which
annihilates all personality." *
Emboldened and confirmed by these philosophical speculations, the
theological RationaUsm assumed a more decided tone, and pursued a
more daring course. Wegscheider, De Wette, Schott, Paulus, Bret-
Schneider, Rohr, and others, successively arose, who denied the inspira
tion of the Bible, disputed the authenticity of many books of the Old
and New Testament, explained away the Prophecies, rejected and
ridiculed the miracles recorded in the Scriptures, threw out imputations
on the intentions of the apostles, arraigned the wisdom of the Divine
Saviour himself; and lastly, contested the necessity, and even possi
bility of a supernatural revelation. The game of the old Gnostic
sects was revived. On the most arbitrary assumptions and frivolous
hypotheses, entire books of Scripture were rejected ; the genuineness
of the most important passages of the Bible was disputed ; even the
authenticity of one or other of the Gospels was assailed ; till at last,
as Reinhard once observed, " whoever wished to obtain the applause of
the critical journals, was obliged to declare some Scripture spurious, or
attack some established doctrine." But between these Rationalists
and the early heretics, with whom I have compared them, there is an
important difierence to be observed. The latter called in question the
genuineness and authenticity of various portions of Holy Writ, not on
critical grounds, but from polemical motives ; they were led on to these
assaults on the Scripture by an impassioned fancy, heated with strange,
extravagant and perverse, though often ingenious systems of philosophy.
Among their modern imitators, on the other hand, it was the cold, cri
tical understanding, directed by a mere negative hostility to the Chris
tian religion, which engaged in these attacks on the Bible.
The men who treated the Scriptures, that they still affected to con
sider as the sole source and standard of faith, with such audacious irre
verence — such atrocious profanity — could not be expected to pay much
regard to the doctrines they taught, not even to those for which the
elder Protestants, while they tore thera from all living connexion with
other Christian dogmas, had professed such exclusive attachraent.
* See Dollinger, Kirchengeschichte, pp. 393-4.

34 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
Accordingly, we find the great doctrines of tho Trinity, the Divinity
of our Saviour, original sin, Christ's atonement and satisfaction, justi
fication, grace, and the efficacy of the sacraments, even of the two
retained by the old Lutheran church — baptism and the Lord's Supper
— positively rejected, or explained away, or debased to the lowest point
of insignificance, by these Rationalist divines. Even the dogma of
the resurrection of the flesh passed for a mere figurative representation
of the idea of immortality ; and the eternity of future torments was
pronounced to be a mere chimera.
There is always the closest connexion between the doctrinal and
the ethical system of any sect. In conformity with their frightful du
alism, we see the ancient Gnostics alternate between the most extrava
gant asceticism and the wildest lust. The Arians, by denying the
divinity of the Redeemer, had narrowed and choked up all the chan
nels of grace, and were accordingly ever remarkable for a low tone of
morality. The Reformers of the sixteenth century, with their doctrine
of justification, swore eternal enmity to all the heroic virtues of Chris-
tianity, and effectually dried up that mighty stream of charity, which
had fertilized and embellished our European soil, and covered it with
•countless institutions, formed to glorify God, and solace, sustain, and
exalt humanity. The Rationalists, who so far outran the early Re
formers in extravagance and blasphemy of teaching, outstripped them,
too, in the licentiousness of their moral code ; for what was more natu- '
ral than that they, who had revived the principles of Paganism, should
revive her morals also ? Accordingly, the theologians, Doderlein and
Caunabich, among other things, roundly assert, that fornication is
blameless, and is not interdicted by the precepts of the Gospel.* Every
branch of theological learning was subjected by degrees to the potent
dissolvents of these subtle chemists ; till at last, after the process of
evaporation, a substance less Christian than Mohammedanism was
found as the residuum.
These doctrines of unbelief, taught by the imraense majority of the
Protestant clergy, penetrated by degrees among all classes of the laity,
and led to the general neglect of Divine service, to the perversion of
youth in the establishments of education, to the desecration of the Sab
bath, the fearful multiplication of divorce, and to general demoraliza
tion. Yet a system so void, so absurd, so repugnant to Christian sentiraent,
could not long subsist without provoking a powerful reaction, especial-

» See this fact stated in Dollinger's Continuation of Horiig's Church History (in
German,) p. 935, Landshut, 1828.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 35
ly among a people like the Germans, so remarkable for deep feeling
5and inquisitive intellect. This coarse and vulgar Rationalism, whose
flourishing eta was from the year 1790 to 1810, now met with vigor-
t)us opponents in the Theologians, Reinhard, Storr, Flatt, Kleuker,
Tittman, and, more recently, Neander, Tholuck, Hengstenberg, and
several others ; who, in the various departments of dogmatic theology,
exegesis, and Church history, have> with considerable learning and
¦ability, striven to infuse more Christian principles into the minds of
their fellow religionists. In the ranks of these more orthodox divines,
however, it is vain to look for uniformity of doctrine araong themselves,
or concurrence with the formularies of the old Lutheran Church,, The
articles of that Church on original sin, on the atonement, on the impu
tation of Christ's righteousness, on the real presence in the Lord's Sup
per, and on the eternity of future torments, are in part rejected by some
of their number. Schleiermacher, and after him Neander, have re
vived the heresy of SabeUius ; and Tholuck has declared the Trinity to
be no fundamental article of the Christian religion, but a later invention
of the schoolmen.*" So we see those, who at Berlin pass for High
Church divines, v/ould at Oxford, and even at Cambridge, be looked
upon as low, very low> Churchmen.
A small party, called " Old Lutherans," and headed by a fiery
preacher named Claudius Harms, is the only one now existing which up-
holds in all its vigour, the Lutheran orthodoxy. It is in the province
of Silesia, only, that these religionists appear to have taken deep root.
They are strenuous opponents of the union between the Lutheran and
Calvinistic Churches, brought about, in 1817, by the late King of Prus
sia, as well as to the new liturgy, which, in consequence of that union,
the same monarch enforced on all the Protestant Churches in his do-
minions, Refusing to hold comraunion with the new mongrel Church,
on which his Prussian majesty had bestowed the pompous epithet of
" Evangelical," these old Lutierans resorted for worship to secret con'
venticles, which were oft<3n broken up by the military and police^
Their rainisters were sometimes thrown into' prison, SDmetimes com
pelled to emigrate to America, and, on the whole, a very resolute con.
test was carried on by them with the Prussian government, until, on the
accession to the throne of the present enlightened sovereign of that
country, the men whom Luther, could he return to Germany, would
alone recognize as his true spiritual sons, were admitted to the blessings
>of full religious toleration.
The late King of Prussia had long cherished the darling project of

' See Dollinger, ibid. p. 942,

36 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
uniting the Lutheran and Calvinistic Churches. Looking at the mat
ter with the eye of a soldier, he thought the junction of two such pow
erful bodies would present a bolder front to the Roman adversary ; and
he therefore seized the opportunity offered by the celebration of the
tricentenary festival of the Reformation, to carry his scheme into exe
cution. His majesty had also, during his stay at Vienna, in 1814, been
much impressed with the beauty, the majesty, and the touching hoUness
of the Catholic liturgy. He therefore conceived, that by the introduc
tion of sorae of its forms and ceremonies into the Protestant service,
that service would then possess greater attractions for its followers : the
churches, in consequence, would be better attended ; and a new barrier
thus raised up against the progress of irreligion. This was the origin
of the new liturgy he devised for what has since been called *' the
Evangelical Church."
The union between the Lutheran and Calvinistic Churches, begun
in Prussia in the year 1817, was adopted in Rhenish Bavaria in 1819,
in the kingdom of Wiirtemberg in 1S20, and in the Grand Duchy of
Baden in 1821.
Yet the success of this royal work was more than problematicaL
The more violent Lutherans, as we have seen, refusing assent to the
new ecclesiastical arra.ngements, seceded from the Established Church
of Prussia, and held separate conventicles. Even some of those, how
ever, who adhered to the Evangelical Church, took exceptions to seve
ral forms and ceremonies introduced into the new liturgy, as being of
" a too Popish character ;" and thus, as regards public worship, the de
sired uni ormity was but imperfectly attained. The wish, so credita
ble to the honest, but sadly misguided sovereign, who lately swayed
the Prussian sceptre, to infuse, by an imitation of parts of the Catho-
lie ceremonial, more dignity and unction into the public service of his
own religious community, was still more fallacious. The Catholic
understands the secret spring whence flows that unction — that sacred
charm — that awe and majesty in his wors'nip, which rivet the senses
and win the hearts of all beholders. He ktiows that it is the great
dogma of the Eucharistic sacrifice that gives life, and significancy, and
importance, to all, even the minutest forms of his public liturgy.
But such an appreciation of things is impervious to the Protestant,
and most of aU to the Calvinist (for the late King of Prussia was by
birth and education a Calvinist) ; and, therefore, that a certain set of
forms and ceremonies, when detached from their natural connexion,
and separated from the doctrine that alone imparted to them nieaning
and efficacy, should not produce the same fruits in the Protestant as in
the Catholic worship, was to him an incomprehensible mystery.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 37
If from the consideration of worship we proceed to that of doctrine,
we shaU find that the " union " was attended with even far less happy
results. " The Calvinists, in Germany at least," says Dr. Dollinger,
" no longer attached importance to their founder's doctrine of absolute
predestination ; and the Lutherans had for the most part given up the
old Lutheran doctrine of the real presence in the Eucharist, and had
adopted the Zwinglian theory. The authority of the symbolical books
was at an end ; and therefore, as regarded dogmas, no important obsta
cle appeared in the way of the desired union. Hence, under the influ
ence of the King of Prussia, the conjunction of the two communions,
the Lutheran and the Calvinistic, was, in the year 1817, brought about
without any difficulty. The differences of belief in regard to the
Lord's Supper, that still prevailed among the people, might in the opin
ion of the theologians be still allowed to continue under the union. In
the reception of the outward Eucharistic signs, every individual was
allowed to think what he pleased. Thus, according to this new theory,
signs are the thing essential, but what should be understood by those
signs is a matter of no importance. The union was made to consist
in the mere declaration, that the. members were united ; and the new
community was decorated with the title of the Evangelical Church."*
Thus in our times was brought about the union of two coraraunities,
differing on the most iraportant and fundamental doctrines of Christi
anity — an union which, whenever proposed in the age of the Reforma
tion, was stigmatized as an abomination by Luther and his early fol
lowers. As the very principle and constitution of such an alliance
presupposes religious indifference, so it is eminently calculated to con
firm and diffuse it ; and what the late King of Prussia and his coun
sellors devised as an instrument for checking the progress of irreligion,
has conduced to its further spread among all classes of the people.
But the principal element of hope in Protestant Germany is, un
doubtedly, Pietism. The great reform, which, towards the close of the
seventeenth century, Spener attempted, and to a certain extent brought
about, in the Lutheran Church, has been ably described in the second
volume of the work now translated. It was the aim of Spener to in
fuse into that Church more of the ethical element, in opposition to the
dry and steril dogmatism of its symbolical books ; to insist on the in
ward, moral, and spiritual regeneration of man ; and to reform discipline
and morals in his own religious coraraunity. He was the first to under
mine the authority of the Lutheran formularies ; and thereby he
unconsciously prepared the way for that great revolution of Rationalism,
* Hanbuch der Kuehengeschichte, fortgesetzt von Dollinger, p 906-7.

38 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
which, as we have seen, has shattered to pieces the fabric of Lutheran
orthodoxy. In the eighteenth century, Spener's disciples united with
those of Zinzendorf, and assumed ever more and more a sectarian char
acter ; but though discountenanced and reprobated by the orthodox
Lutherans, they form, in the words of Moehler, " the true salt of their
Church." In the general shipwreck of Protestantism, visible in our time, this
party appeared to many to offer the only plank of safety. And hence
their numbers have been swelled, and their influence and importance
vastly augmented, by the accession of the most able and learned Pro
testant theologians, who, in their war against Rationalism, have put
forward the Pietists as the vanguard. This party, as now constituted,
is united rather by a general conviction of the truth of Christianity and
a sense of piety, than by any defined set of doctrines. The belief in
a supernatural revelation, in the authenticity and inspiration of Holy
Writ, and in the prophecies and miracles it relates, seems to be the
only bond of union ; for as to special dogmas there is much division of
opinion ;* and there are even some Pietists who call in question our
Lord's divinity.
Like some of our own Methodists, they are distinguished for a more
careful culture of the religious feelings, than the bulk of Protestants ;
they are assiduous in prayer and in Bible- reading, active in the dis
semination of religious tracts, and liberal in pecuniary contributions
towards missionary objects ; and though much less numerous than the
Rationalists, they make up for that deficiency, by superiority of learning
and talents, greater energy of zeal, and higher moral worth. Though,
like the English sectaries with whora I have compared them, they
often evince a bitter sectarian hostility to the Church ; yet, like them,
whenever they wish to excite a devotional feeling among their followers,
they are obliged to have recourse to the works of our great divines and
ascetical writers. The writings of Taulerus, the great mystic of the

* In the interesting German work I have already quoted, entitled " Protestantism
in its Self-Dissolution," the divisions among the Pietist theologians are thus pointed
out. " The union between the Protestant theology, and the belief of congregations,
is purely illusive, and the clergy have for the most part become utterly unfit for their
calling. How can they preach up to their parishioners a faith, which they do not
themselves possess ? And when even they have one, where is the bond of unity to
keep them together? Does not Neander teach very differently from Tholuck ? And
Tholuck differently from Hengstenberg? And Hengstenberg differently from
Knimmaeher? And Krammacher differently from Draseke? And Drapeke differ.
ently from Harms ? And Harms differently from Ullraan ? And Ullman differently
from Lilcke ? And Liicke differently from Olshausen? And so forth. We
are wont to speak of a Protestant Church ; but where is it ?"

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 39
fifteenth century, the treatises of Thoraas a Kempis, the Pensees of
Pascal, and the sermons of Massillon, are held by them in great esti
mation. On the whole, in the desolate waste of Gernian Protestantism,
this religious party is like a rivulet, which, harsh, bitter, and brackish,
though its waters often be, yet is cheering and refreshing to the eye of
the Christian observer.
Yet among these new religionists the same phenomenon has oc
curred, which the history of heretical sects has so often exhibited,
where religious enthusiasm degenerates after a time into the darkest,
raost fearful fanaticism, and an ill-directed asceticism sinks into the
most undisguised sensuality.
In Konigsberg a fanatical sect sprang out of this pietistic movement,
and which under the name of Muckers, held errors not unlike those of
some ancient Gnostics, and perpetrated the most shameless mysteries.
These scandalous scenes, in which together with others, two Lutheran
pastors and several persons of rank were engaged, drew down a long
judicial investigation. In Saxony a fanatical pietistic party, headed by
the pastor Stephan, was forced to emigrate to America, where after he
had exercised over his followers the most unbounded despotism in spiri
tual and temporal matters, and abused his ecclesiastical authority to
the gratification of his personal lusts, the religious community was
broken up.
Swabia during the present century has brought forth several singular
sects,* many members whereof, on emigrating to North America — that
El Dorado of all false religious enthusiasts — have boldly proclaimed and
carried out their monstrous opinions, preaching up, among other things,
the community of goods and comraunity of wives.f

* See Hase Kirchengeschichte, p. 520.
t In the year 1823, and in a part of German and Protestant Switzerland under
the influence of the Swabian pietists, a scene of dreadful religious fanaticism occurred
which^ since the seventeenth century is perfectly unparalleled. The following account
of it is taken from the Church History of a Protestant divine. Dr. Hase of Leipsick.
" Margaret Peter," says he, " the daughter of a peasant at Wildenspuch, in the can
ton of Zurich, had by intercourse with the Herrn-hutters and with Madame de
Kriidener, been prepossessed with the idea, that she was exclusively charged with the
spiritual salvation of the world. Her tone of spiritual authority and decisiveness
caused the pious folks of the neighbourhood to revere her as a saint ; and though she
even fell into the crime of adultery, her faith in her own mission remained unshaken.
In this feeling of her importance, she together with her disciples combated against
Satan with carnal weapons ; she caused her spiritual sisters to be slain ; and pretend
ing to have received a divine command to sacrifice Christ anew in her own person,
she let herself with wonderful endurance be crucified, in order to redeem many thou
sand souls." — Hase, Kirchengeschichte, page 530.

40 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
Yet while the pseudo-mysticism of Protestantism had run into such
fearful aberrations, Rationalism still pursued her destructive career. In
the year 1834, a teacher of theology at Tubingen, Dr. Strauss, pub
lished a book entitled " Life of Jesus," which, written with consi
derable learning and ingenuity, and composed in a tone of dogmatic
assurance and imperturbable phlegm, concentrated in one focus, and
raised to the most intense degree of extravagance, all the monstrous
hypotheses and blasphemous sophisms put forth by preceding Rational
ists. Deeply sunk as reUgious feeling and principle are in Protestant
Germany, yet it is gratifying to observe, that as the celebrated CathoUc
biblical scholar, Flug, observes, this work has encountered the most
formidable opposition among Protestant theologians, and that not a sin
gle eminent individual of their number has entirely subscribed to its
doctrines. Yet this infamous book, for which Rationalists of a less de
cided stamp had prepared the way, has wrought iramense mischief, and
precipitated raany, especiaUy among the Protestant laity, into the
depths of total unbelief.*

* The theory of Strauss is as follows : without absolutely calling in question the
existence of our Saviour, he assorts that the Gospels we now possess, were not com
posed before the close of the second century ; and that the life, ministry, and miracles
of Jesus Christ, as there recorded, were purely fictitious representations, traced ac
cording to that ideal of the Messiah prevalent among the Jews.
In reply lo this monstrous theory, let a few observations suffice. In the first place,
it supposes that the writings of all the Apostolic Fathers, contemporaries or imme
diate successors of the Apostles, and which contain such clear and numerous quota.
tions from the Gospels, and other scriptures of the New Testament, were forgeries
of the third century. Secondly, it supposes, that tbe writings of St. Justin Martyr,
Irenseus, and others still more abounding in such quotations, were also forgeries of a
like, or even later date. Thirdly, that the heretical literature of the former half of
the second century, numerous fragments whereof survive in the pages of the early
Fathers, and wliich fm-nishes such cogent, irrefragable, testimony in favour of the
authenticity, the genuineness, and sometimes the Divine authority of the Four Gospels
and other Now Testament scriptures ; — that this heretical literature, 1 say, was also an
orthodox fabrication of the same period. Fourthly, that the work written against the
Christian religion by the Pagan philosopher Celsus, about the year 176 of our era,
which admits the miracles of our Divine Lord as matters of incontestable notoriety,
and refers to the narratives of supernatural events, contained in the historical books
of Christians, with such distinctness and accuracy, as to establish their identity with
the Gospels we now possess ; — that this work, 1 say, composed by an acute, but ma
lignant enemy of our faith, was a Christian production of a subsequent age. Fifthly,
that the Jewish Mishna, compiled in the secjnd century of the Christian era, and
which, while it seeks to ascribe to fantastic causes the miracles of Christ, unequivo
cally admits their reality ; (miracles, be it observed, the knowledge whereof came
down to the Jews of that ago by a channel of tradition totally independent of Chris
tians) that the Jewish Mishna was Ukewise a Christian fabrication. Sixthly, that not

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 41
Strauss, deprived of his place of private teacher of Protestant divinity
in the University of Tubingen, was offered a few years ago, by the
revolutionary government of Zurich in Switzerland, a theological chair ;
but an armed insurrection of the sounder portion of the Protestant popu
lation prevented this outrage on Christianity. In Halle, two years ago,
a hundred and fifty students presented a petition to the government, that
a professorship should be bestowed on this infidel. In Holstein, a party
called " Philalethes," and in Berlin, another denominated " Freemen,"
have severally formed leagues to renounce all show of outward commu
nion with any Christian Church whatsoever.
In the year 1841, a licentiate of Protestant theology at the university
of Bonn, Bruno Bauer, published a work entitled, " Criticism on the
Evangelical History of the Synoptics ;" a work which in licentious im
piety surpassed even that of Strauss. The pantheistic views of Hegel,
insinuated in Strauss's book, are distinctly avowed by Bauer ; the iden
tity of the Divine and the human consciousness openly proclaimed —
and the personal existence of God and the immortality of the human
soul denied. The author then, absolutely and without restriction, re
jects the authenticity and the credibiUty of the whole Gospel History.
The Prussian Government, naturally conceiving it most absurd' and
dangerous that a man holding such principles should be allowed to re
main a teacher of divinity, proposed to the several Protestant theologi
cal faculties within its dominions the two following questions : " What
point of view does the author of the above-mentioned work hold in re
gard to Christianity,'' and " whether the hcentia docendi should be grant
ed to him V In reply to the two questions proposed, the several facul
ties of Berlin, Bonn, Halle, Breslau, Griefswalde, and Koenigsberg,
have published their opinions ; and no documents that have ever appear
ed throw so clear and withal so fearful a light on the present state of
German Protestantism. That Bauer's book is in opposition to Chris
tianity is the opinion of the Faculty of Berlin with one exception, of the
entire Faculty of Bonn, of that of Breslau with one exception, and of
one half the members in the Faculties of Griefswalde and Kcenigsberg.
only did the whole Christian world at the close of the second age receive as authen
tic and divine. Scriptures which were spurious, l)ut also believe them to have been in
universal circulation for one hundred andfift-y -years before. Lastly, that the Chris
tian Church antedated her own existence by a century and a half, and succeeded in
enlisting in behalf of this imposture the unanimous assent not only of her own mem
bers, but of the heterodox, the Jews, and the Gentiles.
Such are the preliminary difficulties that encounter Mr. Strauss ; and when he has
been clever enough to overcome these, his most arduous task remains ; for the main
evidences of Christianity would still remain unshaken.

42 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
That the work is compatible u-ilh the essence of Christianity, though
opposed only to its ecclesiastical dcvcloimcnl, is the opinion of Professor
Marheincke of Berlin, Professor Middledorpf of Breslau, and one half
the members in the Faculties of Griefswalde and Koenigsberg. As to
the second question, whether the Ucentia docendi should bc granted to
the author, the opposition to Bauer was uot quite so strong as on the
first question. The Faculty of Bonn, which passes for the most ortho
dox in Protestant Gerraany, made the disgraceful remark, that if Bauer
were permitted to teach theology, there would be no hindrance to any
member of the EvangeUcal Church inculcating the doctrines of invoca
tion of saints and the papal supremacy I This, doubtless, would be a
great raisfortune I But a greater misfortune it is, the candid Protes
tant Christian will confess, to see a theological faculty, calling itself
Christian, and Evangelical to boot, place doctrines held by the immense
majority of Christians on the same level with the grossest Pan
theism ! !"*
Had the Prussian government proposed the aforesaid questions to
some other Protestant faculty, like that of Tubingen for example, it
would have found the majority of members probably pronounce a decla
ration in favour of Bauer's infamous book ; for the majority are there
pantheistic. These dreadful doctrines have obtained alarming currency
araong the junior raembers of the theological, as well as philosophical
faculties at several Protestant universities.
Thus have I tracked the restless spirit of negation through all its la
byrinths for the last hundred years. We have seen it first question fhe
genuineness of certain passages and books of Scripture ; next reject the
theory of Divine inspiration ; then deny the authenticity of several of
the Apostolic Epistles, and even Gospels ; and afterwards subvert, one
after another, all the Christian dogmas that the elder Protestantism had
retained ; till at last it has reached the ultimate term of folly and wick
edness, and proclaimed the essential identity of the Divine and the hu
man consciousness.
As the old orthodox Lutherans gave way to the Rationalists of the
school of Semler, and these again to the Rationalists represented by
Wegscheider and Paulus, so the latter are now, by many of the rising
generation, forsaken for the Mythic divines, as Strauss and his followers
are denominated.
Melancholy as is the picture which has here been drawn of the state
of religion in Protestant Germany, let not the reader suppose, that all
* See " Gutachten der Evangeliseh theologischen Facultaten der Preussichen
Universitaten fiber Bruno Bauer." Berlin, 1842.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 43
hopes of a reUgious regeneration there are utterly extinct. The remark
able reaction, headed by her most distinguished spirits, in favour of more
Christian views, he has already had occasion to observe. A far more
favourable sign, is that never intermitting stream of conversions, that
for the last forty years has set in towards the Catholic Church, and
which every year sees flow on with a more rapid tide, and in a more
expansive course.
If among the middle and the lower ranks of society, conversions be
not near so numerous, relatively to the population, as in Holland and
in our own country, yet in the upper and more cultivated classes, they
were, until very lately, of much raore frequent occurrence. Gerraany
is peculiarly circumstanced. There are vast districts in the north,
where a Catholic priest and Catholic chapel are objects as rare as in
North Wales ; and unfortunately, in several of those provinces, like
Wurtemberg and Baden, where the two Churches corae in contact, the
loose opinions and disedifying conduct, which until very lately were
very generally prevalent among the Catholic clergy, were not of course
calculated to raise their Church in the estimation of Protestants. In
other parts, like the Rhenish province, Westphalia, Bavaria, Silesia, and
parts of Austria — districts where new elements of religious life are fer
menting through the whole Catholic population, conversions are exceed
ingly nuraerous, and are annually on the increase.*
But the solution of the great problera that perplexes Protestant Ger
many — the return to a higher religious life, whereof she seems to have
a dim anticipation — and whereof so many noble individual examples
seem to be the necessary forerunners — the solution of this great pro
blem, I say, mainly depends on the moral regeneration of Catholic Ger
many herself; and this leads me to the second part of this historical
sketch, wherein I propose briefly to describe the destinies of the Ger
man Catholic Church for the last hundred years.
Catholic Germany, that, in the latter part of the sixteenth century,
had opposed with so much energy the progress of the Reformation, sank
after the great convulsions of the Thirty Years' War into a state of
moral and intellectual languor, that lasted for the period of a hundred
years. Under the auspices of Catholic prelates, however, many lauda
ble attempts were made in that interval to bring about a reunion of Pro
testants with the Catholic Church ; and Protestant princes, such as the
Landgrave Ernest of Hesse, Frederick of Brunswick, Duke of Hanover,

* For instance, In the hereditary states of Austria, exclusive of Hungary, though
the Protestant population lies thinly scattered, five hundred and forty-eight persons of
various ranks were in the year 1840 converted to the Catholic Church.

^4 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
Frederick Augustus, Elector of Saxony, and Alexander, Duke of Wur
temberg, were successively admitted into her cpmmunion.
The nuraber of ecclesiastical principalities in Germany, though on
the whole conducive to the teraporal welfare of the people, were in a
spiritual point of view attended with great disadvantages. The pre
lates, too exclusively engaged with cares of state, often entirely aban
doned to their coadjutors the spiritual administration of their dioceses ;
and there were instances in the last century, where the character of the
bishop seeraed entirely merged in that of the prince.*
That a certain share of political power and influence is necessary to
the episcopacy, for the better protection of the interests of religion and
morality, as well as of the Church's proprietary rights — for the conser
vation of order, and the promotion of popular freedom, cannot for a
moment be doubted. That, moreover, the temporal sovereignty enjoy
ed by the Holy See was a means devised by Divine Providence for pre
serving intact its spiritual independence, the most superficial glance
over the page of history may suffice to convince us. But whether in
bishoprics, where independence is not of the same vital importance ;
which possess not the same promise of indefectibility and Divine assis
tance, and consequently are devoid of the sarae guarantees against the
abuses and dangers attendant on the possession of secular power, such
extensive political jurisdiction be conducive to the interests of religion,
is a matter exceedingly questionable.
It was not so rauch, however, the temporal sovereignty of the pre
lates, as the too exclusively aristocratic composition of the capitular
bodies, that operated so prejudicially to the well-being of the Church.
The priesthood, as it holds the office of mediator between all ranks of
society, should itself represent the blending of all classes ; and as nobi
lity is calculated to infuse into it moderation of temper and dignity of
habits, .so the commonalty pours into it a perpetual stream of energy,
talent, and popular sympathy. In this, as in so many other instances,
the noblest example has ever been set by Rome, whose Sacred College

» An anecdote, illustrative of the observation in the text, is related of one of the
elector? of Mayence in the last century. Passing in his carriage one day through the
streets of his capital, he saw a man taken suddenly very ill. He stopped his carriage,
and bade his footman fetch a clergyman from a neighbouring church ; and seemed
totally to forget that he himself was invested with powers to render the poor man
spiritual aid.
Yet there were other ecclesiastical potentates (and among these the Prince-bishops
of Wiirlzburg,) who to the last remained true to the spirit of their sacred profession,
and spent their ample revenues in promoting the interests of religion, and tbe moral
and temporal well-being of their subjects.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 45
has in every age been open to virtue and merit, in the humblest, as well
as in the highest ranks of life ; and where it has so often happened, as
even at this moment is the case, that the son of a peasant sits clad in
the Roman purple by the side of a brother of the first Christian
emperor. The members of the German Chapters, thus exclusively composed,
Were too often listless and given up to ease, indifferent to literature,
little concerned about the great objects and interests of the Church, and
evincing activity only in the obscure intrigues that preceded and ac
companied the election of a bishop.
If we except the laudable labours of the Benedictines, and the ex
cellent writings of the Brothers Walenburg, the theological literature
of that period was mostly confined to petty polemical skirmishes ; while
in the schools, divinity, finding few able expositors, was taught in the
raost dry, tasteless, and mechanical manner.
But in the reign of the excellent Empress Maria Theresa, a better
spirit arose. Popular education was considerably extended, the theolo
gical schools underwent great improvements ; and the method of in
struction then adopted has been found so excellent, as to be ever since
retained. Towards the close of this reign, however, the Jansenists
became active and influential ; a spirit of unworthy distrust towards
the Holy See began to display itself; the odious placet on all papal
bulls was, in imitation of France, established; and the evil genius, that
so often blighted all salutary reforms in the eighteenth century, here
again exerted its baneful influence.
Those principles of hostility to papal and episcopal power, which
characterized the French Jansenists of the eighteenth century, and
distracted and convulsed the Ga.llioan Church, at the moment when she
needed all her combined energies and resources in order to resist un
belief, found their way into Catholic Germany ; where the relaxation
of discipUne, and the growing lukewarmness among a large portion of
the clergy and laity, presented a too favourable soil to the growth of
such principles. They found an organ and defender in John Nicholas
von Hontheim, suffragan bishop to the Elector of Treves, who under
the name of Febronius, published, in the year 1763, a work against the
authority of the Holj See, under the pretence that by the depression
of prerogatives peculiarly odious to Protestants, the return of the latter
to the Catholic Church might be more easily brought about. " Hence
he asserted," says Dr. Dollinger, " that the constitution of the Church
is not monarchical, that it was not Christ, but the Church, that had con-
ferred on the Roman pontiffs the supremacy; that the pope has,
indeed, an authority over aU Churches, but no proper jurisdiction ; that

46 MEMOIR OP DR. MOEHLER.
his superiority among bishops is no more than the precedency allotted
to the president or speaker of a parliament ; and that he can indeed
make laws, but that they receive a binding force only through the
unanimous adhesion of all bishops."* The author, moreover, counselled
princes to hold back the papal bulls, in order to impede the intercourso
of their Churches with Rome, and thereby to force the latter into con^
cessions; and also, with the advice of theii" prelates, to take in hand
the reform of those national Churches. This work, condemned by the
Holy See, and proscribed by several German bishopsj called forth able
replies from several distinguished divines of Germany and Italy. Yet
the principles it inculcated, exercised for along time a most fatal influ*
ence over public opinion, passed into the teaching of the theological
schools, furnished the secular power with most formidable weapons
against the liberties of the Church, and led to the degradation and
oppression of the German clergy.
While such principles were leading minds astray, a prince arose,
who was destined to enforce them in public life, and, by his great
power, give to them the most fatal extension nnd diffusion. Imbued
with the maxims of this insidious Jansenism, as well as with many of
the false principles of Illuminism; vain, frivolous, and egotistical, yet
not devoid of benevolent feelings, the perverted philanthropy of the
emperor Joseph was the curse of his subjects. While with the view
of improving the happiness of his people, he ventured on crude, pre-"
cipitate, violent political reforms, that ofton infringed on their liberties,
violated their ancient customs, and were repugnant to their feehngs :
his ecclesiastical reforms, that originated likewise in a true or affected
zeal for the advancement of piety, were still more unsuccessftd. True
to the counsels of Febronius, he prescribed by ordinance the royal placet
as a necessary condition to the reception of all papal bulls, whether of a
doctrinal or a disciphnary kind, forbade recurrence to Rome in all mat
ters, and took upon himself to transfer the right of giving dispensations,
in matriraonial cases, from the Holy See to the bishops of his own dc
minions. He next cut off all communication between the heads of
religious houses within his states and their superiors at Rome ; pro.
scribed all the contemplative orders, and tolerated none but those dedi
cated to the care of souls, attendance on the sick, and the instruction
of youth ; and at last, with few exceptions, dissolved all the monasteries,
confiscated their property, and applied it to the endowment of parishes,
the foundation of schools, and the building of barracks. His reforming
zeal was then exerted on the public liturgy and worship, where the
* Dollinger's Continuation of Hortig's Church History (in German,) p. 871.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 47
innovations he introduced attested at once the littleness of his mind
and his reckless arrogance. The numerous confraternities devoted to
exercises of piety, and the spiritual and corporal works of mercy, this
ruthless enemy of the Church abolished also. The education of clerical
students Was withdrawn frora the eye of the |)ishops ; episcopal autho
rity was everywhere invaded ; those prelates who resisted the impious
innovations of the emperor, were, by his agents, held up to odium and
contempt; and writings more or less openly directed against the dis-
cipline, the constitution, and the dogmas of the Catholic Church, were
encouraged and circulated by the government. He proclaimed the
dissolubility of the nuptial tie, before the civil tribunals ; and while he
thus undermined the constitution of the family, as established by
Christianity, he thereby, to a certain extent, severed the connexion
between Church and State. The celibacy of the clergy he would fain
have abolished, but was compelled to yield to the remonstrances of the
Austrian prelates.
The venerable pontiff Pius VI. crosses the Alps to check the giddy,
infatuated emperor in his headlong course. His remonstrances, ex
hortations, and prayers are unavailing ; till the loud murmurs of
Austria, the menacing attitude of Hungary, and the open revolt of
Flanders, rouse the raonarch from his illusion. He lived to see, in
part, the futility of his efforts ; but his career was terminated before he
could consummate the schism in Austria.
The ecclesiastical policy of this imperial revolutionist well deserves
our consideration, because it has been the main source of all the evils
that for the last fifty years have afflicted the German Church. Those
prelates who had encouraged this monarch in his encroachments on
the papal power, lived to become the victims of that policy ;— the blow
levelled at a higher authority recoiled on themselves ; their jurisdiction
was soon infringed, trampled on, and despised ; and experience proved
on this, as on so many former occasions, that the safest bulwark of na
tional Churches, against the assaults of the secular power, is in their
firm adherence to the Apostolic See. In the suppression of monas
teries, Joseph II. was doubtless an unconscious instruraent in the hands
of a high retributive Justice, for the chastisement of declining piety and
relaxing zeal. Yet here, as elsewhere, the abolition of those institutes
left an irreparable void in society. In directing their first attacks
against the contemplative orders, the revolutionists of the last, as of the
present century, struck at the very root of the monastic life. For all
outward energy, — -all zealous manifestations of love for God and our
neighbour, — all heroic exercises of works of mercy, spiritual and cor
poral,— have their foundation in prayer and heavenly contemplation,

48 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
which form the basis of all religious communities, though in sorae the
exercise be more rigidly prescribed, and more prominently practised,
than in others.
The fountains of education were now often poisoned : the instruction
of youth, wrested from the hands of the vigilant guardians of virtue,
was entrusted to men devoid of the same guarantees, or even the
avowed partisans of schismatical and irreligious principles ; while in
the duties of the sacred ministry, in the care of the infirm, and in the
relief and education of the poor, the secular clergy lost often zealous
co-operators, and admirable models in the path of virtue.
The suppression of the religious confraternities was also a most fatal
blow to the cause of public virtue. These admirable sodaUties foster
faith and piety araong their members, inspire deeds of benevolence,
keep up a holy concord among citizens of all classes, and are to layraen
(even such as are not therein enrolled) what religious orders are to the
secular clergy, — perpetual incentives to the practice of the higher vir
tues. The destruction of these pious brotherhoods was followed, in
Vienna, by the establishraent of various societies for the promotion of
worldly gaieties and profane amusements. So indestructible is the
spirit of association in the mind of man I
The elaborate despotisra which Joseph had contrived for the oppres
sion of the Church, though modified by his successors, has long con
tinued to enervate episcopal authority, to check the zeal of the inferior
clergy, to thwart the efforts and weaken the influence of those religious
orders that were originally retained, or have since been restored, and to
dry up, among the people, many springs of spiritual life.
The spirit of distrust and ahenation towards the Holy See, inspired
by the writings of Febronius, and encouraged by the legislation of
Joseph II. , finds still, unhappily, its adherents among a portion of the
Austrian priesthood, and a large body of the civil functionaries ; while
in some other parts of Germany, that spirit terminated in the open pro
fession of schismatical principles.
Lastly, the sacrilegious spoliation of monastic property on the part
of this emperor, as well as the encouragement he gave to a licentious,
irreligious press, coupled with his avowed contempt for all ancient cus
toms, popular franchises and hberties, and the prescriptive rights of civil
corporations, led to the loss of his Belgian provinces, facilitated the
triumph of the arms and the principles of French Jacobinism, and the
consequent dismemberment of the Germanic empire, and brought about
that long train of calamities, disgraces, and humiliations, that Austria
was destined to endure.
While the head of the empire was thus waging war against the

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 49
Church, she received severe blows from those who were her natural
protectors and defenders. The extensive jurisdiction, which for two
centuries the papal nuncios had exercised in Germany, and which had
been conferred on them in order to check the progress of the Reforma
tion!, now irritated the jealousy of some German prelates, and rendered
them, in the general religious laxity of the age, but too well disposed to
lend a willing ear to the doctrines of Febronius. Imbued to a certain
extent with those opinions, and spurred on by the counsels and example
of Josephs the three ecclesiastical electors of Mayence, Treves, and
Cologne, accompanied by the archbishop of Salzburg, met in the year
1786, at the baths of Ems, and there framed a series of articles, called
the twenty-six points, insulting to the dignity, and derogatory to the
rights, of the Holy See. They were to the effect, that episcopal juris
diction should be freed from those restraints, whereby recurrence to
Rome is rendered necessary ; that the right of dispensation in matri
monial cases, down to the second degree, belonged of right to bishops ^
that all papal bulls and breves must first be sanctioned by the accept.
ance of the bishops ; that annats and dues for the reception of palliums
be abolished, and an equitable tax substituted ; that in cases of appeal
the pope must select judices in partibus, or leave them to the deter
mination of a provincial council ; and that the prelates, when restored
to the possession of their original rights, would undertake a reform of
ecclesiastical discipUne.
These articles, some whereof struck at the essential rights of the
papal power, others at long-established usages, sanctioned by the autho
rity or practice of the Church, were strenuously resisted by several
German prelates, as well as the Pope's nuncio at Cologne, The next
year, the parties themselves, who had been implicated in these proceed
ings, revoked, in a formal address to the pope, the obnoxious articles ;
but it would be an error to suppose that the scandal and mischief of
such declarations are immediately removed by a retractation.
At the moment when these attempts were made to introduce disor
ganizing principles into the German Church, infidelity was not behind
in the concoction of her own schemes. Weishaupt, a professor at the
Bavarian university of Ingolstadt, entered, as I before observed, into
close communication and confederacy with Nicolai, who, in the north
of Germany, was actively diffusing the principles of irreligion. The
former founded, in the year 1776, the order of the Illuminati, which
was destined to propagate the atheistic and antisocial principles of the
French Encyclopedists, through the mysterious forms and agency of
masonic lodges. The founder and first members of this destructive
order were even more systematic in their schemes, and more crafty
4

60 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
in the execution of them, than the infidels of France. A well-informed
eye-witness of the time says : " The illuminati undertake to give eccle-
siastics to the Church, counsellors to sovereigns, tutors to princes,
teachers to universities, nay, even commanders to the imperial
fortresses." This formidable association was, indeed, broken up by
the energy of the elector, Carl Theodore ; but its principles to a certain
extent survived, and wrought great mischief in Bavaria and other parts
of Catholic Germany.
In this state of things did the French revolution surprise the inhabit.
ants of Catholic Germany. A clergy partly relaxed in discipline, and
tainted with Febronian doctrines, — its better members often thwarted
by the despotic control of the state, in their zealous efforts for the
maintenance of faith and piety ; a nobility in part corrupted by the
irreligious literature of France and the rationalist philosophy of Nor
thern Germany ; a third estate in many instances perverted by doc
trines openly proclaimed from many university-chairs, or secretly in
culcated in the lodges of the illuminati ; — all these were social elements
ill calculated to encounter the shock of the moral and physical energies
of revolutionary France.
To these causes of moral debility, others of a political nature must be
added. The political absolutism, which from the reign of Lewis XIV. had
become so predominant in France, in Spain, and Portugal, and, to a
less extent, in Germany (for here many remnants of ancient freedom
survived), powerfully contributed to bring about the great popular com
motion which now shook Europe to its centre. In the first place, by
detaching the nobles from the sphere of their local power and influence,
this political system drew them into the vortex of dissipation, so often
incident to a court life, and thereby rendered them more obnoxious to
the irreligious philosophy of the day, that ministered to sen.wality.
Secondly, by excluding them as a body from a participation in the con
duct of public affairs, it rendered them frivolous, inexperienced, ready
to concur in any hollow sophism, or adopt any rash, crude expedient,
suggested or put forth by political innovators. Thirdly, it exposed tbe
aristocracy to the jealousy and envy of the middle classes, who were at
a loss to understand the meaning of surviving distinctions and privi
leges, when they no longer beheld the corresponding exercise of power.
Lastly, the middle classes themselves, deprived of their old, sound,
historical, legitimate liberties, were the more prone to run after the illu
sive meteor of a false, pernicious, abstract freedom. In a word, the
soUtary column of royalty, unaided by the pilasters of nobility, and the
strong buttresses of democracy, was found incapable of sustaining the

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 51
whole Weight of the social edifice. Such were some of the evils that
the modern system of political absolutism brought on Church and
State ; and though by no means tho chief, it was certainly one of the
great concurrent causes of that mighty revolution, which darkened and
convulsed the close of the eighteenth century, and the last shocks
whereof we are ever and anon doomed to feel.
The divine Nemesis now stretched forth His hand against devoted
Germany, and chastised her rulers and her people for the sins and trans.
gressions of many successive generations. Like those wild sons of the
desert, whom, in the seventh century, heaven let loose to punish the de-
generate Christians of the east, the new Islamite hordes of revolutionary
France were permitted by Divine Providence to spread through Ger
many, as through almost every country in Europe, terror and desolation.
What shall I say of the endless evils that accompanied and followed
the march of her armies ? Tho desolation of provinces, — the plunder
of cities, — the spoliation of Church property, — the desecration of altars,
' — the proscription of the virtuous, — the exaltation of the unworthy
members of society,— the horrid mummeries of irreligion practised in
many of the conquered cities, — -the degradation of life, — and the profa
nation of death ; — such were the calamities that marked the course of
these devastating hosts. And yet the evils inflicted by Jacobin France
were less intense and less permanent, than those exercised by her le
gislation. In poUtics, the expulsion of the old ecclesiastical electors,
who, if they had sometimes given in to the false spirit of the age, had
ever been the mildest and most benevolent of rulers, — the proscription
of a nobility, that had ever lived in the kindliest relations with its te
nantry, — 'and on the ruins of old aristocratic and municipal institutions,
that had long guarded and sustained popular freedom, a coarse, levelling
tyranny, sometimes democratic, sometimes imperial, established ; — in
the Church, the oppression of the priesthood, — a heartless religious in-
differentism, undignified even by attempts at philosophic speculation,
propagated and encouraged ; — and through the poisoned channels of
education, the taint of infidelity transmitted to generations yet unborn ;
—such were the evils that followed the establishment of the French
domination in the conquered provinces of Germany. Doubtless,
through the all-wise dispensations of that Providence, who bringeth
good out of evil, this fearful revolution has partly become, and will yet
further become, the occasion of the moral and social regeneration of
Europe. It was thus Protestantism gave occasion to the reform of
manners instituted by the Council of Trent. In both instances, the
regeneration was brought about in utter opposition to the principles of
the revolution that furnished occasion for reform.

52 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
By thetreaty of Lune ville, in ISOl, and a corresponding decree of thf
imperial diet, in 1803,the left bank of the Rhine was ceded to France. In
order to indemnify the secular princes,who thereby lost their territorial pos'
sessions, all the ecclesiastical electorates, principalities, and landed pro
perty of bishoprics, abbies, convents, chapters, and other ecclesiastical cor.
porations throughout the greater part of Germany, Were given up to them.
Thus did all the secular pomp and temporal grandeur of the German
Church perish with that holy Roman empire, which had risen, and for so
many ages grown up, under her auspices, and which had imparted to her,
in turn, so much power and dignity. The monasteries and convents
were almost everywhere suppressed, their estates confiscated, and their
inmates reduced to a paltry pittance, which was often but irregularly
paid. The chapters also were despoiled, their promised endowments
withheld ; and while their members died one after the other, the bishops
were left without advisers and co-operators. The episcopal sees them
selves were arbitrarily broken up, contracted, or extended in their di
mensions ; and as their occupants died off, or resigned, from age or
other circumstances, they were replaced by vicars apostolic, who, with
out the same influence or authority, were incapable of repressing the
abuses, or coping with the evils of the time. Every impediment was
opposed to a free intercourse between the episcopacy and the Holy
See ; and the jurisdiction of the forraer was subjected to the odious
shackles of a jealous legislation. Ecclesiastical seminaries were, with
few exceptions, not restored ; and thus one of the most efficient means
for training up a pious priesthood was neglected. Altars and churches
were despoiled, and pious and charitable foundations misapplied or
squandered away.* Principles of irreligion, propagated by the press, or
from the university-chair, raet with secret encouragement or passive
connivance from several governments ; the popular and grammar
schools were often entrusted to teachers totally devoid of religion ; and
in Bavaria especially, the profligate ministry of Count von Mongelas
left no measure untried, in order to obliterate religion from the hearts
of a most Catholic people.
To these calamities, under which the Church of Germany groaned,
we must add the many and various evils attendant on the campaigns of
Napoleon, — that often partook of the sacrilegious and atrocious charac
ter of the first revolutionary wars ; the general prostration of moral and
intellectual energy, that foreign dominion engenders ; and the demo-
raUzing efiects ttiat foUow the arbitrary transfer of countries or provin-

. * See Alzog's Church History (in German), p. G59 ; see also the Protestant Hase'i
Church History, p. 505.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 53
ces from one ruler to another ; the dissolution of the sacred ties of
nationality, and the breaking up of old hereditary attachments.
Yet the hour of liberation for Germany and Europe at last sounded.
"That mighty hunter before the Lord," as Gorres once called Napo
leon, who had been raised up by Divine Providence to chastise (in the
words of Dryden) " a lubrique and adulterate generation," had now
accomplished his mission of terror, and amid the exultations of the civi
lized world, was himself caught in the toils which his ambition had laid
for others.
On the restoration of general peace, in 1814, the several German
governments saw the necessity of co-operating with the Holy See, for
the establishment of a new ecclesiastical organization. In the year
1817, Bavaria entered into a concordat with the Pope; and, after long
negotiations, Prussia, Hanover, Wiirtemberg, Baden, and the other minor
states, followed her example. The stipulations in these several concor
dats were tolerably favourable to the Church ; but in a very few in
stances only were they honestly carried out. The virtuous Emperor of
Austria, Francis, strove to negotiate with the Papal See a concordat,
whereby the many evils engendered by Joseph's policy might be re
moved : but owing to the fatal influence of a dignitary of the Church,
this godly work was not accomplished.
It was the great merit of the Emperor Francis, that he relaxed the
severity of his predecessor's legislation in regard to the Church ; dis
countenanced impiety ; restored several religious orders, and mitigated
the harsh, despotic laws respecting the spiritual government and tera
poral administration of others, that had been retained ; placed every
department of education in closer connexion with the Church ; and
generally nominated to the episcopal dignity, and other ecclesiastical
functions, men of orthodoxy, zeal, and learning. In Bavaria, the -
Church languished in a miserable condition, until the year 1825, when
the present enlightened sovereign ascended the throne. He has made
it his duty to heal his country's wounds, by restoring to religion her
salutary influence. He has appointed men of eminent learning and
piety to the episcopal sees ; reformed the establishments of public edu
cation ; revived several religious orders of either sex ; encouraged all
institutions of piety and charity ; and laboured to bring about a holy
union between the Church and art and science. Under his auspices,
Catholic science has reached a magnificent pitch of development ; and
religious art — and especially painting — has achieved wonders unex
ampled since the days of Perugino, Leonardo da Vinci, and Raphael.
In Prussia, and the other German states ruling over a Catholic popu
lation, the Church, after the so-called restoration of 1814, had to encoun-

54 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
fer a long succession of secret intrigues, odious machinations, and vcxa-
'11'
tious oppressions. At times, the independence of canonical election
was violated; at others, bislioprics were kept vacant; and almost al
ways, by the influence of the state, men noted for subserviency of cha-
racter, or labouring under the infirmities of age, were promoted to the
episcopal office. Papal bulls, even on doctrinal matters, were for years
held back by many of these governments : episcopal authority, in WQr-
temberg more especially, was, and is still, shackled by the most humi
liating fetters ; and in general every favour was evinced towards those
churchmen who were most unmindful of their duties. Every attempt
was made to Protestantize, or rather to uncathoUcize the CathoUc popu
lation, partly by the Protestant or irreligious teachers appointed to the
schools, as well as by the professors nominated to the university-chairs,
and partly by the instrumentality of the press, under government influ
ence. Every disfavour was manifested towards zealous Catholics, lay
as well as clerical ; and every encouragement given to mixed marriages,
contracted under such circumstances, and with such conditions, as
were calculated to promote a considerable increase in the Protestant
population. But the web, which a cunning tyranny had spun for years, the me
morable night of the 20fh of November, 1837, saw the courageous wis
dom of one man suddenly unravel. The venerable Archbishop of
Cologne, Count von Droste-Vischering, forced the Prussian government
out of its labyrinth of secret machinations into the path of open violence.
Hereby its h3'pocrisy was exposed, its flatterers were put to shame, and
the vigilance, energy, and religious zeal of Catholic Germany were
aroused. It is here unnecessary to do more, than briefly advert to recent
transactions, that must be still fresh in the reader's mind, and which I
have not space to recount. The example of the iUustrious Archbishop
of Cologne was followed by that of the distinguished prelate who occu
pied the archiepiscopal see ofPosen. The sovereign pontiff denounced
the gross injustice of the Prussian government, in its imprisonment of
the two archbishops, and applauded the firmness, prudence, and self-
devotedness of the latter ; while backed by that high authority, the
other prelates within the Prussian dominions united in strenuous resist
ance against the encroachments of the secular power. This was the
dawn of a new epoch on CathoUc Germany. Frora the banks of the
Rhine down to the frontiers of Hungary, a new spirit hath breathed
over the German Church. A warmer, more filial attachment — the re
sult at once of gratitude and conviction — hath sprung up towards the
Holy See ; the inferior clergy have rallied round their bishops ; and
churchmen, formerly timid and lukewarm, arp now hf"T>mo f"rvPTitand

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 55
courageous. Among the laity many have been reclaimed from tepidity,
and even unbelief; the duties of religion are prosecuted with greater
fervour ; pious and charitable confraternities have raultiplied ; and a
zeal to diffuse the blessed truths of reUgion, to defend the doctrines of
the Church against the calumnies of the press, and her liberties against
the oppressions of the state, has become more and more manifest.
But before I close this account of the German Catholic Church, it is my
duty to notice two parties, that disturbed her peace, and were even seve
rally converted by Protestant Governments into instruments for her an
noyance and oppression. The first is the party of the so-called Liberals,
or anti-Celibates ; a fraction that carries to the most violent excess the
principles of the old Febronians. Headed by Wessenberg, Alexander
Mulier, Carove, and others, it prevails chiefly in Baden, Wurtemberg
and Silesia. Distinguished for a strong semi-rationalistic tone in their
general doctrines, its raembers clamour for a German National Church,
with a mere nominal dependence on the Pope ; they demand (doubtless
with the view of better diffusing their peculiar opinions) the celebration
of the liturgy, and the administration of the sacraments in the verna
cular tongue ; and insist with peculiar force on the abolition of the irk
some law of celibacy. While in politics they profess an ardent liber
alism, they are noted in ecclesiastical matters for their mean subservi
ency to the State, which finds in them ready tools for the accom
plishment of any clandestine or open act of tyranny against that
Church, whereof they profess themselves members. In the earlier part of
the present century, when so many episcopal sees were vacant, when the
secular power ventured on so many encroachments upon ecclesiastical
jurisdiction, this party wrought much mischief, spread pernicious doc
trines among the people, suppressed many practices of devotion, and
not unfrequently set the example of a scandalous violation of their sa
cred vows. Several of its members have gone over to Protestantism ;
others have been suspended for imraoral conduct, or the profession of
false doctrines. It is remarkable that, as in former times, schismatics
generally ended by falling into heresy; so in the present age, when, on
the Continent especially, heresy has little or no vitality, schism gene
rally terminates in the profession of total unbelief. Such was the case
with the old constitutional ecclesiastics of France ; such is the case
with their successors, the Abbe Chatel and his followers ; such, too, is
the case with the German clerical faction I am now describing ; and
examples still more melancholy might be adduced. Stigmatized by
episcopal authority, reprobated by the sounder portion of laics, unsup
ported by a single writer of eminence, and combated, moreover, by
distinguished theologians, and, among others, by the subject of this

56 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
memoir, this schismatical faction, though still powerful in the Grand
-Duchy of Baden, is, in Wiirtemberg and elsewhere, rapidly sinking
into insignificance ; and before the day-star which hath arisen above
the German horizon, these impure and turbulent innovators, like birds
of night, will doubtless soon disappear.
But while this party was truckling to the state, in its iniquitous inva
sion of ecclesiastical rights, and disturbing the Church by its endea
vours to subvert an apostolic, and most salutary, and necessary ordi
nance of discipline, another party arose, which attempted to form a de
grading alliance with Rationalism. By adopting Luther's fundamental
principle of private judgment, the late Dr. Hermes, a professor of Ca
tholic theology at the university of Bonn, deemed he could better
succeed in undermining Luther's theological doctrines. Like Descartes,
he proclairaed that methodical doubt was the only path to wisdom ;
but whereas the French philosopher had expressly limited this method
of doubt to scientific objects only, Hermes extended it to all the truths
of revelation, even the existence of God, the immortality of the soul,
and the distinction between right and wrong.
" This method of doubt," says the celebrated Klee, " is the worst
system that can be devised. It is a sin against the object, which sus
pended in its rights on our belief, is declared to have no existence for
us; it is a sin against the authority of Christ, of the apostles, and
the Church, whose existence and character are hereby called in ques
tion — with whom we place our own private reason on a level, and
whom we summon to the bar of our own judgment ; it is a sin against
God, as we hereby destroy faith, which is God's work in man, and then
presume by our own energies to reconstruct it. It is a sin against the
subject, who is dragged from his state of faith, which is for him a want
and a duty per eminent.iam, and transported into a state of scepticism,
from which the escape is to many a matter extremely arduous and pro-''
blematical. To conjure up the demon of scepticism is no difficult
task : but to exorcise him again into his gloomy regions is a matter that
may baffle the art of the conjurer."*
This radically false and vicious method naturally led the author into
many doctrinal errors more or less grievous, and which, as enumerated
by the sovereign pontiff in his bull of condemnation, regard the nature
of faith ; the essence, the holiness, the justice, and the Uberty of God ;
the ends which the Most High proposed to Himself in the creation ;
the proofs whereby the existence of God should be established ; reve
lation ; the motives for belief; the Scriptures ; the tradition and minis-
* See Klee's Dogmatik, vol. i. p. 344. Mainz, 1839.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 57
try of the Church, as the depository and judge of faith ; the state of
our first parents ; original sin ; the faculties of fallen man ; the neces
sity and the distribution of Divine grace ; and the rewards of merit and
the infliction of punishments.
These errors, and the method which led to them, were, after a long
and careful investigation, condemned by the Holy See. This system,
though it numbered among its partisans no inconsiderable portion of the
Rhenish and Westphalian clergy, and was countenanced by Count von
Spiegel, the former archbishop of Cologne, found not many supporters
among the laity, and was not upheld by any theologian of eminent
talent. Had this system, however, been broached forty years ago,
when the ecclesiastical disorganization was so great, when the Kanti
an philosophy exerted such sway over the public mind, and before
the great regeneration of religious life and of theological science had
taken place in Catholic Germany, the results would have been far more
fatal. Thanks to the decision of the Holy See, and the firmness of
Count von Droste, archbishop of Cologne, as well as his present able
coadjutor, these pernicious doctrines, which caused some young raen to
make a shipwreck of the faith, have sunk into utter discredit. Many,
on the other hand, who had innocently imbibed these opinions, have
bowed to the sentence of the sovereign pontiff, and recanted ; others
(and they constitute the smaOer number) have been abashed into •
silence ; not a single work, or even pamphlet, has for the last two years
been put forth in behalf of the system ; the stronghold of the party, the
University of Bonn — has lately been cleared of those profe.ssors who
were its most obstinate defenders, and the error may be considered as
all but defunct. In conclusion, it is necessary to say a few words on
the relation which the literature of the present age has borne to the
Catholic Church ; and here the task is far more pleasing than when I
had to trace the destructive consequences of the alliance between Ra
tionalism and the literature of the eighteenth century.
The illustrious Count Stolberg, at the commencement of the present
age, gave the first impulse to CathoUc literature, and commenced that
series of eminent writers, who have since adorned Catholic Germany.
Deeply imbued with the spirit of Hellenic antiquity, Stolberg had in his
youth published spirited translations from some of the old Greek drama
tists, — while his own lyrical poems breathed a noble, chivalric spirit.
After his conversion to the Catholic Church, he consecrated his genius
to her exclusive service ; and certainly no man ever rendered his clas
sical acquirements more serviceable to the cause of Christianity. His
great work, the History of the Christian Religion, from the origin of
the world down to the fifth century, is written with considerable learn-

58 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
ing, great elegance of diction, brilliancy of fancy, and much amenity
of feeUng. Indeed the work may be called a noble epos of history,
where the narrative is from time to time intermingled with lyrical
effusions of the author's own pure and exalted feelings. At the same
tirae arose the roraantic school. The object of this school, established
by the two Schlegels, Novalis, and Tieck, was, as is well known, to
revive a love for Christian art and literature, and to explain the prin
ciples whereon they are founded. The founders of this school were
at first, indeed, exclusively Protestant, and their aira, apparently, was
purely aesthetic ; yet were their labours most useful in dispelling raany
prejudices of their fellow-religionists, and in pointing out the ennobling
influences of Catholicity on the human mind. Nor is it true, as has some
times been asserted, that a mere literary dilettantism, and no earnest reli
gious thoughts, were at the bottom of this remarkable intellectual move
ment. The great poet, Tieck, was so earnest in the matter, as to induce
his wife to become Catholic ; and she and her daughter are pious mem
bers of our church. And that the great writer himself never took the step
he had recommended, is only a proof of that sad discrepancy between the
intelligence and the will, which is one of the melancholy consequences
of the fall. The eminent piety of Novalis, and his attachment to the
Catholic Church, breathe through all his writings ; and those possessing
•the best opportunities of forming an opinion, declare,* that but for his
untimely death, he would have sought a refuge in that Church which is
the native home of all lofty intelligences, as well as the asylum of all
bruised hearts. His illustrious friend, Frederic Schlegel, the deepest
thinker of aU, embraced at a mature period of Ufe the Catholic faith ;
and the sincerity of that conversion, as well as the piety which subse
quently characterized hira, was proved, in a memoir I published several
years ago, to the satisfaction of my English Protestant critics. Several
of his disciples, like Adam Mulier, Baron d'Eckstein, and others, were
led, partly by aesthetic studies, partly by historical researches and philo
sophic speculations, to follow the noble example which Schlegel had
set. As the avenues that led to the old Egyptian temples, were bor
dered on either side by representations of the mysterious sphinx, so it
was through a mystical art, poetry and philosophy, many spirits were
then conducted to the sanctuary of the true Church. I am, however,
far from pretending to assert, that all the followers of the romantic

* A friend of mine, a distinguished German writer, who saw the private corre
spondence that once passed between Novalis and Frederic Schlegel, has assured me
that in that correspondence, the Catholic sentiments of the former are still more
clearly evinced than in his published writings.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 59
school were equally earnest, or that the admiration professed by many
among them for the Catholic Church, went beyond a mere enthusiasm
for the music of Pergolesi, the paintings of Raphael, and the poetry of
Dante. — -"
The heathenish fanaticism which Goethe had called up, and which
was exercising such destructive sway, Frederic Schlegel opposed by a
noble Christian enthusiasm. This was the aim of all his labours — this
was the task of his life, and which he so gloriously accomplished. And
whether we behold him pouring forth the religious effusions of his earn
est, reflective muse ; or displaying in comparative philology his ad
mirable analytic skill ; or unfolding with such marveUous depth the
peculiar genius of ancient and modern literatures ; or tracing on the
map of the world's history, the workings of God's providential dispensa-
tions ; or throwing out in metaphysics his rapid, searching, intuitive
perceptions ; or, before an audience of celebrated painters, like Scho-
dow, Veit, CorneUus, hnd Overbeck, revealing the fountains of artistic
inspiration, — we are lost in wonder at a mind of such depth and uni
versality. It is no exaggeration to say, that the whole modern art?
literature, and science of Catholic Germany, sprang, kindled up by the
fire which this Promethean spirit stole from heaven.
Of the genius of Novalis, who was cut off at the premature age of
twenty-nine, it is impossible to speak with the same confidence ; but it
may be asserted, that if inferior to his iUustrious friend in solidity of
judgment, he was endowed with nearly the same depth of understand
ing, and with even higher poetical imagination. His writings in prose
and in poetry exhibit a mind instinctively Catholic, wrestling with the
prejudices imbibed from a Protestant education. His tender piety,
which among other things frequently exhibited itself in an extraordi
nary devotion to the glorious Mother of God, unique, perhaps, among
Protestant writers, stamped on all his poetical conceptions a character
of indescribable purity. And had his brilliant career not been so
speedily terminated, he would, under the patronage of that powerful
advocate, have in all probability reached the temple, after which he
had so fondly yearned. As in the cloudless atmosphere of the south,
the stars of heaven shine with greater eflfulgence, so those lights of hu
man existence — love, friendship, patriotism — that beam along the im
mortal verse of Novalis, receive, as it were, a more magical glow from
the exquisite purity of his devotional feelings.
The genius of Gorres exhibits the same wondrous combination of
deep, comprehensive understanding and lofty iraagination, though not
in the same beautiful harmony as we find developed in Frederic Schle
gel, and as, in an immature state, was perceptible in Novalis. This

60 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
combination is the rare privilege of the most favoured sons of genius ;
and when, as in the case of Gorres, it is consecrated to the service of
truth, it becoraes indeed the most potent instrument of good. Gorres,
who devoted his energetic youth and manhood chiefly to political and
historical literature, wherein he combated at once the absolutists of de
mocracy and the revolutionists of absolutism, has in the evening of life
gone into the sanctuary of the mystic theology ; as, after the fatigues
and agitations of the day, raen love to retire into the secret oratory.
The other great thinkers of Catholic Germany, like Molilor, Windisch-
mann, Giinther, and others, have in the several departments of Jewish
traditions. Oriental philosophy, and speculative theology, displayed
great extent of erudition and depth of understanding, and rendered emi
nent services to the Church.
In this rapid survey I can notice only the most celebrated men in the
most important departments ; but it may be asserted, without fear of
contradiction, that in almost every branch of literature and science,
Catholic Gerraany has in our times produced raost distinguished men,
and has nobly redeeraed herself from the reproach of intellectual sloth,
that once deservedly attached to her.
The historical school, founded by the eminent Protestant John von
Miiller, and continued by the Protestants Voight, Leo, and Hurler, is
more or less distinguished for impartiality, extensive research, and a
noble appreciation of the social influence of the Catholic Church.
This school, when we look to its general tone and spirit, particularly in
its most distinguished ornament, Hurler, belongs certainly more to
Catholic than to Protestant literature. And certainly in no department
have German learning, genius, and rectitude, shone to greater advan
tage, or been attended with more beneficial results.
If the department of special history has not been cultivated by the
Catholic party with such brilliant success as by the Protestant, the for
mer, on the other hand, has produced the most celebrated men in pub
lic and constitutional law ; and, among these, Haller, Adam MuUer,
Jarcke, and Phillips, hold the most conspicuous place.
Yet theology, the queen of sciences, was still unrepresented in the
high circles of intelligence. In the last century the Jesuit Stattler,*
and the Augustinian Klilpfel, and in the present age, Zimmer, Dob-
mayer. Bishop Sailer, Lieberraann, and Breuner, had treated dograatic
theology with remarkable acuteness and learning, and some of them
with great taste and elegance of diction, and clearness of method. But

. * In the theology of Stattler, however, there were a few erroneous propositions,
that were censured by the Holy See.

MEMOIR OF t)R. MOEHLER, 61
a high t;reative spirit was still wanting. Divine Providence took com
passion on that afflicted German Church, and at the right moment sent
her the aid she most needed. It was in the beautiful province of Swa
bia that (through the whole Middle Age, and down to recent tiraes, has
ever furnished Church and State, art and science, with the most dis
tinguished men) this great luminary arose ; and this leads rae to the
great subject of my biography.

John Adam MoeHlee was born the 8th of May, 1796, at Igersheim,
near Mergentheim, on the confines of Franconia and Swabia, about
twenty miles from Wurzburg. His father, who was a substantial inn
keeper of the place, resolved to give his son the benefit of a liberal edu
cation. In his twelfth year, Moehler began to attend the Gymnasium at
Mergentheim, a town two miles distant froni the place of his birth, and
every evening he was obUged to return home. During his four years'
attendance at this school, he was distinguished as well for a peculiar
gentleness of disposition, and blameless conduct, as for his diligence and
love of study. Yet his mental powers Were but of slow development,
and gave no earnest of the intellectual eminence he was destined one
day to reach. In most branches of study he was surpassed by some of
his feUow-students ; although the strong predilection for history, which
he evinced even at this early period, and the keen interest he took in
the events of the day, are well worthy of attention. Such a love for
historic lore was also a characteristic trait in the boyhood of Gibbon.
It was Moehler's happiness to receive a religious education from his
virtuous parents ; for in Germany, more than in any other country, the
task of education, in the strict sense of the word, devolves on parents
far more than on the heads and teachers of Schools. Under the modern
system of Gymnasial instruction, which for the last fifty or sixty years
has there prevailed, the students of all the schools, whether elementary,
commercial, or Latin, are mere day-scholars, who after the prescribed
hours of study raust return to the paternal roof. With the exception
of the catechetical instruction, which in many parts of Catholic Ger
many is now most solid and excellent, and with exception of the fixed
hours for attendance at mass, and the frequentation of the sacraments,
the moral training of the pupil, the culture of his religious feelings, and
the superintendence of his moral conduct, devolve on his parent or
guardian. The defects of this system, in most instances, are obvious,
and are deeply deplored by the raost eminent Catholics of German}-.

62 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
Yet it cannot be denied that where, as in the case of the subject of this
memoir, the parents are very reUgious, it raay be attended with ad
vantages. Mojhler had the misfortune to lose his mother Very early, and his
father, though a most worthy and excellent man, treated him with a
certain degree of harshness. On his return from school, he would
sometimes compel him to perform the household duties, and, during the
vacations, to labour in the field. On one occasion a friend of his
youthful days came to his house, and saw him pouring out wine for hia
father's customers, while on the table lay a gramraar, which at every
spare interval he would take up and study.
Arter attending the Gymnasium of Mergentheim for four years,
Moehler repaired, in 1814, to the Lyceum, in the Swabian city of
EUvvangen, in order to prepare for the study of theology. After re
maining there sorae time, he began to entertain serious doubts whether
he were equal to the discharge of the arduous and awful duties of the
priesthood, and already revolved in his raind the project of embracing
another of the learned professions. For this end the consent of his
father was to be obtained ; and the conduct of that father on this occa-
sion, harsh and injudicious as it undoubtedly was, and perilous as it
might have been, was, under the raysterious guidance of Providence,
the means of giving a great teacher to the Church, and a most edify
ing rainister to her altars. On his son's soliciting his approbation and
support in a new professional career, the father replied, that the most
fervent wish of his heart was to see his son a worthy Catholic priest ;
but that if he felt not a caU frora heaven to that state, he raight give up
his studies and return to the parental roof, where he would meet with
kindness, and find occupation. " But," said he, "as regards any other
of the liberal professions, I can never give my consent to your embrac
ing one of thera." When subsequently censured forbis conduct, the
father replied to a friend, " I could not possibly see my son take to the
study of the law, for I have seen so many young men at the universi
ties make a shipwreck of their faith, and lose the heritage of eternal
life." When we consider the state of the German universities at that
period, the pernicious doctrines which were then inculcated from so
many professional chairs, the unbeUef and imraorality of so many of the
students, we may well understand the apprehensions of this honest and
simple-rainded man, however we may feel disposed to condemn his
severity. But Moehler, whose talents by this time were quickly and vigorously
developing, felt an irresistible attraction to learned pursuits, and, after
some consideration, he returned to the study of theology. In the foi-

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER, 68
lowing year he repaired to the University of Tiibingen, where the theo
logical faculty numbered among its members distinguished professors,
like Drey, Herbst, and Hirscher. Here he entered the ecclesiastical
seminary, and after passing four years in the study of divinity, under
the guidance of these distinguished masters, he was ordained priest on
the 18th of September, 1819, and thus reached the term of all his la
bours, and obtained the most ardent desire of his heart.
The first fruits of sacerdotal grace he wished to offer up to God by
devoting himself to the pastoral ministry, and accordingly, in the fol
lowing year, he officiated as assistant vicar in the successive parishes
of Walderstadt and Reidlingen, in Wiirtemberg.
I shall here take the Uberty of citing the testimony, so honourable to
both parties, which his principal in the last-named parish, the now canon
Strobele, has given respecting the life and ministry of the subject of
this memoir, during the period in question. " His pastoral career was
characterized by such an amiable, modest, and, in every respect worthy,
deportment, joined to such holy earnestness in all his functions and in
tercourse with men, that he won in an eminent degree the love and
veneration of the whole congregation, and especially of the young
scholars, whom he had to catechize. His style of preaching, simple
and feeling, addressed itself more particularly to the hearts of his
hearers, and thus atoned for defects in delivery. The inhabitants of
Riedlingen boasted of their vicar, whose name even now is mentioned
among them with love and respect. The half-year which he spent by
my side, was to my friend, the then chaplain Ehinger, and myself, a
period of cordial mutual co-operation. But even then his desire, I
might almost say his destination, for learned pursuits, was so decided,
that every hour he could devote to them was precious to him ; and there
fore the official writing which, as my assistant in the rural deanery,
he was obliged to go through, he felt as an irksome duty. To lighten
this burden as much as possible, my friend Ehinger and myself under.
took a portion of his task, and said to him in jest, that we expected he
would give us in return some fruits of his learned labours. I must here
make mention of a visit, which at this time the venerable and cele
brated Bishop Sailer honoured me with. Moehler made on the mind
of this prelate a deep impression ; and the manner in which he fixed
his eyes on him, threw our modest vicar into great embarrassment. This
amiable bishop made particular inquiries respecting this interesting young
man, as he termed him, and testified the great hopes he entertained of
him, which the latter afterwards so well justified. That, moreover,
Moehler's way of thinking had not then the same turn, which it after
wards took, is notorious ; and I well remember that on seeing some

64 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
essays he had delivered at several ecclesiastical conferences, the ieliO
rable and learnrd curate Haass expressed with apprehension a hope,
that this young man, for whom he entertained such sincere affection,
might regain the path of strict orthodoxy ; and the old curate Bcrtsch
once said on a similar occasion : " Well, well, it is aOowable for such a
learned young man to believe a little differently from us old men ; but
he will later recur to our way of thinking."— Jfi/A", Biography in the
Quarterly Theological Review of Tubingen, p. 578, 580.
The pernicious influence that the Neologists had exerted over public
opinion in Southern Germany, particularly in Baden and WOrtemberg,
I have already described. The theological faculty in the university of
Tiibingen, at which Moehler had studied, was, to a certain extent, and
in some of its professors, infected with those doctrines ; and even Hir"
scher, who has since become so eminent a divine, then gave in to many
of those false opinions. It was not to be expected that a young man,
like Moehler, should have escaped totally free from tho contagion of
doctrines, often put forth with seductive eloquence and learning, and
then held by so many fellow-students, and the majority of the Swabiah
clergy. " The Church," says his friend Professor Ruhn, " had not
yet Won all the affections of his heart, and the objects of his enthusiasm
lay, in part, beyond her circle : his views did not entirely harmonise
with all her doctrines, nor agree with all her disciplinary institutions.
Yet, from the outset of his career he was a conscientious priest, and
preserved intact the sanctity of the sacerdotal character, and most as
suredly he was devoid of all perfidy towards the Church, whose minister
he had become." — Tubinger Quartal-Schrift, p. 580, 1838.
His passion for learning was too irresistible to keep him long aloof
from the university life. After passing a year in the pastoral office, he
returned on the 31st October, 1820, to the University of Tubingen,
where he was soon nominated to the place of tutor in the Gymnasial
Institute, connected with the Convictorium, or ecclesiastical seminary
of that town. During the two years he filled this place, he devoted
himself with uncommon ardour and astonishing success to the study of
the ancient classics, particularly the Greek philosophers and historians.
The study of these ancient masters of human eloquence and specula
tion, brought out and developed all those faculties, wherewith nature
had so richly endowed him. In this school he acquired that delicacy
of taste— that solidity of judgment — ¦that vigour and dexterity of ratio
cination — that clearness and precision of language, which afterwards
so erainently characterized him. The insight, too, which he hereby
obtained into the nature of Paganisra, as well as the acquaintance ho
formed with the various systems of ancient philosophy, was of the

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 65
greatest service to the future speculative divine, and learned Church-
historian. And in allusion to the importance of these preparatory studies
for his subsequent career, Moehler used to speak jestingly " of the tiraes
when he lived in heathenisra."
So strong was his love for ancient literature, that in 1822 he drew
Up a petition to the Wiirtemberg government, soliciting the nomination
to a place, that had just becorae vacant in the philological faculty.
And there is no doubt, that had he pursued this career, he would have
reached the highest eminence. But Providence had reserved far higher
destinies for him. While he was on the point of forwarding this peti
tion to the government, the theological faculty, that had long observed
his great talents, transmitted to hira, with unanimous consent, a written
invitation to accept the place of private teacher in theology — a place
which is always sure in time to conduct to a professorship. Moehler
hesitated not a moment — gave up his cherished plan — accepted the
offer that had been so graciously made hira, and thus became bound
by new and more intimate ties to the interests of the Church.
His appointment to this place was, on the 22nd of September 1822,
confirmed by the government, which at the same time furnished him
with pecuniary means for undertaking a great literary journey through
Northern and Southern Germany, in order that by visiting the most
celebrated seats of learning, and conversing with distinguished profes
sors, he might the better qualify himself for the important office he was
about to enter on.
He began his journey in the autumn of 1822, and visited succes
sively the universities of Jena, Leipzig, Halle, Berlin, Gottingen ; and
on his return visited those of Prague, Vienna, and Landshut. The
conversation and literary advice of so many distinguished scholars and
theologians, whether Catholic or Protestant, whom he met with on his
journey, were, doubtless, of the greatest service to the future develop
ment of his mind ; and there was one individual, in particular, from
whom Moehler received lasting benefit. The celebrated Plank, Pro
testant professor of theology at Gottingen, had been the first to revive
— I had better, perhaps, have said introduce — the study of the fathers
in Protestant Germany. By his profound study of Christian antiquity,
he had been led to approximate very closely to the doctrines of the
Catholic Church; and it was said that more than one raeraber of his
family evinced no Uttle inclination to embrace its faith. With Plank,
Moehler held much conversation on the subject of the fathers, and of
Church-history ; and the result was, that several Neological opinions,
which the latter had imbibed in the school of Tiibingen, were dispelled
by this learned and enlightened Protestant. Plank urged him also to
5

66 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
prosecute with diligence the study of the fathers ;— a study whicli, In
the school of Hermes, and in that of the Wiirtemberg and Baden Neolo
gists, had been, from their strong leaning to heretical and semi-ratio
nalistic opinions, as well as from a conceited contempt for all former
ages, grossly neglected.
The nearer insight into the essence of Rationalisra, which, from his
visit to Protestant Germany, Moehler had obtained^lhe perception of
the dreadful moral ravages it had occasioned — its dry and heartless
worship — its churches vacant, even during the sermons of the most
celebrated preachers — the unbelief that had spread from the upper to
the lower classes of society — the sight of all these evils, I say, tended
heartily to disgust the subject of this memoir with all those sickly off
shoots of Rationalism, that the Swabian innovators were endeavouring
by degrees to engraft on the Catholic Church.
On his return to Tiibingen, Moehler took Wiirzburg in his way, and
called on his friend Dr. Benkert, then rector of the seminary, and who
has since succeeded him in the deanery of that city. Dr. Benkert af
firms, that he found Moehler vastly improved by this journey, and a
more decided Catholic tone pervading all his theological views.
Having arrived at Tiibingen in the summer of 1823, Moehler opened
his theological course with lectures on Church-history, and occasionally
on canon-law. Here he devoted himself with his characteristic ardour
and untiring perseverance to the study of the fathers, and of ecclesias
tical history. The first fruit of his labours was the work entitled
" Unity in the Church, or the Principle of Catholicism," 1825. This
work is now out of print, nor have I been able anywhere to procure a
copy of it. "In this book," sajs one of his biographers, " there was
much which in his riper years he no longer approved of, yet it must ever
be regarded as a noble proof of his originality of mind, as well as of
the depth of his feelings, and gave earnest of his future eminence in
theological literature. The reputation which it soon acquired for the
author, induced the Baden government to make him the foUowing year
the offer of a theological chair at the University of Freyburg in Breisgau.
This honourable offer Moehler declined ; but was thereupon immedi
ately raised to the dignity of professor extraordinary at his own
university. In the year 1827, a more important work, entitled " Athanasius the
Great, or the Church of his tirae in her struggle with Arianism," tended
vastly to extend Moehler's reputation. There were many reasons,
which induced him to make the Arian controversy, and the iUustrious
saint who played so salutary and glorious a part in that religious dis
pute, the subject of special investigation and description. Now, as in

Memoir o? idr. MofitiLEfe. «if
^.he age of Constantius, the cardinal mystery of Christianity, that the
'elder Protestantism, in its destructive march, had yet respected, was
assailed with a subtlety and a violence, that even Arianism itself had
never displayed. Those rationalizing views of the whole system of
Christianity, but timidly put forth by the heretics of the fourth century^
were developed and proclaimed with an unblushing effi'ontery and a
recklessness of impiety, that would have startled and shocked the ex*
tremest Arian. Now, as in the former period, liJkewartnness and
timidity, not to say cowardice, characterised a great proportion of
Catholics ; while the oppression of the German Church by the secular
power, if less open and violent than in the age of the son of Constan
tine, Was fat more insidious, refined, and systematic. And What more
glorious model Could be presented to inany of the degenerate Church-
¦men of Germany, than that illustrious saint, Who combines in himself
the characters of the learned and profound theologian, the prudent and
indefatigable prelate, the holy ascetic, and the intrepid confessor ?
The work is divided into six books. In the first we find a very clear,
iearned, and elaborate dissertation on the doctrine of the ante-Nicene
fathers, respecting the divinity of our Lord-, and the Trinity in
general. The following five books are taken tip with the public history of St.
.iVthanasius, with a copious analysis of his various works against the
heathens, the Arians, and the Apollinarists, and with a very full ac-
Count of the Arian heresy, from its rise, down to the death of ,St.
Athanasius, in the year 373.
The author, by giving copious extracts frofn contemporary histo
rians, and also from the letters of St. Athanasius and the other de
fenders of the Catholic cause, as well as from those of their Arian
opponents, completely transports us into the age he describes. It is,
however, to be regretted, that t"he narrative of events is too often in ten
rupted by, doctrinal dissertations, and analytic expositions of writings ;
and this defect renders the perusal of this valuable work sometimes
5rksome. All the personages, who took part in this mighty conflict, a're por
trayed with much truth, life, and interest. In the hostile camp, we find
the false-hearted, double-tongued Arius — the crafty Eusebius of Nico-
media-^the hypocritical Valens and Ursacius' — the audacious Aetius-^
the weak and tyrannical Emperor Constantius'— and, lastly, the pagan
enthusiast, Julian, who hangs over the Church like a dark, boding, but,
happily, passing, thunder-cloud. On the side of the combatants for
truth, the firmness of Pope Julius — the noble-minded character of his
successor, Liberius-'^the intrepid fortitude of tbe venerable Osius-^the

68 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER-
burning zeal of MarceUus of Ancyra — the high courage, but harsh and
intemperate zeal of Lucifer of Cagliari — the genius, the eloquence, the
mild virtues, and unshaken constancy, of Hilary of Poictiers— -and,
lastly, the lofty genius and majestic character of the great Athanasius,
alternately challenge our admiration, and enlist our sympathy.
Much as all Catholics are taught, from childhood, to revere the
character of this great conflssor, yet none can rise from the perusal of
iNIoehler's work, without feeling increased admiration for his genius,
and increased love and veneration for his virtues. In the writings of
Athanasius, what marvellous acuteness of dialectic, what prodigious
depth of observation, do we discover ! — -what intuitive insight into the
mind of Scripture !— what dexterity in the application of its texts ! —
what knowledge in the tradition of the fathers, and what instinctive
adherence to the spirit of the Church! In his life, what magnanimous
intrepidity in the defence of truth ! — what unwearied perseverance in
the path of duty !• — what unbroken constancy under persecution ! —
what presence of mind in the face of danger ! — what sagacious insight
into the wiles and machinations of heretics ! — what generosity towards
his enemies ! How temperate, too, is his zeal, and what a spirit of con
ciliation, where compromise is possible, and where concession is safe !
What activity and what wisdom in the government of his vast patri
archate ! Watch him through all the phases of his various destinies !
See him now surrounded by the love and sympathy of his Alexandrians
— now confronting hostile synods— now undertaking long and perilous
journeys, to defend his character from calumny, and to unmask before
the head of the Church the arts of heresy — now fearlessly proclaiming
the truth at the court of the tyrannical Constantius — and now banished,
time after time, from his diocese, his country, his friends ; encom
passed by perils from false brethren, perils from the sea, perils from the
wilderness ; and, while surrounded by the lions of the Lybian desert,
writing those iraraortal letters and treatises, where he consoles the per
secuted sons of the Church, confirms her wavering merabers, and
refutes the elated heretics ; — productions that to the end of time will be
the solace and the glory of the Church !
Behold him now, at the close of his glorious career, after forty years'
incessant toil, hardship, and suffering ; with a frame unbent, and a mind
unsubdued by age, still ready to fight new battles for the Lord : spared
by Heaven to see the great adversary he had so long combated — the
adversary of Christ — the monster Arianism— -gasping and bleeding
from his death-wound. Behold the veteran warrior now honoured by
that degenerate court, which had so long persecuted him — consoled by
the respect and sympathy of the Christian world — consulted on all

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 69
important affairs by the dignitaries of the Church, near or remote —
and nerving the courage, and directing the counsels, of that young,
hopeful band of Christ's soldiers — the Basils, the Nazianzens, and the
Nyssas, who were destined to follow up the victory he had achieved,
and annihilate the great antagonist of the Church.
But Athanasius attained to this great authority in the Church, only
because he had been most obedient and most faithful to the authority
of the Church. It was not by his personal genius, learning, and sanc
tity alone, that he obtained such a prodigious ascendancy over the
minds of his contemporaries, but also by the weight he derived from
the sanction of the Church and its visible head.
What a glorious part doth not the holy Roman See act in this Arian
contest ! While orthodox prelates are driven from their sees ; while
some quail before triumphant heresy, and others are incautiously en
trapped into the acceptance of ambiguous formularies ; while the faith
ful are distracted by the conflicting decisions of hostile synods, and
doctrine is undermined, and discipline subverted, by intruded heretical
bishops, the Roman pontiffs ever uphold the authority of the Nicene
Council, quash the decrees of heretical provincial .synods, restore to
their churches the banished prelates, condemn their adversaries, every
where enforce canonical discipline, and sometimes overawe the hostile
potentates of the earth.*
* The inerrancy of the Holy See during this dreadful contest, which witnessed
the confusion, or the fall, of so many other Christian Churches, is an historical fact
that has excited the admiration of enlightened Protestants themselves. " The history
of the great ecclesiastical disputes of this period," says Engelhardt, a German
Protestant Church historian of our day, " will show how much the authority of the
Roman See increased from the circumstance, that its bishops, almost without ex
ception, upheld with undeviating perseverance their doctrinal views, and that these
views ever bore off the final victory."* An elegant writer in the British Critic, after
asserting " that Rome was the only apostolical see in the west, and thereby had a
natural claim to the homage of those which were less distinguished," proceeds to
Bay, " ttiat this pre-eminence was heightened by her inflexible orthodoxy amid the
doctrinal controversies in which the eastern sees had successively erred, and by the
office of arbitrator and referee, which she held amid their rivalries and quarrels." —
British Critic, No. lvhi. April, 1841, p. 396.
Very many ages before the two Protestant writers made the remarks cited in the
text, the Emperor Justinian said, " the bishops of ancient Rome having in all things
followed the apostolic tradition, have never disagreed among themselves, but down
to our days have preserved the sound and true doctrine." " Oi ynf n^iic ric
TrfiT^wri^-i! *Pii|«»s T«i airoo-TOXjxti Jll* -JTM^rccv iniKduS-iia-ctvTl; iraostifoo-li abfi-!roTi wgit
Adv. Monophys. in Mai. tom. vii. par. i. p. 304.
* Engelhardt Kirchen-Geschichte, vol. i. p. 312.

70* MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
The approbation which this work universally received— the spirit
of zealous orthodoxy that pervaded its pages — the immense patristic
and historical learning it displayed— and the original and profound
views with which it abounded, drew more and more the attention of
Protestant as well as Catholic Germany towards its iUustrious author.
He now began to deliver lectures on the doctrinal differences be
tween Catholics and Protestants. The errors of his time, as I before
observed — the struggles the Catholic Church had to encounter, and the
oppression she had to endure, by rendering her position very analogous
to her state in the age of the great Athanasius, had first induced
Moehler to compose the work that has just been described. But now
he resolved to grapple more closely and directly with the errors of his
ace. Judging that the most effectual method to bring about the return
of our erring brethren to the Catholic Church, as well as to awaken
many Catholics themselves from their state of torpor, was to set forth
with accuracy the points of doctrine which divide the Churches, he
commenced a thorough investigation into the public formularies of the
various Protestant communities, as well as the private writings of the
Reformers, and their most eminent disciples. This was a field which
had been but partially tilled by preceding labourers, and which offered
much to reward the industry of a new cultivator. The course of lec
tures which, in the year 1828, Moehler opened on this important sub
ject, soon attracted a crowded auditory ; and every year they were
received by the students with increasing interest and attention. The
fame of these lectures getting abroad, the Prussian government made
lo Moehler the offer of a theological professorship at the University of
Breslau in Silesia — an offer which he immediately declined. The
Wiirtemberg government now nominated him professor ordinary of
theology at the University of Tiibingen — a nomination that was con-
Before Justinian, the great St. Leo had spoken of those privileged bishops-, his pre
decessors, "who for so many ages, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, had been
preserved from the defilements of heresy.'' *' Quos per tot seecula doeente Spiritii
Sancto nulla heeresis viola vit." — Serm. xc. viii. e. iii.
And long before St. Leo, the great teacher and martyr of the third century, St.
Cyprian, had extolled that Roman Church, " which was inaccessible to false faith."
"Ad quos (Romanos) perfidia habere non potest accessum." — Ep. lv.
The fall, real or pretended, of Pope Liberius, forms no exception from the trutb
of these remarks. In the first place, from the silence of many contemporary his
torians, the lapse of this pontiff is doubtful. Secondly, it is very generally agreed, that
the formulary he is said to have subscribed, was susceptible of a Catholic interpreta
tion. Thurdly, he was under personal restraint ; and consequently, as Cardinal Orsj
observes, he could not in that state be considered the organ and representative
of his See.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 71
firmed by the theological faculty, which, at the same time, conferred
on him the honour of doctor of divinity.
At length, in the year 1832, the great work, whose fame the public
had long anticipated, issued from the press, under the title, " Symbol
ism, or Exposition of the Doctrinal Differences between CathoUcs and
Protestants, as evidenced by their Symbolical Writings." The sensation
it produced throughout aU Germany, Protestants as well as Catholic,
was prodigious ; perhaps unparalleled in the history of modern theolo
gical literature. Hailed by Catholics with joy and exultation, its
transcendant merits were openly acknowledged by the most eminent
and estimable Protestants. The celebrated Protestant theologian and
philosopher, Schleiemracher, declared it to be the severest blow ever
given to Protestantism. -4.nother very distinguished Protestant pro
fessor of philosophy at Bonn, candidly confessed, that none of the
Protestant replies at all came up to it in force of reasoning.
" Germany," says a French journal of high merit, " so parcelled out
^ into different states, so divided in religious belief — Germany, where
opinion is not centralized in a single city, but where the taste of Vienna
is checked by the critics of Gottingen, Munich, or Berlin, — Gerraany
with one voice extols the merits of Moehler's ' Symbolism.' '' — L'Uni-
versite Catholique„ p. 75, vol. xi.
That this testimony is not exaggerated, the rapid sale of the work
wiU show ; for in the course of six years it passed through five editions,
each consisting of frora three to four thousand copies, which were
nearly as rauch sought for in Protestant as in Catholic Germany. It
was adopted by several universities as a text-book, was translated into
Latin and Italian by the papal nuncio of Switzerland, and into French
by M. Lachat.
The same French critic, as was before observed, termed the Symbol
ism " an indispensable complement to Bossuet's immortal History of
the Variations."* This has suggested to me a parallel between the
two works. Looking to the plan and the matter of the two books,
I may call the work of the illustrious French prelate a more external —
that of the German theologian, a more internal, history of Protestantisra.
In the first place, the bishop of Meaux points out with adrairable skill
the endless variations and inconsistencies of Protestantism ; so does
the German professor ; yet the inconsistencies and variations, which,
in the pages of the former, appear isolated, uncOTinected, accidental
phenomena, the latter shows to be bound by the ties of a necessary,
though secret, connexion. In a word, Moehler, not content with
proving the many mutations and self-contradictions of Protestantism,
* L'Universit^ Catholique, tom. ii. p. 75.

72 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
and its repugnance to reason and revelation, sets forth its consistency
also — I mean the filiation of its doctrine, and the concatenation of its
errors. Secondly, the French prelate confines his attention to the two
leading sects of the Reformation — the Lutheran and the Calvinistic,
and expressly informs us in the preface to his work, that his intention
is " not to speak of the Socinians, nor of the several communities of
Anabaptists, nor of so raany different sects, which in England and
elsewhere have sprung up in the bosora of the Reformation ;" a reso
lution, that was the more to be regretted, as the description of these
sects would not only have lent a fresh charm to his historic narrative,
but have vastly increased the weight, and extended the compass, of his
argument. And that sagacious mind, which, in the funeral oration on
Queen Henrietta, had cast such an intuitive glance into the history
of our doraestic troubles, would, doubtless, have given an admirable
portraiture of the various and multitudinous sects of the Cromwellian
era. Yet we must remeraber that, in the course of his work, Bossuet
had more particularly in view the Calvinists of his own country. This
void is supplied in the Symbolism, where the history and the dogmas
of the minor sects of Protestantisra are fully analysed and described :
a portion of the work, which is certainly not the least important, and, to
the English reader, perhaps the most interesting and attractive.
Thirdly, Bossuet, who lived at a period when Protestantism had just
entered on the second stage of its existence, not only with the most
masterly skill traced its progressive development, from its birth down
to his own days, but foretold the course of its future destinies.
From his lofty eyrie, the eagle of Meaux beheld the whole coming
history of Protestantism ; he snuffed from afar the tempestuous clouds
of irreligion, that were to spring from its already agitated waters, and
the whirlwind of impiety that was to convulse Christianity to its
centre.*

* In an immortal passage of the 'Variations, Bossuet has recorded the moral and
social evils, which the Reformation, up to his own day, had already brought forth,
and the still greater ones wherewith it was pregnant. After notiomg the prophetic
words of Melancthon, " Good God ! what tragedies will posterity witness, if one day
men shall begin to stir those questions, whether the Word, whether the Holy Ghost,
be a person," the eloquent prelate exclaims : " On commencja de son temps a remuer
ces matiferes : mais il jugea bien, que ce n'^tait encore qu'un faible commencement ;
car il voyait les esprits s'enhardir insensiblement centre les doctrines ^tablies, et
centre I'autorit^ des decisions eccMsiastiques. Que seroit-ce s'il avoi vu les autres
suites pemicieuses des doutes, que la R^forme avoite exit^s ? tout I'ordre de la disci
pline renvers^ pubhqueraent par les uns, et I'indf^pendanee ^tablie, c'est-a-dire sous
un nom sp^cieux et qui flatte la liberty, I'anarchie avec tous ses maux ; la puissance
spirituelle mise par les autres entre les mains des princes ; la doctrine Chretienne

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 73
Moehler, on the other hand, cannot be said to bring the history
of the Reformation down to his own times ; for with the excep
tion of the Herrnhutters, the Methodists, and the Swedenborgians, the
sects whose doctrines he has examined were not posterior to the age of
Bossuet. The new and prodigious forms, which, within the last sixty
years, Protestantism, in Germany especially, has assumed, the doctrines
of Rationalism and Pietism, that, as the reader has already seen, have
quite superseded those of the elder Protestantism, are, as was before
stated, for the reasons assigned in the work itself, left unnoticed by the
author of the Symbolism. It may at first sight appear singular, that
a work which has excited so prodigious a sensation throughout Ger
many, which has been read by Protestants as well as Catholics, with
an avidity that proves it responded to a want generally felt, should
have left untouched the existing forms of Protestantism, and been ex
clusively engaged with the refutation of those antiquated doctrines
that, though in certain Protestant countries they may still retain some
influence and authority, can count in Protestant Germany but a sraall
number of adherents. How is this fact to be accounted for ? I raust
observe that, although the Symbolism abstains frora investigating
the modern systems of Protestantism, yet it presupposes through
out their existence ; and the work itself could never have appeared, if
Protestantism had not attained its ultiraate terra of development. The
present forms of Protestantism, moreover, being only a necessary de
velopment of its earlier errors, a solid and vigorous refutation of the
latter must needs overthrow the former. But there is yet another and
more special reason, which, in despite of first appearances, rendered
this work eminently opportune. A portion of the German Protestants,
as we have seen, recoiling from the abyss, to which Rationalism was
fast conducting them, sought a refuge in falling back on fhe old sym
bolical books of the Lutheran and Calvinistic Churches, whose author-

combattue en tous ses points ; des Chretiens nier I'ouvrage de la creation et celui
dela redemption du genre humain; aneantir I'enfer ; abolir I'immortalite de I' ame;
depouiller le Christianisme de tous ses mystercs, et le changer en une secte de philo.
Sophie, toute accommodee aux sens; de Idnaitre I'indifference des religions, et ce
qui suit naturellement, lefonds meme de la religion attaque ; Vecriture directement
combat.tue ; la voie ouverte au Deisme, c'est-d-dirc a un Atheisms deguise, et les
livres oil seroient ecrites ces doctrines prodigieuses, sortir du sein de la Reforme, et
des lieux, oil elle domine. Qu'aurait dit M^lancton, s'il avait pr^vu tous ces maux,
et quelles auraient 6t6 ses lamentations ? II en avait assez vu pour en 6tre trouble
toute sa vie. Les disputes de son temps et de son parti suffisaient pour Iui faire dire,
qu'a moins d'un miracle visible, toute la rehgion allait 6tre dissip^e." — vol. i. pp. 215.
16. ed.Venise, 1738.

74 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
ity for upwards of sixty years had been totally disregarded. This
movement of minds was seconded by some Protestant princes, particu
larly by the late King of Prussia, who had learned, from bitter expe
rience, the disastrous political consequences which the doctrines of
RationaUsm are calculated to produce. This sovereign, who was as
skilful an ecclesiastical, as he was a military tactician, in order to
escape from the two enemies, Catholicism and RationaUsm, who were
galling his flanks, sounded the trumpet for retreat, and, assisted by an
able staff of theologians, was making a rapid retrograde march on the
old formularies — the bulwarks of Protestant orthodoxy, which, for
more than half a century neglected and dilapidated, had reraained
utterly untenanted. Moehler watched his moment — fell with terrific
onslaught on the retreating forces — blew up the old Protestant strong
holds — compeUed the eneray to retrace his steps, and brought him at
last into such straits, that he must now either make an unconditional
surrender to the Church, or be swept down the abyss of Pantheism.
This is the origin and the meaning of the present book — this is in part
the cause of its prodigious success. Thus, it not only pre-supposes the
extinction of the elder, more orthodox Protestantism, but in so far as any
human production can accomplish such a thing, it effectually -will prevent
its revival.
Fourthly, if we look to the form of these two remarkable productions
of the human mind, which I have ventured to compare, the History of
the Variations is characterized in an eminent degree by logical perspi
cuity ; the Symbolism, at least equal to it in dialectic force, is vastly
superior in philosophic depth. The learning displayed in the former
work is quite sufficient for its purpose ; and when we consider the
period at which it was written, the comparative paucity of materials
accessible to its iUustrious author, and the then state of historical
researches, we are astonished at the extent and the critical soundness
of the learning there exhibited. Mr. Hallam, however, in his History
of Literature, complains that Bossuet had not given his citations from
Luther in the Latin original ; so that he himself had often been unable
to verify his quotations. This complaint at least he will be unable to
prefer against the Symbolism, where the Latin citations frora Luther
and the other patriarchs of the Reforraation, are given with a fulness
and an exactness that must satisfy — perhaps rather more than satisfy—
our fastidious critic. The erudition displayed in the Symbolism is
admitted on all hands to be raost extensive and profound. Its style is
clear, forcible and dignified ; but in point of eloquence the Bishop of
Meaux ever reraains the unrivalled master.
The Symbolism called forth many replies from Protestant theolo-

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 75
gians, such as Nitzch, Marheineke, and Dr. Baur of Tiibingen. The
work of the latter, which was the longest and most elaborate, was
entitled, " Opposition between Catholicism and Protestantism, accord
ing to the leading dogmas of the two religious systems, with special
reference to Moehler's Symbolism," Tubingen, 1833. Of this work, a
writer in the Conversations-Lexicon,* thus speaks : " That Protestant
writers should stand up in defence of a Church, to which Moehler denies
every right, save that of political existence, was very natural. But it is
equally certain, that in an inquiry, wherein the symbolical writings only
of the difierent Churches possess a decisive authority, an Hegelian,f
with his subjective views, and the attempt to enforce these as the doc
trine of the Evangelical Church, could play no brilliant part. Yet in
this false position we find Dr. Baur, whose writing, moreover, is not
exempt from personal attacks against his adversary."
Moehler replied without delay, and in a tone of suitable dignity, in a
work entitled, New Investigations into the doctrinal differences between
Catholics and Protestants : Mayence, 1834. This work will be found
a most valuable appendix to the Symbolism ; although no inconsiderable
portion of it has been incorporated into the edition from which the pre
sent translation has been made.
The personal acrimony, which Dr. Baur had infused into his contro
versy with the subject of this memoir, as well as the intrigues set on
foot to alienate the Wurtemberg government from the latter, who was
represented as a disturber of religious peace, rendered his abode at Tu
bingen daily raore unpleasant and irksome. The Prussian govern
ment, probably apprised of this state of things, renewed negotiations
with Moehler, in the view of obtaining his services for one of its univer
sities. Yet these negotiations, creditable to the prudence and discern
ment of the Prussian government, a second time failed, through the
* Conversations-Loxicon, p. 699. Leipzig, 1840.
t The system of Hegel is that of n logical Pantheism. His leadmg doctrine is,
that the Deity is the impersonal Reason, and in the human mind only attains to self-
consciousness. He and his earlier disciples affected to re-establish the union between
faith and science, and employed the language of the Bible and the Church in a sense
totally different from what was meant by either. But the younger HegeUans have
rejected the hypocritical artifices of their master, and proclaimed, iu the most cyni
cal language, the most undisguised Pantheism. It is just, however, to observe, that
there are some, though tho number is small, who combme Christian views with this
system of philosophy.
As to Dr. Baur of Tiibingen, he has, since his controversy with Moehler, shown
himself a decided Pantheist. Yet this is the man whom the Wiirtemberg govern.
ment decorated with orders, while it loaded Moehler with affronts, that forced him
to leave the country. Ex uno disce omnes.

76 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
opposition of the Hermesian party. This party had already a most
formidable opponent to encounter in the celebrated Klee, professor of
Theology at Bonn ; and it was evident that the accession of Moehler
to that theological faculty, or, indeed, to any other in the Prussian
states, would be most detrimental to the influence, and adverse to the
projects, of the party. Count Von Spiegel, then .\rchbishop of Cologne,
and predecessor to that iUustrious confessor, whose humiliation prepared
the triumph of the German Church, and whose captivity was the pre
lude to her liberation — Count Von Spiegel, I say, a worldly-minded
courtier, Uttle acquainted with theology, was alternately the tool of the
Hermesians and the Prussian government. His sanction, as -Arch
bishop of Cologne, was necessary for the confirmation of -Moehler's
appointment to a theological chair at Bonn. To the latter he ad
dressed a letter, requiring as the condition to such a sanction, the
public retractation of the work entitled. Unity of the Church ; just as if
Moehler, with Hermesian obstinacy, had continued to defend in the
face of the Church, and as the doctrine of the Church, what its highest
tribunal had formally and solemnly condemned. He wrote back to the
Archbishop of Cologne, that the mistakes, such as they were, in his
first work, were entirely rectified in his subsequent productions : and it
may be added, that he had never been called upon by the competent
authorities to make a public recantation of any opinions therein con
tained. It was indeed truly ridiculous, that, while purity of doctrine
and glowing love for the Church, as well as profound genius, were
claiming for the illustrious author of Athanasius and the Symbolisms
the respect and admiration of Germany and Europe, the organ of a
party that had for years broached pernicious doctrines, evinced a
marked disrespect for ecclesiastical tradition, and subsequently dis--
played a most obstinate resistance to the authority of the Church,
should, forsooth, take exceptions to Moehler's orthodoxy !
Here it may be proper to make a few remarks on the position which
he had taken up in relation to this party. It has sometimes been
asked why he did not appear in the lists against the Hermesians ?
Man}' reasons may be assigned for his not taking an active part in this
controversy. In the first place, his opposition would have been ascribed
to motives of personal resentment against a body of men, through
whose intrigues he had been twice thwarted in the attainment of an
honourable and lucrative professorship. Secondlv, the Hermesian sys
tem, unsupported by a single theologian of eminence, had been pros
trated by the vigorous arm of Klee. Thirdly, the Holy See having
pronounced a solemn sentence of condemnation, the view which all
Catholics were to take of this system, could no longer be problematic.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 77
Fourthly, the utterly disgraceful part that the Herraesians had played
in the tyrannical proceedings of the Prussian government against
Count Von Droste Vischering, the venerable Archbishop of Cologne,
drew down upon them the general odium of Catholic Germany. Lastly,
the tactics of this party was to avoid an open, dispassionate, scientific
discussion of principles ; and to drag into the controversy matters of
personal dispute, and even of ecclesiastical administration' — a course
of warfare, where even victory was somewhat ignoble, and which,
above all things, was abhorrent to the gentle disposition and elevated
feelings of Moehler.
But there was another party in the Church, with whom he came into
more immediate contact — the so-called Liberals of Catholic Germany,
whom I have already had occasion to describe. This party, whose
principal seat was in Baden and Wiirtemberg, had, as has been
already observed, exerted some influence over the youthful mind of
Moehler ; and the last faint tinge of their principles is traceable in his
first production. Unity of the Church. But his maturer genius — his
more extended acquaintance with ecclesiastical antiquity— and, above
all, his advances in piety, had revealed to him the hollow pretensions
and dangerous tendencies of this party. In the year 1827, he pub
lished his celebrated essay on " sacerdoral celibacy," that inflicted on
this party a wound, from which it has never since recovered. In this
masterly production he proves the apostolic antiquity of clerical celi
bacy ; its conformity with reason, and with the most ancient traditions
of nations ; its close connexion with the most sacred dogmas and essen
tial institutions of the Church, as well as the occasions that led to a
partial deviation from the law ; and, after showing why the enemies of
sacerdotal celibacy, must necessarily be the foes to ecclesiastical inde
pendence and the papal supremacy, he stigmatizes the Baden church
men for their shallow theological learning, in despite of all their high
pretensions to general knowledge — -for their carnal-minded tendencies,
their often profligate habits, and their political harlotries with the
secular power. This essay was, in the year 1829, followed up by
another, entitled, " Fragments on the False Decretals ;" where, with
much skill and learning, the author wrested frora the enemies of the
papal authority, one of their most favourite weapons of attack. The
rage of the anti-celibates was, as we may suppose, wound up to the
highest pitch ; Moehler was denounced as an apostate, an ultra-mon-
tanist, a Roman obscurantist ; and his fame, which grew from year to
year, served only to embitter the animosity, and stimulate the assaults,
of this paltry faction. While the great genius of the illustrious author
of Athanasius and the Symbolism was hailed with joy by Catholic, and

78 MEMOIR OP DR. MOEHLER.
recognized with respect by Protestant Germany, these false brethl'et\
had discovered, that he was devoid of talent and erudition ; they openly
gave the palm of victory to his Protestant opponent, Dr. Baur ; and, in
ono of their periodicals,* were shameless enough, while they denomi*
nated the Symbolism a violation of religious pence, to avow their satis*
faction with the mythical theory of the blasphemous Strauss, — a proof,
if further were wanting, how utterly many of these so-called " Libe
rals" had apostatized from the principles of that Church, whose commu'
nion they still so audaciously profaned !
It was not, however, by his writings only that this excellent man
opposed the progress, and defeated the projects, of a dangerous faction.
By his amiable disposition and engaging manners, as well as by his
great reputation, he had gained an extraordinary influence over the
minds of his pupils ; and this influence he employed to inspire these
young theologians with a zeal for the cause and interests of the Church,
— a deep veneration for the Holy See,— a love for the duties of their
future calling, — 'and a noble passion for learning. Nor was the
beneficial influence of his example and exhortations confined to his
pupils alone. During the ten years he filled the professorial chair at
Tiibingen, a complete change came over the CathoUc theological fa*
culty of that university. Such of its members as had hitherto been
sound in doctrine, but timid in its avowal, like Dr. Drey, took courage
by Moehler's example : and such who, like Hirscher, had been to some
extent led away by Neological doctrines, were now, partly through that
example, partly by their own researches, graduaUy reclaimed. The
evidence of this change is aflfbrded by the Theological Quarterly Review
of Tubingen, which, from the year 1828, breathes a very different
spirit, and which, supported as it was by Moehler and his most distin
guished colleagues and disciples, has remained, down to the present
day, by its orthodoxy, its learning, and its philosophic spirit, an orna
ment to Uterature and the Church. The noble attitude which, in the
present struggle for the liberties of their Church, the younger members
of the Swabian clergy have taken — the zeal and courage wherewith
they defend their spiritual rights, and rally the people round that sacred
standard — the talent and learning they evince in defence of their re^
ligion, are all, according to a recent public acknowledgment of fhe prime
minister of Wurtemberg in the assembled states, mainly attributable to
the influence of Moehler.
Yet, the spot which was dear to him from so many early associa-

' " Die Freimiithige Blatter,'

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 79
tions— -where the Lord had blessed his labours — where he had won so
many briUiant victories over the enemies of the faith — he was now, for
the reasons above adverted to, about to quit. At the commencement of
the year 1835, a theological chair at Munich becarae vacant ; and the
King of Bavaria, with that enlightened zeal which makes him ever at
tentive to the promotion of the interests of the Church, and the ad-
vancement of Catholic learning, solicited, on this occasion, the services
of Moehler. To this proposal the latter immediately acceded ; andv
deeply regretted by his friends, his colleagues, and the academic youth,!
he quitted Tiibingen, and arrived at Munich in the spring of the same
year. Warmly welcomed by his friends in the Bavarian capital, and
enthusiastically greeted by its students, he immediately opened a course
of lectures on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, which was soon fol
lowed up by others on Church-history, patrology, as well as commenta-
ries on various epistles of St. Paul.
This seems to me the raost proper place to speak of the various theo
logical and historical essays, that Moehler contributed to periodical pub
lications, and especially to the Theological Quarterly Review of Tiibin
gen. These essays have since his death been collected by his friend,
Dr. Dollinger, and published in two volumes. They are as follows :-—
I. An investigation of the dispute between St. Jerome and St. Augus
tine, on the fourteenth verse of the second chapter of Galatians. 11. A
critical inquiry into the period of publication of the Epistle to Diogne-
tos, usually attributed to St. Justin, and an analysis of its contents.
nr. An historical sketch of St. Anselra, Archbishop of Canterbury, and
his times, iv. An essay on clerical celibacy, v. Short considerations
on the historical relation of Universities to the State, vi. Fragments
on the false decretals, vii. An essay on the relation of Islam to the
Gospel. VIII. An essay on the origin of Gnosticism. The second
volume contains the following : — i. Considerations on the state of the
Church, during the fifteenth, and at the commencement of the sixteenth
century. 11. An essay on St. Simonianism. iii. Fragmentary
sketches on the abolition of slavery, iv. Letter to the Abbe Bautaur
of Strasburg, on his system of philosophy, v. Rise and first period of
Monasticism : a fragment, vi. Two articles on the imprisonment of
the Archbishop of Cologne.
It does not enter into the plan of this memoir to give an analysis of
these collected essays, which certainly furnish new evidence of the
author's great historical, as well as theological learning ; his critical
acuteness, his depth of observation, and elegance of style.
The most remarkable pieces in this misceUaneous collection, are the
already noticed essay on clerical celibacy, that on Gnosticism, the

80 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
beautiful fragment on the eariy history of monasticism, which was to
form part of a large work on the monastic orders of the west, and the
essay on Islam, that has received its due meed of praise from one of
our own Protestant critics. " This essay of Moehler's," says a writer
in a number of the Quarterly Review, that appeared two years ago,
•' was composed with an express view towards the progress of Chris-
tianity in the east, and the question how it might be ofiered in the most
commanding and persuasive manner to Mahometans. It is written
with so much learning, judgment, and moderation, that it might be well
worthy of translation in some of our religious journals."*
The lectures which Dr. Moehler delivered on patristic literature, have
since his death been coUected and edited by his friend Dr. Reithmayr,
Professor of Theology at the University of Munich. Of this work,
three parts only have as yet appeared, embracing the first three centu
ries of the Church, and containing nearly a thousand pages of print in
small octavo. After some very interesting and profound preliminary
reflections on tjje Greek and Roman languages and Uteraturcs, and
their relation to Christianity, and some general views on the nature of
patristic Uterature ; the author, in the first part, treats of the lives and
writings of the ApostoUc Fathers, frora Pope St. Clement, down to
Papias. In the second part, the lives and writings of the Fathers of the
second century, from St. Justin martyr, down to Pantenus ; and in the
third, the lives and writings of the fathers of the third century, from
St. Clemens Alexandrinus down to Lactantius, are described, analyzed,
and appreciated.
In this work, the plan of the author is to prefix to each century ge
neral views on its ecclesiastical and literary character ; then under a
special section devoted to each particular father, to trace a short sketch
of his life, where the materials for such exist ; next to give an analysis
of his various works, accorapanied with a critical inquiry into the age,
or the authenticity of such writings as have been disputed ; then to fur
nish a summary of the father's doctrine, and lastly to pronounce judg
ment on his literary merits. To each biographical section, the editor
has appended notices of the best editions of the works of the father. It
should be added, that the account of the fathers of the second century
is closed with a notice of the most celebrated martyrologies ; and that
of the fathers of the third century with a short dissertation on the spu
rious gospels, and a more lengthened one on the sybils.
A more useful, as well as more engaging introduction to the study of

* See No. cxxxvi. p. 410. Murray, London. 1841.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 81
patristic literature, cannot be, perhaps, recommended than the present
work. The author's prodigious knowledge in ecclesiastical history, as
well as in the writings of the fathers ; his power of clear exposition and
acute analysis ; and his depth and originality of genius, which enabled
him easily to enter into, and duly to appreciate, the conceptions of the
great thinkers of Christian antiquity, eminently qualified him for the
execution of this task. And although the work be posthumous, and
did not therefore receive a careful revisal from its author, yet its every
page evinces the hand of the master. Among the various dissertations
I may notice those on St. Justin martyr, St. Irenaeus, Origen, and St.
Cyprian, as peculiarly able and elaborate. Frora its posthumous cha
racter, there were, of course, many gaps and omissions in it, which the
talented editor has, in the true spirit of the author, endeavoured to fill
up ; supplying biographical notices of those ecclesiastical writers whose
works have perished, and carefully citing the authorities for statements
and assertions in the text, as well as making various other additions.
Everything contributed to render Moehler's abode at Munich most
agreeable. Surrounded by the distinguished Catholic professors, whom
the king had assembled in that capital ; living amid a people that in
despite of all the eflforts made during the late reign to pervert it, was
still eminently Catholic ; in a city, too, where the theological faculty
was undisturbed by the opposition of any rival ; where the CathoUc
Church could unfold all her salutary influences, and all her pomp of wor
ship, and where art was making the noblest efforts to minister to the
splendour of that worship ; — Moehler might confidently look for still
more blessed results from his literary labours. And during the first
eighteen months of his residence in the Bavarian capital, the content
ment he enjoyed, had, in despite of the severe climate of the place, re
established his health, which of late years had been much impaired.
At length, in the autumn of 1836, came that dreadful scourge, the
cholera, that for six months, without intermission, exercised the most
dreadful ravages at Munich. Though the prevailing epidemic aflfected
Moehler but in a slight degree, yet he experienced a general debility,
that incapacitated him frora prosecuting his public duties.
This indisposition was succeeded in the following spring by an at
tack of influenza, that confined him for two months to his bed ; and
did not quit him, without leaving behind most dangerous symptoms of
disease on the lungs. On rising from the bed of sickness, he was not
permitted by his physicians to pursue his ordinary duties ; but on their
urgent advice, he took a journey to southern Tyrol, where the genial
climate of Meran, the use of whey, and the cheering society of the
Benedictines of that place, whose learning and piety he made a con-
6

82 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
slant theme of eulogy to his friends, soon produced the most bene*
ficial effects on his health. After passing the whole summer of 1837
in that beautiful country, he returned in the autumn to Munich, to re
sume his public functions. But the hopes which his friends had enter.
tained of his complete recovery, were soon to undergo a bitter disap
pointment. On the first of Noveraber his indisposition returned, and
symptoras of a decided pulmonary complaint becarae even more mani
fest. Again, to his grief, and to the regret of his numerous auditors,
his promised course of lectures raust be put off. The bleak climate of
the Bavarian capital was, at that season especially, little propitious to
one labouring under such a disorder ; and most unfortunately, towards
the close of the month a calamitous event occurred, which, while it
threw the whole Gerraan church into mourning, and convulsed West
phalia and the Rhenish provinces to their centre, filled the soul of
Moehler with a disquietude and dismay, that operated most prejudi-
ciously on his health — the imprisonment of the venerable Archbishop of
Cologne, on the 20th of November, 1837, is the event to which I
allude. This act of reckless and violent tyranny, which put tbe Keal to that
long series of intrigues, machinations, and oppression.?, that for five-and-
twenty years had been directed against the Catholic Church in Prussia,
Moehler appreciated in all its vast importance. He saw the evils with
which it was fraught, the fearful and general persecution against the
German Church, that it seemed to portend ; and yet with a prophefic
eye he discerned the good that Providence would one daj^ bring out of
that evil — the triuraph and regeneration of that Church, so long be
trayed, insulted, and oppressed. These apprehensions and these hopes
he has recorded in two remarkable essays, which he published in Feb
ruary, 1838, in the Universal Gazette, of Augsburg; the last which ho
ever wrote — the last effusions of that heart, which, amid the languor of
sickness, yet beat quick and strong to all that concerned the glory of
its God.
At this time, the Prussian commissary, Bruggemann, who was sent
to Rome on a diplomatic mission from the court of Berlin, received in
structions to hold an interview with Moehler, on his passage through
Munich, and to tender to him, in the name of his sovereign, a preben
dal staU in the cathedral of Cologne, and if he pleased, a professorship
at Bonn. The reader will observe, that this was the third atterapt made
by the Prussian government to enlist the professorial services of Moeh
ler. What could be the meaning of these repeated endeavours on the
part of a hostile government, to obtain for one of its universities the
greatest theologian of Germany ? How do these attempts agree with

MEMOIR OE DR. MOEHLER. 83
the Well-knoWn policy of a government, that by every species of intrigue,
4nachination, encroachment, and crafty tyranny, had endeavoured to
Protestantize its Catholic sul^ects, and which in some parts of its domi
nions, like Silesia, had too well succeeded in its endeavours — and that
at the very moment when it made this proposal to Moehler, had torn
from his diocese, and plunged into prison, an illustrious prelate, for hav«
ing courageously unmasked and defeated its designs ? To the honour
of the Prussian government, it must be said, that it was its pride and
boast to fiU its universities with eminent men ; and that hostile as it
Was to Catholicism, its respect and love for learning exceeded that hos
tihty. Thus in the very heyday of Hermesianism, it appointed its great
antagonist Klee, to a theological chair at Bonn ; and in its conflict with
the Archbishop of Cologne, it artfully pointed to the noraination of this
eminent divine, as a proof that it wished to give no exclusive encou-
i-agement to any particular school of theology.
But at the conjuncture at which we have arrived, the Prussian go>
Vernment had a peculiar inducement to make the proposal whereof I
speak. The general discontent that reigned in its Catholic provinces,
the ever-growing indignation of Catholic Gerraany at the treatment
they had experienced, and the precarious relations wherein Prussia
stood with Belgium and France — neighbours to whom her fatal policy
had unbarred her ovvn weakness and disunion ; this state of things ren
dered the redress of public wrongs, and the allaying of public irritation
in her Catholic dominions, a matter of the most imperious necessity.
In this posture of affairs, as a professor of theology must needs exer
cise great influence over the rising members of the priesthood, and in
an ecclesiastical question over the lay members also of the university, a
sort of political importance now attached to a theological chair at Bonn.
And unless the Prussian government were prepared to close the door
irrevocably against al! justice and conciliation, it could not have select
ed a man, who by his high reputation and zealous attachment to the in
terests of the Church, as well as by his amiable and conciliatory dispo
sition, was fitter than the sul^ect of this memoir to be the medium of
any safe and honourable negotiation.
The offer of M. Bruggeman, Moehler, however, immediately declin
ed. This refusal was dictated not only by the precarious state of his
health, as well as by the distracted condition of affairs in the Rhenish
{irovince, but also by a feeUng of attachment to Bavaria. This feel-
ing his Bavarian majesty delicately appreciated, by conferring on him
"the knightly order of St. Michael.
His health seemed to rally for a while, so as to enable him for a few
Weeks to resume the delivery of his lectures ; but towards the end of

84 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
January a violent catarrh ensued, which soon terminated in inflamma
tion of the chest.
The following account of his last iUness is from the pen of an eye
witness, and friend ; and the tone of mournful earnestness, wherein it
is written, must challenge the sympathy of every reader.
" The experience of late j^ears," says the anonymous biographer,
" convinced the physicians that the injurious influence of the Munich
chmate, combined with the arduous duties of the professorial charge,
afforded no certain prospect of the preservation of Moehler's life ; and
that it was only by changing his abode for some milder climate, any
chance for his recovery existed. The King of Bavaria, informed of the
condition of the illustrious patient, and anxious to preserve a life so
valuable to Church and State, nominated Moehler, by a decree dated
March, 1838, to the just vacant dignity of Dean in Wurzburg. Moehler
was deeply affected by this mark of his sovereign's delicate attention
and forethought ; yet his joy was not unalloyed. He had entered with
uncommon ardour on the professorial career, for which heaven had fa
voured him with the highest qualifications, and wherein his efforts had
been blessed with the raost signal success. The very idea of the aban-
donraent of that career, had inspired him with the deepest melancholy.
He anticipated something more than a mere change of employment.
To a friend, who congratulated him on the promotion to his new dig
nity, he expressed himself in the following remarkable words : ' I have
often observed in history,' said he, ' that men whom God hath highly
favoured in life, He often on the eve of their separation from this world,
invested with the glimmer of some temporal honour. I cannot, with
out being guilty of great ingratitude, deny that Providence hath loaded
me with many favours ; but the prognostic which I here advert to, may
now be realized in me also.' This anticipation, alas ! was too soon
verified ; that very day the fever returned ; a week later, suddenly at
night, catarrh and the critical symptom of hoarseness ensued, and then
a few days afterwards the physicians observed aU the signs of a violent
l.octic fever. His nights especially, were attended with great suffering;
on the seventh of April, he felt himself again better, and desired that
for his entertainment a favourite book of travels should be read to him.
This was done, not without a fearful presentiment, that that wish was
the prelude to another and a raore distant journey, and so it happened.
At the beginning of Holy Week, the fever assumed the character of ty
phus, and the mind of the patient from time to time slightly wandered
in delirium. Feeling his end approach, he again, on the tenth of April,
prepared by the reception of the sacraments for appearing before his
.\lmighty Judge. The sacraments appeared to exert a beneficial influ-

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 85
•ence on his health, for on the foUowing day he felt much relieved, and
hope began to revive in the bosom of his friends. But he no longer
looked forward to recovery, and on the same day he made his last tes
tamentary arrangements in regard to his temporal concerns. The fol
lowing night dispelled all hopes of a change for the better. On the
morning of the twelfth of April, he felt great oppression at his chest, he
became somewhat restless ; the heavy ice-cold sweat-drops gathered
about his brow and temples ; the last struggle had corae on. His con
fessor, Dr. Aloysius Buchner, (now a prebendary at Passau,) never left
his side. At one o'clock in the afternoon, he awoke from a gentle
slumber, clasped both hands to his head, and exclaimed, " Ah ! now I
have seen it — now I know it — now I would like to write a book, — this
must be written down, — but now it is gone." He then laid himself
calmly down, a look of serene and winning love passed again over his
countenance, as if the soul were evidently making an effort gently to
sever the last bonds of life. He then gasped violently three times, and
the soul bursting her fetters, sprang upwards to her God. The sad
event took place on Maundy Thursday, the 12th of April, 1838, at half
past two o'clock in the afternoon. His remains were interred on Holy
Saturday, the 14th day of April ; and his death was mourned by his
king, deeply bewailed by his friends, and regretted by all."*
Thus died this celebrated man, in the midst of his career, at a crisis
so eventful for religion, and at a moment when he could be so ill spared
by the Church and by his country. His career, though brief, had been
eminently useful as well as brilliant ; and his life, though not full of
years, had been replete with good works. He might, at the close of his
course, exclaim with the great apostle, " Bonum eertamen certavi, cur-
sum consuramavi, fidem servavi, reposita est mihi corona justitiae."
"Happy, saith the Scripture, are they who die in the Lord!" And
happy, thrice happy, we may add, are they, who die, before the enemy
hath snatched from their hands the fruit of their morning's toil ! And
when we are tempted to lament the untimely end of this great luminary
of the Church, we mould assuage our sorrow with the reflection, how
infinitely more enviable was his fate, than that of his celebrated con
temporary — the once great Gamaliel in the Church of France. For,
whereas death, we may confidently hope, brought to one the garland of
eternal life, existence hath cast over the other, the blight and desolation
of death. In abandoning the glorious mansions of the Church for those
bleak and desolate regions, where the grisly phantoms of erring fancy

• See memoir by anonymous biographer, p. 27.

86 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
dwell, that unhappy spirit hath abandoned, too, the sweet recollections
of early days, and the sacred ties of friendship, and the merit and the
glory of all his victories over heresy and unbelief, and the inestimable
peace of the soul ; in a word, all the earthly charms, and all the hea
venly hopes, that cheer and sustain existence, and solace and sweeten
death. And as a great writer once said, that the fall of the rebel arch
angel cast a sadness over all creation, whereof the traces are even now
perceptible ; so the fall of this mighty spirit hath saddened the Church,
in this the morning of her reviving hope and joy.
Moehler's countenance, deportment, and manner, were perfectly indi
cative of his moral and inteUectual qualities. The perfect harmony or
equilibrium of his mental powers was expressed in the serenity of his
countenance, in the modulations of a most pleasing voice, and in the
dignity of his carriage. The same exquisite sense of justice — the sarae
aversion from all exaggeration, which characterized his writings, were
perceptible in his conversation. Yet, though endowed with this natural
benignity of temper, which, in him, was exalted and sanctified by mo
tives of Christian charity, he was not slow to the perception of defects
of character ; and whenever the meaner passions crossed his path, his
instinctive abhorrence would find vent in the sallies of a subdued, yet
pungent satire.
His personal appearance has thus been described by one of his bio
graphers : " Tall in stature, he was of a slight and delicate frame ; hi»
outward bearing was most decorous and dignified ; his features were
delicate, regular, and prepossessing ; in his large, dark eye, beamed a
gentle fire, which shed over a pallid countenance an indescribable charm-
His voice, Uke his bodily frame, was weak and slender, yet harmonious;
his pronunciation was pure, without the aUoy of any peculiar dialect.
Whoever, therefore, saw him for the first tirae, was ever most agreea
bly prepossessed with his general appearance."*
During the first years of his professorship, and before he had quite
thrown off sorae of the lax opinions already adverted to, he was not so
assiduous in prayer, nor so diligent in the celebration of the holy sacri
fice, as might be desired. Then too exclusively occupied with science'
he did not seek out with sufficient ardour that heavenly wisdom, with
out which, aU human learning, like the grass of the field without the re
freshing dew, will soon become arid and unprofitable.
A friend concluded at that time all his letters to him with an earnest
exhortation to the habit of frequent prayer. These exhortations, as well

* Leben.sskizze, p. 28.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 87
as the diligent perusal of the writings of the holy fathers, which are no
less powerful in cherishing the feelings of piety, than in confirming and
enlivening faith, wrought, under the Divine blessing, the happiest change
in Moehler's devotional exercises ; for, in subsequent years, he never
let a day pass without celebrating the holy sacrifice, and with a tender
ness of devotion, that excited universal edification.
With the laborious duties of the professorial office, he combined, to
some extent, the functions of the sacred ministry ; and to many of the
academic youth he acted as spiritual (jirector.
Not content with personally discharging the obligations of his sacred
calling with the strictest fidelity, and an irreproachable purity of con
duct, he strove by example and conversation, as well as by his writings
and his lectures, to stem the tide of corruption that had burst into the
Swabian Church, and was, it is confidently asserted, the means of guard
ing many a young clergyman against the evil counsels and evil prac
tises of the anti-celibate party.
His zeal for the glory of God and the interests of His Church, while
it was the animating and sustaining principle of all his intellectual ex
ertions, often communicated itself with electrical effect to his youthful
auditors. Yet that zeal, which consumed him for the house of his Lord,
was exceeded, if possible, by a spirit of mildness, modesty, and humi
lity — qualities which, while they endeared him to Heaven, made him,
too, the favourite with men.
Adorned with all the sacerdotal virtues, he possessed at the same time
a winning amiability of manner, that caused his society to be courted
by men of various ranks and professions, and even of the most opposite
religious and political principles. Protestants as well as Catholics, lay
men as well as churchmen, consulted him personally or by letter on
every variety of subject, — religious, political, literary, or domestic ; and
had his life been prolonged, he would probably have becorae one of the
most influential men in Germany.
Having thus briefly described the moral character of this remarkable
man, it remains for me to sum up his intellectual qualities.
He was distinguished for an uncommon clearness, precision, and
vigour of ratiocination, that shows how weU he had profited by the ex
ample of those Attic masters, to whom his youth had been so sedulously
devoted. His plan is to let his adversary bring forward his strongest
arguments, and dispone them in the most advantageous order ; then,
without stopping to refute him in detail, he wrings from him some re.
luctant concession, or forces hira unconsciously into some false position,
whereby he is enabled at a single stroke to shake or overthrow the whole
system of his antagonist's reasoning.

88 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
In depth of reflection and comprehensive grasp of generalization, he
equals Frederic Schlegel; and if inferior to him in the fervour of a
poetic imagination, he yet possesses, partly from nature, partly from the
severer training of theological discipline, a superior force and precision
of reasoning. Like the great writer to whom I have compared him,
Moehler was eminently endowed with the faculty caUed by critics dia
thesis—the faculty of seizing on the raain points of his subject, divesting
it of its subordinate or accessory parts, and in a few bold strokes trac
ing a perfect outline.
The learning of Moehler was most profound and various. Though
he died at the premature age of forty-three, he yet had mastered every
branch of theological science ; and in patristic literature and the writ
ings of the schoolmen, as also in the works of the Reformers, and the
later Protestant divines of various sects, he was pre-eminently versed.
His acquaintance with profane history and modern literature was most
extensive ; and his acquirements in classical philology were so great,
as to call forth the astonishment and admiration of the most learned
professors in that faculty.
His style reflects the calm, equable dignity of his soul ; clear, flow
ing, and stately : if it seldom rises to eloquence, it never sinks into dry
ness, or loses itself in obscurity.
Yet all these high intellectual endowments were rendered still raore
effective, because, as was above said, they were tempered, chastened,
exalted, and sanctified by an amiable modesty, a deep, unaffected hu
mility, a glowing zeal, and a piety serenely bright, that like a light
within a beautiful vase, brought out all those mental ornaments into
bolder relief.*
•* As it may bc interesting to the reader to hoar the opinion entertained of this re.
markable man, by those who are far more competent than myself to pronounce a
judgment on his merits, I will here subjoin the following critical remarks from some
of the ablest literary and theological periodicals in Germany. My own opinion, it is
just to premise, was formed before I had seen the passages in question.
From the Historisch-politische Blatter.
•* As Ul life he was full of the most tender-hearted mildness and forbearance, full
of an unpretending modesty and kindliness of feeling, which won him the hearts of all
men ; so his moral character was reflected in his literary labours. Free from the arro
gance and cold.heartedness of an idle science, his bosom glowed with a pure and
mild enthusiasm, and the calm and unruffled clearness of his spirit was evinced, as
with the eye of thoughtful sensibility, he contemplated the agitated scenes of history,
and their chequered phenomena, so celculated to mislead and confuse the judgment.
Gifted with an untiring industry, and with a penetrarive mind, that, amid the mass of
details, never lost sight of the whole, he yet, in his humble modesty, never forgot the
deficiencies and the narrowness of all human science. All one-sided exaggeration — all
passionate attacks, grated on him as a discord ; and all merit he would acknow
ledge, and present to it with a cheerful brow and feeling heart, the homage of hia
«™;=o"  Mn\. X. D. 564-5.

praise.

' — vol. A. p. 564-5.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 89
In a communication which Dr. Reithmayr has had the kindness to
make to me, he writes as foUows : " Brief as was the period of Moeh
ler's labouis in Munich, yet it is difficult to describe the good he
wrought, and the seed for still greater good which he sowed. Power
ful as his influence over Southern Germany had become, great as was
his authority, honoured- as was his name, and mighty as was the impulse
he had given to the pubUc mind, he was yet far from entertaining the
thought of wishing to forra a school, in so far as we thereby under
stand a certain peculiar theological system, whether its nature consist
in a special theoretical method, or in the adoption and more precise de
velopment of certain opinions. His faith was of a much too positive
kind ; he was too removed from all hollow speculation ; and his whole
intellectual cultivation was too strongly historical, and he was withal
too modest, to wish to bring his own person thus prominently forward,
or to stamp upon other minds the irapress of his own individual con
ceptions. If anything can be said to characterize, or distinguish in
any degree his auditors and admirers^ it is a certain idealism in the
treatment of science, an enthusiasm for the institutes and interests of
the Church, abhorrence of all sectarianism, and a closer attachment to
the mother Church of Rorae."
The new school of German Catholic divines is characterized by the
union of great patristic learning and high philosophic speculation ; by
severe orthodoxy and warm attachment to the Church, coupled with a
singular spirit of conciliation and tenderness in the treatment of con
troversy towards the erring brethren. This spirit is of course modified
according to the pecuUar temper and genius of diflferent individuals ;
but such is the general characteristic of the new school.
The more celebrated theological contemporaries of Moehler were
Klee, Dollinger, Drey, Hirscher, and Veith ; and among his scholars,

From the Conversations-Lexicon.
" If we combine in a single focus all the particular traits of this remarkable man,
we shall find that his most eminent peculiarity consisted in the utter abandonment
of that pretension, after %vhich so many strive, to be the head of a sect, or even a
school. Moehler devoted his faculties pm*ely and entirely to the objective and divinely-
established institution of the Church. To this service he gave up his whole being —
his high natural endowments^his penetration of intellect — his often overpowering
logic, and his great erudition. And as he made it the business of his life, to set forth
the Church in all her truth and beauty, so the Church, in her turn, transfigured his
whole existence, and made him that model of purity, humility, and conscientiousness,
— that mirror of all human and sacerdotal virtues, which called forth the enthusiastic
admiration of all, who had the good fortune to come into nearer or remoter inter
course with him." — No xxi, p. 700, vol. iii. Supplement to Eighth Edition. Leipzick.
1840.

90 MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER.
Staudenmaier, Ruhn, Hefele, and Reithmayr, have attained to great
eminence. Klee has treated every branch of theology. His works are charac
terized by vast erudition, great metaphysical depth, and a consuramate
power of dialectic. This very acute thinker and eminently learned man,
wiU ever exercise the greatest influence in the school ; but as he was
deficient in grace of st3'le and power of imagination, his influence wiU
be less perceptible in the great republic of letters.* Dollinger, whose
excellent Church History is known to the English reader from Dr.
Cox's elegant translation, combines extraordinary learning in theology
and canon law, with great historical research, critical acumen, and
clearness of method and style. Drey has proved himself a very learn
ed and philosophic apologist for Christianity. Of Hirscher I can speak
with less confidence, as I possess but little acquaintance with his writ
ings. He cultivates chiefly moral theology, and unites, it is said, un
common unction of feeling to originality of thought and extent of learn.
ing. Some prejudices, however, which he has still retained, tend some
what to impair the influence his genius and piety would otherwise com
mand. Veith has distinguished himself more particularly in pastoral
theology, and combines in an eminent degree eloquence, deep thought,
and high asceticism. Ruhn is distinguished for great depth of philoso
phic speculation ; and Staudenmaier displays great fertility of ideas
and amenity of feeling. Hefele and Reithmayr, both as scholars and
thinkers, bid fair to tread in the footsteps of their illustrious master.
The number and excellence, too, of the theological periodicals and
smaller essays and treatises, as well as of the more extended works, that
now appear in Catholic Germany, evince the vigour and productiveness
of her religious genius. Divine Providence, when He suffered the
German Church to be despoiled of her temporal riches and political
greatness, repaid her with aU the abundance of moral and intellectual
wealth.

» With Professor Klee the writer of these pages was most intimately acquainted.
He was a most amiable and exceUent clergymen, and delightful companion. He in
formed the writer, that he had read aU the works of the fathers, and some of them
twice over. With the writings of the mediEBval divines, he possessed still greater
acquaintance than Moehler. He was uncommonly well versed in history, had read
all the Greek and Roman classics, and was familiar with the best prod uctions of
EngHsh, French, and Italian Literature. He succeeded Moehler in the professorship
of theology at the University of Munich ; but after one year's residence in that city
he died, at the age of forty-three. His loss, like that of his predecessor, wiU be felt
in Germany for long years to come.

MEMOIR OF DR. MOEHLER. 91
Last year, in the public cemetery of Munich, a beautiful Gothic sepulchral monu
ment was erected over the spot where Moehler's remains lie interred. Moehler is re
presented in a kneeling posture, and robed ia sacerdotal garments. His Hkeness is
said to be admirably caught. On one side is represented the Blessed Virgin, holding
the Divine Infant, who graciously extends his arm to bless the priest, sunk down in
adoration before him. On the other side is Moehler's guardian angel, presenting to
the Divine Infant certain writings of the deceased. The monument is decorated
with other beautiful devices, aUusive to the life and writings of this great man. It
bears the following appropriate inscription ; —
JOHANNES ADAMUS MOEHLER.
S. THE0LOGI.E DOCTOR . ET PROFESSOR I. O. IN
UNIVERSITATE TUBINGENSI : ET MONACENSI .
CiPlT. CATHEDR. WIRCEBURG : DECANHS DESIGN :
ORDIN : ST. MICHAEL PRO lUERITIB EQUES.
NATU3 IGERSHEMII IN WUERTEMBERGA,
PRIDIE NON. MAJA3 1796.
DEFENSOR FIDEI.
LITERARUM DECOS. ECCLESI.E SOLAMEN.
OBIIT MONACHII. PRIDIE IDUS. APRIL 1838.

INTRODUCTION.

PART I.
NATURE, EXTENT, ANH SOURCES OF SYMBOLISM.
By Symbolism we understand the scientific exposition of the doctrinal
differences among the various religious parties opposed to each other,
in consequence of the ecclesiastical revolution of the sixteenth century,
as these doctrinal differences are evidenced by the public confessions
or symbolical books of those parties. From this definition it follows :
First, that Symbolism has directly and immediately neither a pole
mical nor apologetical aim. It has only to give a statement, to furnish
a solid and impartial account, of the differences which divide the above-
mentioned Christian communities. This exposition, doubtless, will
indirectly assume, partly a defensive, partly an offensive, character ;
for the personal conviction of the writer wiU involuntarily appear, and
be heard, sometimes in the tone of adhesion and commendation, some
times in the tone of reproof and contradiction. StiU, the mere ex
planatory and narrative character of SymboUsm is thereby as little
impaired, as that of the historical relation, in which the historian con-
ceals not his own personal opinion respecting the personages brought
forward and the facts recounted. The claims of a deeper science,
especiaUy, cannot be satisfied unless the exposition occasionally assume,
in part a polemical, in part an apologetical, character. A bare narra
tive of facts, even when accompanied with the most impartial and most
solid historical research, will not suffice ; nay, the individual proportions
of a system of doctrine must be set forth, in their mutual concatenation
and their organic connection. Here, it wiU be necessary to decom
pose a dogma into the elements out of which it has been formed, and
to reduce it to the ultimate principles whereby its author had been de
termined ; there, it wiU be expedient to trace the manifold changes
which have occurred in the dogma : but at all times must the parts of

94 INTRODUCTION.
the system be viewed in their relation to the whole, and be referred td
the fundamental and all-pervading idea. During this analytic process,
¦ — without which a true, profound, and vivid apprehension of the essen
tial nature of the different confessions is absolutely impossible, — the
relation of these to the gospel, and to Christian reason, must nccessa-*
rily be brought out ; and the conformity of the one, and the opposition
of the other, to universally acknowledged truths, must follow as a mat
ter of course. In this way, indeed, Symbolism becomes the most cogent
apology, or allusive refutation, without designing to be, in itself, either
the one or the other.
Secondly, in the definition we have given, the limits and extent of
our course of Symbolism haVe been expressed. For, as they arc only
those ecclesiastical differences that sprang out of the convulsions of the
sixteenth century, that form the subject of our investigations, so all
those religious communities that have arisen out of earlier exclusion or
voluntary secession from the Church, even though they may have pro
tracted their existence down to our times, will necessarily be excluded
from the range of our inquiries. Hence, the course of doctrinal dis"
putes in the Oriental Church will not engage our attention. The
religious ferment of the sixteenth century, and the ecclesiastical contro
versies which it produced, are of a totally different nature frora the
contest which divides the Western and Eastern Churches. The
controversy, agitated in the West, regards exclusively Christian an
thropology ; for it will be shown, that, whatever other things may be
connected with this, they are all mere necessary deductions from the
answer, given to the anthropological question mooted by the Reformers.
The controversy, on the other hand, agitated in the East, has reference
to Christology ; for it would be strange indeed, if the orthodox Greek
Church, whose dispute with the Catholic regards no doctrine of faith,
were alone to claim attention ; while the Nestorians and the Mono-
physites, who are separated from Catholics, orthodox Greeks, and
Protestants, by real doctrinal differences, were to be excluded from the
inquiry. But the special objects of our undertaking neither occasion
nor justify so extended a discussion. An account of these doctrinal
differences has, moreover, appeared to us uncalled for, since even the
most abridged ecclesiastical history furnishes, respecting all these phe
noraena, more information than is requisite for practical purposes. In
fact, no present interest conducts us to the Oriental Church and its
various subdivisions ; for, although the ancient disagreement of these
communities with the CathoUc and Protestant Churches still continues,
it is at present without real and vital influence.
On the other hand, the doctrinal peculiarities of the Lutheran

INTRODUCTION. 95
¦and Reformed Churches, in opposition to the Catholic Church, as well
tis to each other, must be set forth with the utmost precision, and in
every possible bearing, as must also be the positions of the Catholic
Church against the negations of the two former. It might, indeed,
appear proper to presuppose a general acquaintance with the Catholic
dogmasj as asserted and maintained against the Reformers, in the same
way as Plank, in his Comparative View of the Churches, has presup*
posed the knowledge of the Lutheran system of doctrine. But, as the
tenets of Protestants have sprung only out of opposition to CathoUc
doctrine, they can be understood only in this opposition : and, therefore,
the Catholic thesis must be paralleled with the Protestant anti-thesisj
and compared with it in all its bearings, if the latter would be duly ap-
predated. On the other hand, the Catholic doctrine will then only
appear in its true light, when confronted with the Protestant. The
.present comparative view of the differences between the Christian con
fessions, is besides, as indicated in the Preface, destined for Protestant
readers also ; but that these on an average possess more than a super
ficial acquaintance with Catholic doctrine, we cannot here reasonably
suppose. The various sects which have grown out of the Protestant Church,
like the Anabaptists or Mennonites, the Quakers, Methodists, and Swe
denborgians, could the less pass unnoticed by us, as they only further
developed the original Protestantisra, and have in part alone consistently
carried out its principles, and pushed them to the farthest length.
Hence, although all these sects did not spring up in the sixteenth cen
tury, we still regard thero., as in their inward purport, belonging to that
age. The Socinians and Arminians, also, will claim our attention. These
appear, indeed, as the opposite extreme to primitive Protestantism.
For, while the latter sprang out of a strong, but one-sided, excitement
of feelings, the former, as in the case of the Socinians, either originated
in a one-sided direction of the understanding ; or, as in the case of the
Arminians, terminated in such a course, completely rejecting the fun*
damental doctrines of the Reformation 5 so that in them one extreme
was replaced by another, while Catholicism holds the just medium be
tween the two. Whether, moreover, the Socinians are to be numbered
among Protestant sects, is a matter of dispute among the Protestants
themselves. It .is, however, really unquestionable, that Socinianism
ought not to be looked upon as an appendage to orthodox Protestantism)
as was strongly pointed out by us, when We just now called the So
cinian conception of Christianity the precise opposite to the old Protes
tant view. But, as the Protestants have not yet succeeded in dismissing

96 INTRODUCTION.
the Rationalists from their community (to use the language of Mr,
Hahn), we do not see why they should now, at least, refuse admittance
to the Socinians. Nay, every one who abandons the Catholic Church,
who only ceases to be a Catholic, whatever in other respects may be
the doctrines which he believes, or refuses to believe, though his creed
may stand ever so low beneath that of the Socinians, is sure to find
the portals of the Protestant Church thrown open to him with joy. It
would therefore not be praiseworthy on our parts, if in the narae of
Protestants we were to exercise an act of intolerance, and deny to the
Socinians the gratification of seeing, in one writing at least, the object
of their ancient desire attained. On the other hand, the doctrines of
the Rationalists cannot be matter of investigation here, because they
form no separate ecclesiastical community, and we should have to set
forth only the views of a thousand different individuals, not the tenets
of a church or sect. They have no symbol, and therefore can claim
no place in our SymboUsm. Rohr has, indeed, put forth such a one,
and Bretschneider has passed on it no unfavourable judgment ; but
that it has been in any place adopted by any one community, we havte
not learned.
StiU less could any notice be taken of the Saint-Simonians, for they
are not even to be numbered among Christian sects. In order that a
religious party raay be deeraed worthy of that place of honour, it is at
least requisite that it should revere Christ, as Him through whom man
kind have attained to their highest degree of religious culture ; so that
aU which, from Him downwards, has been thought or felt in a reUgious
spirit, should be regarded only as the further expansion of what, in
germ at least, He had imparted to His foUowers. Hence, the Carpo-
cratians are by no means to be included in the class of Christian sects,
because they placed Christ raerely on a level with Orpheus, Pytha
goras, Socrates, and Plato. The same honour must be refused to the
Mohammedans also, because they exalt the Arabian prophet above
Christ, although the latter they still revere as a Divine envoy. Tho
same now holds good of the Saint-Siraonians. According to thera,
Christianity, like heathenism, comprises only a one-sided conception of
the religious idea. It is, indeed, accoidingto their principles, a neces
sary point of transition, but stiU only a point of transition, to attain to
what they please to term absolute religion ; in which every preceding
forra, as a mere transitory phase, is abolished. As they have thus ex
alted themselves above Christianity, they have thereby absolutely
excluded themselves frora her pale.
Thirdly, the definition we have given establishes the liraits, within
which the characterization of the different ecclesiastical communities.

INTRODUCTION. 97
that fall within the compass of the present work, must be confined.
Treating only of doctrinal differences, it is the object of the present
work solely to unfold the distinctive articles of belief, and to exclude
all liturgical and disciplinary matters, and, in general, all the non-essen
tial ecclesiastical and political points of difierence ; although, even thus,
the peculiarities of the coraraunities to be described must find a general
explanation in our Symbolism. In this respect, Symbolism is distin
guished from the science of comparative liturgy, ecclesiastical statistics,
&c. It is only in a few cases that an exception from this principle has
appeared admissible.
Fourthly and lastly, the sources are here pointed out from which
Symbolism must draw. It is evident that the public confessions, or
symbols, of the ecclesiastical communities in question, must, above all,
be attended to, and hence hath the science itself derived its name.
Other sources, meanwhile, which offer any desirable explanation, or
more accurate decisions, in reference to the matters in hand, must not
be neglected. To Uturgies, prayers, and hymns, also, which are pub
Ucly used, and are recognized by authority, Symbolism may accord
ingly appeal ; for in these the public faith is expressed. In appealing
to hymns, however, great prudence is necessary, as in these the feeling
and the imagination exert a too exclusive sway, and speak a peculiar
language, which has nothing in common with dogmatic precision.
Hence, even from the Lutheran church-songs, although they comprise
much very serviceable to our purpose, and sorae peculiar Protestant
doctrines are very accurately expressed in them, as also from Catholic
lays, hymns, and the like, we have refrained from adducing any
proofs. That even those writings of the Reformers, which have not obtained
the character of public confessions, must be of great importance to our
inquiries into Symbolism, must be perfectly clear. Reference must
especially be made to these, when the internal signification and the
worth of Protestant dogmas is to be apprehended. In the same way,
CathoUc theologians of acknowledged orthodoxy, and, above all, the
history of the Council of Trent, offer many satisfactory and fuller elu
cidations of particular decisions in the CathoUc formularies. Yet the
individual opinion of one or more teachers belonging to any confession
raust not be confounded with the doctrine of the confession itself ; a
principle which must be extended even to the Reformers, so that opin
ions which may be found in their writings, but have not received any
express public sanction, must not be noted down as general Protestant
tenets. Between the use, however, of Catholic writers and of the Re
formers, for the purpose of proof and illustration in this Symbolism, a

P8 INTRODUCTION.
very observable difference exists. The importance of the nlaffef wiU
render deeper insight into this difference necessary. The relation,
namely, wherein the Reformers stand to the religious belief of their
followers, is of a very pecuUar nature, and totally different from that
of Catholic teachers to Catholic doctrine. Luther, Zwingle, and Cal
vin, are the creators of those religious opinions prevalent among their
disciples ; while no Catholic dogma can be referred to any theologian
as its author. As in Luther the circle of doctrines, which constitute
the peculiar moral life of the Protestant communities. Was produced
with the most independent originality ; as all who stand to him in a
spiritual relation, like children to their parents, and on that account
bear his namcf draw from him their moral nurture, and live on his ful
ness ; so it is from him we must derive the most vivid, profound, and
certain knowledge of his doctrines. The pecuUar emotions of his spirit,
out of which his systera gradually arose, or which accompanied its
rise ; the higher views, wherein offen, though only in passing, he em
braced aU its details, as well as traced the living germ, out of which
the whole had by degrees grown up ; the rational construction of his
doctrine by the exhibition of his feelings ; all this is of high significancy
to one, who will obtain a genuine scientific apprehension of Protes
tantism, as a doctrinal systera, and who will master its leading, funda
mental principle. The Protestant articles of faith are so Uvingly
interwoven with the nature of their original production in the mind of
Luther, and with the whole succession of views, which filled his soul,
that it is utterly impossible to sever them. The dogma is equaUy sub
jective with the causes, which co-operated in its production, and has no
other stay nor value than what they afford. Doubtless^ as we have
before said, we shall never ascribe to the Protestant party, as such,
what has not been received into their symbolical writings. But although
We must never abandon this principle, yet we cannot confine ourselves
to it. For this religious party was generally satisfied with the results
of that process of intellectual generation whereby its docliines had been
produced ; and, separating by degrees those results from their living and
deepest root, it rendered them thereby for the most part unintelligible
to science ; as the bulk of mankind are almost always contented with
broken, unsubstantial, and airy theories. But it is for science to restore
the connexion between cause and effect, between the basis and the
superstructure of the edifice ; and, to discharge this task, the writings
of Luther, and, in a relative degree, of the other Reformers, are to bc
sedulously consulted.
It is otherwise with individual Catholic theologians. As they found
the dogmas, on which they enlarge, which they explain, or illustiwte,

INTRODUCTION. 99
mreddp pre-existing, we must in their labours accurately discrirainate
between their special and peculiar opihions, and the common doctrines
declared by the Church, and received from Christ and the apostles.
As these doctrines existed prior to those opinions, so they can exist after
thera, and can therefore be scientifically treated witliout them, and quite
independently of them. - This distinction between individual opinion
and common doctrine pre-supposes a very strongly constituted com-
' munity, based at once on history, on life, on tradition, and is only pos
sible in the Catholic Churchi But, as it is possible, so also it is neces
sary ; for unity in its essence is not identity. In science as in life,
such scope is to be afforded to the free expansion of individual exertion
as is compatible with the existence of the common weal ; that is to say,
so far as it is not in opposition to 'it, nor threatens it with danger and
destruction. According to these principles the Catholic Church ever
acted ; and by that standard we may estimate not only the oft-repeated
charge, that, amid all their vaunts of unity, Catholics ever had divisions
and various disputes araong themselves, but also the Protestant habit of
ascribing to the whole Church the opinions of one or more individuals.
Thus, for instance, it would argue a very defective insight into the na-
ture of CathoUcism, if any one were to give out, as the doctrine of the
Church, Augustine's and Anselm's exposition of original sin, or the
theory of the latter respecting the vicarious atonement of Christ, or
Anthony Giinther's speculative inquiries on those dogmas. These are
all very laudable and acute endeavours to apprehend, as a conception of
reason, the revealed doctrine, which alone is binding upon all ; but it is
clear that it would be gross ignorance to confound them with the teach
ing of the Church itselfi For a time, even a conception of a dogma, or
an opinion, may be tolerably general, without, however, becoming an
integral portion of a dogma, or a dogma itself. There are here eter
nally changing individual forms of an universal principle, which raay
serve this or that person, or a particular period for mastering that uni
versal principle by way of reflection and speculation-— forms which may
possess more or less of truth, but whereon the Church pronounces no
judgraent ; for the data for such a decision are wanting in tradition,
and she abandons them entirely to the award of theological criticism.
From what has been said, it follows that such a distinction as we
speak of between dogma and opinion must be extremely difficult for
Protestants. As their whole original system is only an individuaUty
exalted into a generality ; as the way in which the Reformers con
ceived certain dogmas, and personally thought and lived in them, per
fectly coincided, in their opinion, with those dogmas themselves ; so
their followers have inherited of them an irresistible propensity every

ICO INTRODUCTION.
where to identify the two things. In Luther, it was the inordi
nate pretension of an individuaUty, which wished to constitute itself
the arbitrary centre, round which all should gather,— an individuality
which exhibited itself as the universal man, in whom every one was
to be reflected, — in short, it was the formal usurpation of the place of
Christ, who undoubtedly as individual represents also redeemed hu-
manit}', — a prrrogative which is absolutely proper to Him, and, after
Him, to the universal Church, as supported by Him. In modern times,
when the other opposite extreme to the original Reformation has in
many tendencies found favour with the Protestants, not only are all the
conceivable individualities and peculiarities, which can attach them
selves to dogma, willingly tolerated, but even all the peculiar Christian
dograas are considered only as doctrines, which we must tolerate, and
leave to individuals who may need them for their own personal wants ;
so that, if Luther raised his own individuality to the dignity of a gener
ality, the generality is now debased into a mere individuality, and thus
the true relation of the one to the other can never be established. In
the consistent progress of things, every one considered himself, in a
wider circle, the representative of humanity, redeemed from error at
least — as a sort of microcosmic Christ. But in order that this phe-
noraenon might not appear too strange, for it is no easy matter to re
concile one Christ vvith the other, an expedient of compromise was dis
covered, by leaving to each one his own — that is to say, by permitting
him to be his ovvn Redeemer, and to represent himself, as also to con-
sider the extreme points, wherein all individuals concur, as representing
redeemed humanity. The common property of Protestants could only
now consist of some abstract formulas, which must be acceptable to
very many non-Christians. As every one wished to pass for a Christ, the
true Christian, the real scandal to the world, necessarUy vanished ; for as
each one redeemed himself, there was no longer a common Redeemer.
To this we may add the following circumstances, whereby was form
ed that peculiar kind of individuality, which the Protestants would fain
confound with the universal principles of the Catholic Church. Pro
testantism arose partly out of the opposition to much that was undeni
ably bad and defective in the Church ; and therein consists the good
it has achieved, although this was by no means peculiar to it, since
hostility to evil upon Church principles existed before it, and has never
ceased to exist beside it. Protestantism, too, sprang partly out of the
struggle against pecuUar scientific expositions of doctrine, and against
certain institutions in ecclesiastical life, which we may comprehend
under the expression of a mediaeval individuality ; but a change in this
respect was the object of many zealous churchmen since the latter half

INTRODUCTION. 101
of the fourteenth century. As the contest grew in vehemence, it carae
to pass, as passion views every thing in a perverse Ught, that raatters
took such a shape in the eyes of the Reforraers, as if the whole pre
existing Church consisted of those elements of evil, and of those indi
vidual peculiarities — as if both constituted the essence of the Church.
This opinion having now been formed, the two things were further set fortii
in the strongest colours of exaggeration ; for in this course of proceeding
there was a manifest advantage, since with such weapons the Catholic
Church was most easil}' combated. Accordingly, among the Refor
mers, we very frequently find (if we except some rare but gratifying
avowals in Luther's writings,) not only the necessary distinction be
tween the dogmas of the Church, and the individual views or con
ceptions of particular writers and periods of time, entirely overlooked,
but the latter so pointedly brought forward, that the forraer not seldom
sink totally into the back-ground. The nature of the origin of any in
stitution determines in general its duration. If, accordingly, Protes
tants would enter into the distinction in question ; if, in their estimate
of Catholicism, they would look only to what was universally received,
what was laid down in her public formularies, and leave all the rest to
history ; then as their first rise would have been impossible, their sepa
rate existence even now would be essentially endangered. The com
plaint here adverted to, a complaint which has so often been made by
Catholics, appears, therefore, to be so intimately interwoven with their
whole opposition against Protestantism, that it is only by the cessation
of that opposition the complaint will ever be set aside.
Though from this it wiU be evident, that, in the course of our sym
bolical inquiries, an use is to be m^de of the works of the Reformers,
which cannot be made of those of any Catholic writer, we must never
theless now draw attention to sorae pecuUar difficulties attending the
use of Luther's and Melancthon's writings. Luther is very variable in
his assertions. He too often brings forward the very reverse of his
own declarations, and is, in a surprising degree, the sport of raomentary
impressions and transient moods of mind. He delights also in ex
aggerations, willingly runs into extremes, and likes what are called
energetic expressions, in which oftentimes, when taken by themselves,
his true meaning is certainly not easy to be discovered. The most ad
visable course, under these circumstances, is, by a careful study of his
writings, to learn the key-note which pervades the, whole : individual
passages can in no case be considered as decisive in themselves ; and a
sort of average estimate, therefore, naturally recommends itself to our
adoption. With Melancthon we have fewer difficulties to encounter.
He, indeed, is involved in contradictions of greater moment than Lu-

102 INTRODUCTION.
ther, but, for that very reason, he Ughtens for us the task of separating
in his works the genuine Protestant elements from their opposites. In
this respect, his reforming career may be accurately divided into two dis
tinct parts. In the first, being yet a young man, Uttle familiar with
theological studies, and versed only in classical literature, he was by
degrees so subjugated in religious matters by the personal influence of
Luther, as to embrace without any qualification his way of thinking ;
and it was in this period that the first edition of his most celebrated
work, the Loci Theologici, appeared. When his ripening talents, his
more extended theological learning, and a more enlarged experience of
l^e, had pointed out to him the abyss before which he had been con
ducted, he receded by degrees, but yet was never able to attain to a de
cided independence of mind ; for, in the fiower of his years, he had
given hiraself up to foreign influences that confined and deadened his
spirit. He now, on one side, vacillated without a compass between
Catholicism and Lutheranisra ; on another side, between Lutheranism
and Calvinistic opinions. Hence, we have felt no difficulty in making
use only of his above-mentioned work in the edition described : and in
opposition to those, who raay be of another opinion, we appeal to the
controversies that have been agitated among the Lutherans respecting
the Corpus Philippicum, a.nd to the final settlement of the question. In
respect to Zwingle and Calvin, there are no such difficulties ; as the
former for the most part has only an historical importance, and the lat
ter is ever uniform with himself.

INTRODUCTION. 103

PART IL
STMBOLICAI, WRITINGS OF CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS.

I. — ^The Catholic Formularies.
Before we proceed to the treatment of our subject, we must inq^||b
into the public confessions of Catholics as well as Protestants. It is^
matter of course that those formularies only are here understood, where
in the peculiar and opposite doctrines of the two confessions are set
forth ; and not by any means those, wherein the elder class of Protes
tants, in accordance with Catholics, have expressed a common belief.
The Apostolic, Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds, and in general all the
doctrinal decrees, which the first four general councils have laid down
in respect to the Trinity, and to the person of Christ, those Protestants,
who are faithful to their Church, recognize in coraraon with Catholics ;
and on this point the Lutherans, at the commencement of the Augs
burg confession, as well as in the Smalcald articles, solemnly declared
their belief. Not less explicit and public were the declarations of the
Reformed. These formularies constitute the comraon property of the
separate Churches — the precious dowry which the overwise daughters
earried away with them from the maternal house to their new settle
ments ; they cannot accordingly be matter of discussion here, where we
have only to speak of the disputes which occasioned the separation, but
not of those remaining bonds of union, to which the severed yet cling.
We shall first speak of those writings, wherein, at the springing up of
dissensions, the Catholic Church declared her primitive domestic laws.
1. The Council of Trent. Soon after the commencement of the con
troversies, of which Luther was the author, but whereof the cause lay
hidden in the whole spirit of that age, the desire frora many quarters
was expressed, and I y the Emperor Charles V. warmly represented to
the Papal court, tint a general council should undertake the settleraent
of these disputes. But the very complicated nature of the matters them
selves, as well as numerous obstacles of a peculiar kind, which have
seldom been impartially appreciated, did not permit the opening of the
council earlier than the year 1545, under pi ipe Paul III. After several
long interruptions, one of which lasted te i years, the council, in the
year 1563, under the pontificate of Pius IV., was, on the close of the

104 INTRODUCTION.
twenty-fifth session, happily concluded. The decrees regard dogr
and discipline. Those regarding the former, are set forth, partly
the form of treatises, separately entitled decretum or doctrina, partly
the form of short propositions, called canones. The forraer dcscril
sometimes very circumstantially, the Catholic doctrine ; the latter (
clare in terse and pithy terms against the prevaUing errors in doctrii
The disciplinary ordinances, with the title Decretum de Reformatio
wiU but rarely engage our attention.
2. The second writing, which we must here name, is the Tridenti
or Roman catechism, wilh the title Catechismus Romanus ex Deer
Cmicilii Tridentini. The fathers of the Church, assembled at Tre
^Ht, themselves, the want of a good catechism for general use, althou
very serviceable works of that kind were then not altogether wantir
ThesO) even during the celebration of the council, increased to a gr(
quantity. None, however, gave perfect satisfaction ; and it was
solved, that one should be composed and published by the council itse
In fact, the council examined the outline of one prepared by a co
mittee ; but this, for want of practical utility and general intelligiblene
it was compelled to reject. At length, when the august assembly v
on the point of being dissolved, it saw the necessity of renouncing (
publication of a catechism, and of concurring in the proposal of I
Papal legates, to leave to the Holy See the preparation of such a wo
..The holy father selected, for this important task, three distinguish
iheologians, namely, Leonardo Marino, archbishop of Lanciano ; Egi
Foscarari, bishop of Modena-;— and Francisco Fureiro, a Portugui
Dominican. They were assisted by three cardinals, and the xjelebrai
philologist, Paulus Manutius, _who was to give thajast finishHo 1
Latin diction and style of the work. '\
It appeared in the year 1566, under pope Pius IV., and, as a prool
its excellence, the various provinces of the Church, — some even by i
merous synodal decrees, — hastened publicly to introduce it, T
favourable reception, in fact, it fully deserved, from the pure evangel
spirit which was found to pervade it ; from the unction and clearn
with which it was written, and from that happy exclusion of scholas
opinions, and avoidance of scholastic forms, which was generally i
sired. It was, nevertheless, designed merely as a manual for pastors
the ministry, and not to be a substitute for children's catechisms,
though the originally continuous form of its exposition was afterwa
broken up into questions and answers.
But now it may be asked, whether it possess really a symboU
authority and symbolical character ? This question cannot be answei
precisely in the affirmative ; for, in the first place, it was neither pi

INTRODUCTION. 105
lished, nor sanctioned, but only occasioned, by the Council of Trent.
Secondly, according to the destination prescribed by the Council of
Trent, it was not, like regular forraularies, to be made to oppose any
theological error, but only to apply to practical use the symbol of faith
already put forth. Hence, it answers for other wants, and is accord
ingly constructed in a manner far different from public confessions of
faith. This work, also, does not confine itself to those points of belief
merely, which, in opposition^to the Protestant communities, the Catho
lic Church holds ; but it erabraces all the doctrines of the Gospel ; and
hence it might be named (if the usage of speech and the pecuUar objects
of all formularies were compatible with such a denomination,) a confme,,
sion of the Christian Church in opposition to all non-Christian creedsr
If, from the reason first stated, the Roman catechism be devoid of a
formal universal sanction of the Church, so it wants, from the second
reason assigned, aU the internal qualities and the special aim which for
mularies are wont to have. In the thir^ place, it is worthy of notice,
that on one occasion, in a controversy touching the relation of grace to
freedom, the Jesuits asserted before the supreme authorities of the
Church, that the catechism possessed not a Symbolical character ; and
no declaration in contradiction to their opinion was pronounced.
But, if we refuse to the Roman catechism the character of a public
confession, we by no means deny it a great authority, which, even from
the very circumstance that it was composed by order of the Council of
Trent, undoubtedly belongs to it. In the next place, as we have said,
it enjoys a very general approbation from the teaching Church, and
can especially exhibit the many recommendationa, which on various
occasions the s'oveijeign pontiffs have bestowed on it. We shaU accord
ingly often refer to it, and use it as a very iraportant voucher for Catholic
doctrine ; particularly where the declarations of the Council of Trent
are not sufficiently ample and detailed.
3. The Professio Fidei Tridentina, stands in a similar relation.
4. Shortly after the times of the Council of Trent, and in part
during its celebration, there arose within the Catholic Church doctrinal
controversies, referring mostly to the relation between grace and free
dom, and to subjects of a kindred nature ; and hence, even for our
purposes, they are not without importance. For the settleraent of the
dispute, the Apostolic See saw itself forced to issue several constitutions,
wherein it was obliged to enter into the examination of the matter in
debate. To these constitutions belong especially the bulls, published
by Innocent X., against the five propositions of Jansenius, and the bull
Unigenitus, by Clement XI. We may undoubtedly say of these con
stitutions, that they possess no symbolical character, for they only

106 INTRODUCTION.
note certain propositions as erroneous, and do not set forth the doctrine
opposed to the error, but suppose it to be already known. But a formu
lary of faith must not merely reject error ; it must state doctrine. As
the aforesaid bulls, however, rigidly adhere to the decisions of Trent,
and are composed quite in their spirit ; as they moreover have refer.
ence to many important questions, and settle, though only in a negative
way, these questions in fhe sense of the above-named decrees ; we
shall occasionally recur to thera, and illustrate by their aid many
a Catholic dogma.
It is evident from what has been said, that the Catholic Church, in
fact, has, in the matters in question, but one writing of a symbolical au-
'thority. All that, in any respect, raay bear such a title, is only a de
duction from this formulary, or a nearer definition, illustration, or
application of its contents, or is in part only regulated by it, or in any
case obtains a value only by agreement with it, and hence cannot, in
point of dignity, bear a comparison with the original itself
II. — The Lutheran Forraularies.
The first symbolical book of the Lutherans is the Augsburg confes
sion : it owes its rise to the following circumstances. The schism in the
Church, which had proceeded from Wittenburg, had already engaged
the attention of several diets ; but the decrees, framed against it at
Worms, in the year 1521, appeared impracticable at Spires, in the year
1526, and three years later led to a very r.rificnl dissension, in the as
serably of princes which, in March, 1529, wa5~!rgain convoked at the
last-mentioned place. Those states of the empire, which had protested
against the deraand to give no further extension to Luther's Reforma
tion, and had expressed a decided repugnance to tolerate, as the
Catholic party proposed, those Catholic peculiarities of doctrine and prac
tice yet subsisting in their doraimons, now formed clnse leagues with each
other ; and nineteerrarticles, framed at Schwabach, composed the doc
trinal basis of the association, without the recognition whereof no one
could becorae a member. At Torgau, the above-mentioned articles were
confirmed. Out of these elements was formed fhe Augsburg Confession.
Charles V. sumraoned a diet to be held at Augsburg, in the year
153j3/ which, after anirapartial and earnest examination of the doctrine
of either party, was to secure peace to the Church and the empire.
This laudable object was in no other way to be attained, than by let
ting the Protestant states set forth their doctrinal views, and allege
what they found offensive in the rites and discipUne of the Church, as
hitherto practised. Melancthon received a commission to state in a brief

INTRODUCTION. 107
essay, afterwards called the Augsburg Confession, the opinions of
his party ; for Luther was generally deemed unfit for the office of
pacification. Although the author of this confession had altered, in many respects,
the articles of Schwabach and Torgau, and on the whole had very much
softened down, and really improved, the assertions of Luther, yet much
was stUl wanting to make it acceptable to Catholics. Hence, a refuta
tion of the Protestant confession, that had been read out, was composed,
and in like manner delivered before the assembly of the princes. But
this also failing to carry conviction to the minds of the Lutheran states,
Melancthon wrote an apology for his confession, which, although no pub
lic use could be made of it at the diet, was yet subsequently honoured
as the second symbolical writing of the Lutherans.
The object of the emperor to restore peace and concord in Germany,
was not attained, although special conferences between the most pacific
and moderate theologians of the two parties were still instituted at
Augsburg. On several articles, indeed, they came to an understanding ;
but, as the conciUation had been forced by circumstances, it remained
merely ouiwaird and apparent. All hope, meanwhile, had long been
fixed on a general council, and such a one was now convoked for
Mantua, by Pope Paul III. Even the Protestant states received an in
vitation to attend it ; and, in the year, 1537, Smalcald was selected by
them, in order, among other things, to confer with each other, and with
the imperial and Papal deputies. Held and Vorstius. Luther had previ
ously been charged with drawing up the propositions, which were to
express the Protestant sentiments, from the basis of some subsequent
reunion, and note down the points, which might perhaps be conceded
t«tthe Catholics. At Smalcald, these propositions received the sanction
of the Protestant princes, as well as of several theologians, summoned
for advice. These propositions were, indeed, never employed for the
purpose designed ; for, from a concurrence of obstacles, occasioned by
the circumstances of the time, the council was not assembled. The
Lutherans, however, had thus another opportunity of expressing their
opinions in regard to the Catholic Church ; and, under the narae of the
Smalcald articles, a place among the Protestant symbolical books was
conceded to this essay of Luther's.
Already, during these manifestoes against the Catholics, the seeds of
a great inward confiict were laid among those to whom Luther had
given his name and his doctrine ; yet it was only after his death that
these seeds were really brought to maturity. The subject of the dis
pute, and the persons engaged in it, will be noticed in the course of the
present work ; but we cannot here refrain from observing, that, after

108 INTRODUCTION.
long and stormy dissensions, it was Andrew, chanceUor of Tubingen, to
whom the honour eminently belongs of discovering a formulary, which,
in opposition to the attempted innovations, so expressed itself in favour
of the genuine orthodoxy, as to be every where received for the only
correct exposition of the Lutheran faith, — which consolidated concord
for ever, and secured the orthodox doctrine against future falsifications.
After long and very doubtful efforts, which taxed his patience to the
severest lengths, this person at last succeeded, with the aid of Chem
nitz (a highly respectable theologian of Brunswick.) in establishing, in
the year 1577, the intended formulary. It is commonly called the
Formulary of Concord, or sometimes the Bergen Book, from the monas
tery Bergen, in the vicinity of Magdeburg, where the above-mentioned
theologians, aided by SeUnecker, put the finishing hand to the work.
This Confession consists of two pieces, — a short outline of the ortho
dox doctrine, called the Epitome, and a very diffuse exposition of the
same, which is commonly cited under the name of the Solida Decla-
ratio. Moreover, this writing, however much conceived in the spirit of
Luther's original doctrines, and, singularly enough, even because it
was so conceived, was by no means universally accepted.
Lastly, to the aforesaid symbolical writings must be added the larger
and the smaller catechism of Luther, — called, by the Epitome, the Bible
of ihe Laity. These two catechisms in themselves, though, as we raay
conceive, they comprise the contents of the Lutheran formularies, were
not intended to be symbolical books ; yet it has pleased the Lutheran
Church so to revere thera.
III. — The Calvinistic and Zwinglian Formularies.
If the symbolical books of the Lutheran confession were adopted by
all the particular Churches that embraced the views of the Wittenberg
Reformers, — a fact which only in regard to the Formulary of Concord
admits of an exception, — the Reformed communities, on the other hand,
possess no confessions received with the like general respect. The rea
son is to be sought, partly in Zwingle's conception of the doctrine of
the holy Eucharist, which too deeply wounded the profounder religious
feelings of the sixteenth century, to gain a permanent, or even a very
extensive, reception, and partly in Calvin's doctrine of predestination,
which, revolting as it was to the sense of Christians, could not in Uke
manner penetrate into all the Reformed Churches. Hence, as no
general harmony existed among the Reformed communities, no such
general harmony could possibly be expressed in a common formulary.
Add to this the peculiar circumstances of the Anglican Church, wherein

INTRODUCTION. 109
the divine institution of episcopacy was asserted against the Presby
terian system of the other partisans of Zwingle and Calvin, and wherein
consequently, in accordance with this view, a liturgy more approximat-
ing to that of the CathoUc Church was introduced.
Thus it happened that nearly every Reformed national Church had
its own formulary, or even several forraularies differing from each other.
The more remarkable are the following :
1. The Confessio Tetrapolitana, which was presented by the four
cities,— Strasburg, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau, — to the diet
of Augsburg, in the year 1530, but was not attended to by that assem
bly, because the Protestant states refused these cities, on account of
their leaning to the Zwinglian view of the Lord's supper, admission into
their league. The above-mentioned cities having, some years later,
out of pure political motives, subscribed to the Augsburg confession, the
Confessio Tetrapolitana was, in a short time, abandoned by every one.
2. The three Helvetic Confessions. The Helvetic Confession, that
Stands at the head of the collection of the Reformed symbolic writings,
(accordingly the first,) was, in the year 1536, composed by Henry
Bullinger and Leo Judas, Myconius and Simon Grynaeus ; but, in the
year 1566, was revised and published in the name of all the Helvetic
Churches, those of Basle and Neufchatel excepted. The second con
fession is the first we have named, but in its original form. The third
is the Confession of Muhlhausen, published by Oswald Myconius, in
the year 1532 ; it is also denominated the Confession of Basle.
3. The Thirty-nine Articles, — the formulary of the Anglican Church.
In the year 1553, under king Edward VI. , forty-two articles had been
composed, probably by Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and Rid
ley, Bishop of London, as the Confession of the English Church. But
under Elizabeth they were, in the year 1562, reduced to Thirty-nine
Articles, and were confirmed by a London synod.
4. The French Calvinists framed their confession of faith in a synod
at Paris, which Antoine de Chantieu, a Calvinistic preacher at Paris,
had, on a bidding to that effect, convoked.
5. The disciples of Calvin in the Netherlands received, in the year
1562, a confession of faith, coraposed in the French tongue by Guy de
Bres and Hadrian Saravia, with the aid of several other co-operators,
and soon after translated intoFleraish. But these men not having been
publicly charged with this undertaking, this formulary obtained only
by degrees a symbohcal authority ; which (especially after the synod
held at Dort, in the year 1.'574, had, with the exception of a few unim
portant particulars, given it their sanction,) could not fail to occur.
6. Far more celebrated and more notorious, however, were the de-

110 Introduction.
crees of another Calvinistic synod, held likewise at Dort, in the year?
1618 and 1619. Calvin's rigid theory of predestination could not long
be maintained, without encountering opposition even in the bosom of
the Reformed. This lay in the very nature of things. But the ma
jority of Calvinists showed themsehes as little inclined to suffer one
of the fundamental dogmas of their Church to be called in questionj as
did the Lutherans in Gerraany. Hence, when Arminius, a preacher in
Amsterdam, and, after the year 1603, a professor in Leyden, together
with other men of a sirailar way of thinking, called in doubt Calvin's
opinions, (and these again were vehemently defended by his colleague
Gomar,) a very eventful contest arose, — tho settlement whereof the
abovementioned synod attempted, while in reality it only confirmed
the dissension. The Arminians, or Remonstrants, though very much
persecuted, maintained themselves as a distinct sect. Meanwhile, the
decrees of Dort met with a very favourable reception out of Holland,
even in Switzerland, araong the Calvinists in France, and in othet
parts ; whUe in England they were formally rejected, and in other
countries were not approved of.
7. Frederick HI., Count Palatine on the Rhine, who renounced the
Lutheran for the Calvinistic creed, and forced upon his subjects his
own cherished opinions, caused, in the year 1562, a catechism to be
composed, which has also been included in the number of Calvinistid
symbolical books. It is coraraonly called the Hc'uldbcrg or Palatine
Catechism, and has met with so much approval, that many reformed
communities have adopted it as a school-book.
8. The Protestant princes mostly entertained the same view of their
prerogptive as the Count Palatine Frederick, and thought they were
bound to decide for tbeir subjects all religious controversies, and to
make their own individual opinions the property of all. On his death,
this prince was succeeded, in the year 1576, by his son Lewis, who in
his turn expelled the Calvinistic preachers, and, together with the Lu
theran creed, re-established the Lutheran service ; until his successor, i
Frederick IV., in the year 15S2, a second time restored the peculiar
doctrines and practices of Calvinism, and infiicted on the ministers and
professors of the again outlawed confession the sarae fate, which, under
his predecessor, those of Calvinisra had sustained. Even the decrees
of Dort were obliged to be believed in the Palatinate. The like oc
curred in the principality of Anhalt. John George, from the year
1586, Prince of Anhalt-Desau, believed it his duty to purge his land
from Luther's opinions and institutions) and to enforce the introduction
of Calvinism. In the year 1597, appeared a formulary, comprised in
twenty-eight articles ; and no other alternative was left to the preachers,

¦ lNfROt>UCTION. ill
but Siibscription, or banishment from fhe country. When, however,
Prince John, in the year 1644, assumed the reins of government, he re
established, by as violent means, the Lutheran confession. In Hesse-
CasSel, after the Landgrave Maurice had changed his creed, the
Calvinistic (Jonfession, indeed, was enforced, and the preachers of
Lutheran orthodoxy were deposed ; yet (a circumstance which must
excite great astonishment) no special symbolical book was proposed to
the acceptance of believers. Perhaps such a formulary would not have
failed to appear, had not belief in the doctrinal decisions of Dort been,
shortly afterwards, ordained.
9. On the other hand, the Margrave of Brandenburg, John Sigis-
mund, on abandoning the Lutheran for the Calvinistic Churchj was
unable to refrain from the pleasure of publishing a special formulary.
It is known under the name of the Confession of the Marches.
10. Lastly, we must observes that the altered confession of Augsburg
not only possesses a symbolical authority in the German Calvinistic
Churches, but is in general highly esteemed by all Calvinists. Me
lancthon, in fact, approximated in his latter years to the Calvinistic
view of the Lord's supper ; and, for that reason, introduced into the
editions of this confession, revised by him from the year 1540, certain
alterations, which must the more recommend it to Calvinists, as unin^
structed persons, at least, might be led to suppose, that Calvin's opinion
was favoured by the primitive orthodoxy of the Lutheran Church.
More details on this subject hereafter. On the confessions of Poland,
Hungary, Thorn, and other places, as we learn nothing of a peculiar
nature from them, it is unnecessary here to dwell at any length.
The symbolical writings of the smaller Protestant sects, or those
other books whence their system of belief can be derived, it wiU be
more proper to notice in the chapters devoted to the consideration ot
those sects.

BOOK I.
THE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
AMONG CATHOLICS, LUTHERANS,
AND THE REFORMED.

PART L
aiFFESKXCES IN DOCTRINE EESPECTING THB PKIMITIVE STATE Ol?'
MAN AND THE ORIGIN OP EVIL.

§ I . — Primitive State of Man, according to the Catholic Doctrine.
In proportion as we consider the history of mankind, or even of indi
vidual man, frora the Catholic or Protestant point of view, very different
conclusions will in part be formed respecting our common progenitor-—
conclusions which will affect the destinies of his whole race, even to
their passage into the next life : and even the first degrees of that life
take a very different form, according as we regard them in the light
either of Catholic or of Protestant doctrine.
The parties, indeed, originaUy were not conscious of the full extent
of their divisions ; for ecclesiastical, like political, revolutions, are not
conducted according to a preconcerted, fully corapleted system : but, on
the contrary, their fundamental principles are wont to be consistently
unfolded only in and by practical life, and their heterogeneous parts to
be thereby only gradually transformed. Hence, at the commencement
of the ecclesiastical revolution of the sixteenth century, reflection was
not immediately directed towards the origin of our kind, nor even to its
passage into eternity ; for a more minute explanation of these articles
of doctrine appeared in part to possess but a very subordinate interest,
8

114 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
and many points seemed only brought forward to fill up the breaches in
the general system of belief. The great contest, which now engages
our attention, had rather its rise in the inmost and deepest centre of
human history, as it turned upon the mode whereby fallen man can re
gain fellowship with Christ, and become a partaker of the fruits of
redemption. But from this centre the opposition spread backward and
forward, and reached the two terms of human history, which were
necessarUy viewed in accordance with the changes introduced in the
central point. The more consistently a system is carried out, and the
more harmoniously it is framed, the more will any modification in its
fundamental principle shake all its parts. Whoever, therefore, in its
centre assailed CathoUcism, whose doctrines are all most intimately
intertwined, was forced by degrees to attack many other points, also,
whose connection with those first combated, was in the beginning
scarcely imagined.
We could now have started from the real centre of all these disputes,
and have shown how all doctrines have been seized and drawn into
its circle ; and undoubtedly the commencement of our work would
have much more excited the interest of the reader, had we immediately
placed him in the midst of the contest, and enabled him to survey the
entire field, which the battle commands. But we conceive that the
controverted doctrines may be stated in a simpler and more intelligible
manner, when we pursue the contrary course, and, by following the clue
presented by the natural progress of human history, bring under notice
these doctrinal differences. Hence, we begin with the original state
of man, speak next of his fall, and the consequences thereof, and then
enter on the very central ground of the controversy, as we proceed to
consider the doctrine of the restoration of man from his faU through
Christ Jesus. We shall afterwards point out the influence of the con
flicting doctrines, respecting the origin and nature of the internal life
of those united with Christ, on their external union and communion
with each other, and thus be led to enlarge on the theory and essence
of this outward communion, according to the views of the different
confessions ; and we shall conclude with the passage of individuals
from this communion, c.xi.-ling on earth, to that of the next world, as
weU as with the lasting mutual intercourse between the two.
The first point, accordingly, which wiU engage our attention, is the
primitive state of man.
Fallen man, as such, is able, in no otherwise, save by the teaching of
divine revelation, to attain to the true and pure knowledge of his origi
nal condition ; for it w as a portion of the destiny of man, when aliena-
ted from his God, to be Ukewise alienated from himself, and to know

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 115
with certainty, neither what he originally was, nor what he became.
In determining his original state, we must especially direct our view to
the renewal of the fallen creature in Christ Jesus ; because, as regene
ration consists in the re-establ;shraent of our primeval condition, and
this transformation and renewal is only the primitive creation restored,
the insight into what Christ hath given us back affords us the desired
knowledge of what in the origin was imparted to us.
This course has been at all times and by all parties pursued, when
the original condition of man was to be traced.
As regards the Catholic dogma, this embraces the whole spiritual as
well as corporeal existence of the Paradisaic man, extending not only to
his pre-eminent endowments of soul and body, but to those gifts which
he possessed in common with all men, so far at least as the doctrinal
controversies of the sixteenth century required a special explanation, on
this latter point. Accordingly, in the higher portion of his nature, he
is described as the image of God, that is to say, as a spiritual being,
endowed with freedom, capable of knowing and loving God, and of
viewing everything in hira.* As Adam had this divine similitude in
common with the whole human race, the distinction, which he enjoyed
herein, consisted in his being what the simple expression of the Coun
cil of Trent denominates, just and holy ; in other words, completely
acceptable to God.f Or as the school says, in language, however, not
quite expressive enough, " His inferior faculties of soul, and bodily im
pulses, acted unresistingly under the guidance of his reason, and there
fore every thing in him was in obedience to reason, as his reason was
in obedience to God ;" and accordingly he Uved in blessed harmony
with himself and with his Maker. The action of the faculties and im
pulses of the body was in perfect accord with a reason devoted to God,
and shunned all conflict with her : it was, moreover, coupled with the
great gift of immortality, even in man's earthly part, as well as with an
exemption from all the evils and all the maladies, which are now the
ordinary preludes to death.:}:
* Catechism, ex dccret. Concil. Trident. ed.Col. 1565, p. 33. "Quodadanimam
pertinet, eam ad imaginem et similitudinem suam formavit (Deus,) liberumque ei tri-
buit arbitrium : omnes preeterea motus animi atque appetitiones ita in ea temperavit,
ut rationis imperio nunquam uon parerent. Tum originalis justilim admirabile do-
num addidit," etc.
t Concil. Trident. Sess. v. decret. de peccat. origin. The council says only,
" Justitiam et sanctitatem, in qua constitutus fuerat."
\ Catechism, ex decret. Concil. Trident, p. 33. " Sic corpore eifeotum et consti
tutum effinxit, ut non quidem naturse ipsius vi, sed divino beneficio immortaUs esset
et impassibilis." Very well, observes St. Augustine (de Genes, ad ht. vi. u. 95)
•¦ Ahud est, non posse mori, aliud posse non mori," etc.

116 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
The ideal raoral state, in which Adam existed in paradise, the theo
logians of antiquity knew by the name of " original justice ;" on the
notion and nature whereof it will be proper to make some further re
marks, partly of an historical kind, in order to explain the opposition,
which, in this article of doctrine, the C; tholic Church has had to en
counter from the Protestants.
The essential and universal interest of the Christian religion, in de
termining the original condition of our common progenitor, is, by the
above-stated brief doctrine of the Church, amply satisfied. Herein con
sists the interest — on one hand to guard against evil in the world being
attributed to a Divine cause, and the dogma of the suprerae Jioliness
of God, the creator of the world, being disfigured ; — and on the other
hand, to establish on a solid basis the principle of a totally unraerited
redemption from the fall — that practical fundaraental doctrine of Chris
tianity — by most earnestly inculcating, that God had endowed the first
man with the noblest gifts, and that thus it was only through his own
deep self-guilliness he fell. Upon both points, however, there exist
raore stringent, and by no means superfluous, definitions of the Church.
Theologians, likewise, taking as their standard the ecclesiastical doc
trine, clenrly based as it is on Scripture and tradition, and following
certain hints which particular passages of holy writ, and some dogmas,
appear to furnish, have endeavoured to fn thorn raore dcoply the nature
of original justice ; and the Church has viewed with pleasure the atten
tion and love bestowed on the consideration of the holy work, and per
mitted, within the determined limits which revelation itself has marked
out, the freest scope to speculation.
When the Church attributes to Adam, in his original state, holiness
and justice, she by no means merely means, that he was unpolluted
with any alloy adverse to God, or contrary to his natural impulse and
bearing to God, but, what is far more, that he stood in the most interior
and the closest communion with his Maker. Now, it is an universal
truth, holding good of all even the highest orders and circles of intel
lectual creatures, that such a relation to God, as that of the paradisaic
man, is no wise to be attained and upheld by natural powers ; that con
sequently a special condescension of the Almighty is required thereto ;
in short, that no finite being is holy, save by the holy and sanctifying
spirit ; that no finite being can exist in a living moral communion with
the Deity, save by the communion of the self-same holy spirit. This
relation of Adam to God, as it exalted hira above human nature, and
made him participate in that of God, is hence termed (as indeed such
a denomination is involved in the very idea of such an exaltation) a
supernatural gift of divine grace, superadded to fhe endowments of na-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 117
ture. Moreover, this more minute explanation of the dogma, concern
ing the original holiness and justice of Adam, is not merely a private
opinion of theologians, but an integral part of that dogma, and hence,
itself a dogma.*
The following observation will not, perhaps, appear unimportant. So
often as from a mere phUosophical point of view, — we mean td say, so
often as without regard to, or knowledge of, revealed truth, — the rela
tion of the human spirit to God hath been more deeply investigated,
men have seen themselves forced to the adoption of a homousia, or
equality of essence between the divine and the human nature ; in other
words, to embrace pantheism, and, with it, the most arrogant deification
of man. How, on the other hand, the doctrinal system of the Catholic
Church obviates the objections of pantheism, and, while filled with the
spirit of humility, satisfies those cravings after a raore profound science,
which a profane pantheistic philosophy vainly endeavours to supply, is
apparent from what has been above stated. What man, as a creature,
by the energy of his own nature abandoned to itself, was unable to
attain, is conferred on him as a grace from his Creator. So exceed
ingly great is the goodness and love of God !
The blessing above described, which knit the bonds of an exalted,
holy, and happy communion between God and the paradisaic man, is
founded on the supposition that a struggle would by degrees have natu
rally arisen between the sensual and the spiritual nature of man, cha
racterised by many theologians as that power, whereby the sensual and
supersensual parts of Adam were maintained in undisturbed harmony.
The same divines necessarily suppose, that on Adam the supernatural
gifts were bestowed simultaneously with his natural endowments ; that
is to say, that both were conferred at the moment of his creation. f

* Popes Pius V. and Gregory XIII. have condemned the following propositions ;
" Art. XXI. Humanse naturce sublimatio et ezaltatio in consortium divinie nature dc-
blta fuit integntati primm conditionis, ac proinde naturalis dicenda est, non super-
naturalis. Art xxvi. Integritas conditionis non fuit indebita naturEe humanse exal-
tatio, sed naturalis ejus conditio."
The opinion put forth in the earlier editions of this work, that the doctrine of the
donum supernaturale primi hominis, though generally received among theologians,
and grounded in the whole Catholic system, had not, however, received a formal
sanction from the Church, must now be corrected.
+ Thom. Summa, P. i. q. 95, art. 1. " Manifcstum est, quod ilia subjectio corpo
ris ad animam, et inferiorum virium ad rationem, non erat naturalis ; alioquin post
peccatum mansisset, cum etiam in dteraonibus data naturalia post peccatum raanse-
rint. Ex quo datur intelligi, si deserente gratia soluta est obedientia carnis ad ani
mam, qufid per gratiam in anima existentcm inferiora ci subdobantur." Bellarmine

118 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Other theologians, on the other hand, distinguishing undoubtedly
between justice and hoUness, prefer the opinion that Adam was crea
ted as a sound, pure, unpoUuted nature (^wilb the harmonious relation
of all his parts ;) and that he was favoured with the supernatural gift
of a holy and blessed coraraunion with God at a later period only, to
wit, when he had prepared for its reception, and by his own effbrts had
rendered hiraself worthy of its participation. This latter opinion pos
sesses the advantage of more accurately distinguishing betuecu the two
orders of nature and grace, and is moreover recommended by the fact,
that what nature is in itself, and what it is enabled to accomplish of
itself, is pointed out with great clearness. That the spirituaLaature of
man, as being in its essence the image of God, hath the faculty and the
aptitude to know and to love Hira ; nay that, to a certain extent, it is
of itself really capable of lovTng HirnTandThat the desire after the fuU
union with the Deity is a want inherent in his very nature, are truths
very well pointed out in this theory. Thus the natural and necessary
points of contact for the higher communications of grace are here very
finely brought out. The same opinion also distinguishes Adam's ori
ginal justice from his internal sanctity and acceptance before God, con
sidering the former to be the attribute of pure nature, as it came frora
the hand of the Creator ; the latter to be only the gift of supernatural
grace. The advocates of this opinion are thus in a condition success
fully to prove, that it was not the creation as such, which gave occasion
to any incongruity in the relation of man to God, — any interruption of
the former's freedom ; but that every such incongruity, every such dis
turbance, had its rise only in the abuse of freedora. (Compare Sect.
V.) Further, this theory significantly implies, that without any antago
nism of evil, man could yet have attained to the consciousness of his
own nature and the wants extending beyond it, as well as of the mani
festations of Divine favour and grace — a doctrine which is of the high
est importance. Lastly, the pos.sible condition of man after his faU,
and the course of his conversion and regeneration, are here prefigured.
Moreover, both these opinions regard the justice and sanctity of
Adam as accidental qualities. The Council of Trent has not pronounced
itself either for or against either of them, but has employed such ex-

(de grat. primi hom. c. v.) adds : " Ex hoc loco aperte discimus, hominem in purls
naturalibus conditum habiturum fuisse rebellionem iliam carnis ad spiritum, quam
nunc post amissum justitiae originalis donum omnes experimur. Quandoquidem
obedientia carnis ad spiritum non fuit in prime homine naturalis et gratuita. Proinde
justitia originahs divinitus homini collata non conservavit solum, sed attulit et fecit
rectitudinem partis inferioris."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 119
pressions, that both may co-e.xist within the pale of the Church. '' The
first declaration of the council, regarding our great progenitor, was
couched in the following terms : " the justice and sanctity, wherein he
(Adam) was createdP (conditus.) This form was afterwards in so far
modified, that, instead of the word " created," that of " established "
{constitutus) was selected.*
§ n. — The Lutheran doctrine on man's original state.
LuTHEK by no means called in question the fact that Adam was
positively holy and just. On the contrary, he was totaUy unacquainted
with the later negative conceptions of a state of mere innocency — an
indifference between good and evil, wherein the paradisaic man is re
presented to have existed ; and was accordingly far removed from
those opinions, which make the doctrine of the fall a foolishness, and
make the huraan race adopt a course, which is the necessary entrance
into evU, in order to serve as a transition to a self-conscious return to
good.f Unhappily he fell into other errors, which, considered in their
consequences, outweigh at least those we have mentioned.
Respecting original justice, Luther brought no new and peculiar
views into vogue. He only selected, out of the rich store of theories
which the fruitfulness of scholasticism had produced, the one which
seemed most favourable to his own opinions, handled it with no great
dexterity, and, in the form which it assumed under his hands, inter
wove it in such a way into his whole system of doctrine, that the lat
ter, without it, cannot be at all understood. Hence, it is only later
that its full importance in the whole Lutheran system will become per
ceptible. Against those theologians, who called Adam's acceptableness
before God, supernatural, Luther asserted it to be natural ; and in op
position to the schoolmen, who regarded it as accidental, he conceived
it to be essential to huraan nature — an integral and constitutive part of

* Pallavic. hist. Concil. Trident, lib. vii. c. 9. p. 975, ed. Antw. 1675. He says
this change was made at the suggestion of Paceeus. *' Paceco monente, non esse
citra eontroversiam, an Adamus interiorem sanctitatem obtinuerit prime quo creatus
fuit momento ; unde patet, quam infirma a quibusdam dedueatur probatio ad id afiir-
mandum ex verbis concilii, quae nunc extant." — Sess. v. decret. de peccat. origin.
t A Trial of Adam was doubtless necessary, that man should make his own de
cision, and thereby attain to a complete self-eonsciousness of the good which he al
ready possessed, and especially of his freedom ; but the fall was by no means neces
sary. Undoubtedly the fall brought about the self-conscious and free possession of
truth and goodness, because, by God's grace, even evil must conduce towards the
promotion of good. But the bare assertion that the fall was necessary, exalts evil
itself into goodness.

120 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
the same ; esse de naUird, de essentia hominis.* He meant to say, the
pure nature of raan, as it sprang forth at the omnipotent word of the
Creator, comprised absolutely in itself all the conditions to render rt
pleasing unto God ; that the various parts of Adam's nature, by the
peculiar energy inherent in them, were maintained in the most beauti
ful harmony, and the whole raan preserved in his due relation fo God.
The religious faculty, especially of the first man, in virtue of an inborn
fidness of energj', expanded itself in a way acceptable to the Deity, so
that, without any supernatural aid, he truly knew God, believed in Him,
loved Him perfectly, and was holy. The religious and moral disposi
tion of Adam, together with its practical development, the Reformers
caUed the image of God, without drawing any distinction between the
hare faculty itself, and the exercise of that faculty in correspondency
to the divine will. From the very fact that Adam possessed this fac
ulty, he was, according to them, truly religious, truly pious, devoted in
aU things to God and His holy AviU, and perfectly united with Him.f
CathoUc theologians, on the other hand, distinguished very exactly be
tween the one and the other ; so that, to determine rightly the distinc
tion, they commonly termed the religious faculty, "the image of God;"
but the pious exertion of that faculty, " the likeness unto God.":}: We

* Luth. in Genes, c. iii. Op. ed. Jen. tom. i. p 83. " Quarro statuamus, justitiam
non esse quoddam donum, quod ab extra aocedcrct, separatumque a natura hominis
[so the schoolmen never expressed themselves], sed fuisse vere naturalem, ut natura
Adse esset diligere Deum, credere Deo, cognoscere Deum," etc.
t Apol. de peccat. origin. ^ 7, p. 56. " Itaque justitia originalis habitura erat sequale
tcmperamentum qualitatum corporis, sed etiam h£ec dona : notitiam Dei certiorem, ti
morem Dei, fiduciam Dei, aut certe rectitudinem, ct vim ista ctEciendi. Idque testatur
scriptura, ciim inquit, hominem ad imaginem et similitudinem Dei conditum esse. Quod
quid est aliud, nisi in homine hanc sapientiam et justitiam effigiatum esse, quEE Deum
apprchenderet, et in qua reluceret Deus, hoc est, homini dona esse data notitiam Dei,
timorem Dei, fiduciam erga Deum et simdia." They thus understand by what God
gave to Adam, as well real acts of the spirit (timorem Dei, fiduciam) as the faculty
for those (vim ista efEclendi). Very remarkable is Gerhard's assertion, that according
to the Lutheran doctrine the divine image in man is not any thing substantial, 'out
merely a condition of human substance, a quality of it. (Joann. Gerhard, loci theolog.
ed. Cotta, 1765, tom. iv. p. 249, seq. Compare ejusdem Confess. Cathol. lib. ii. art.
XX. c. 2, p. 349.) It is observable he refutes himself by saying, that conscience in
man is still a remnant of the divine image. As he adds, conscience is not to be ex
plained from any supeniatural action of God on man, so it follows it must be a sub
stantial faculty of the latter, and consequently such the image itself. But he says
the latter is, " concreata humaniB substantia integritas, perfcctio ac rectitude, et pro
inde in categoria qualitatis coUocanda." Loci theol. lib. u. p. 268. Comp. Chomnit
loc. theol. pt. I. p. 217, ed. 1615.
X Bellarm. de grat. prim. hom. c. ii. lib. e p. 7. " Imago, qute est ipsa natura
mentis et voluntatis, a solo Deo fieri potuit : similitude autem, quaj in vlrtute et pro-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. )21
shall later see what mighty consequences were involved in these, at the
first view, trifling doctrinal differences, that seeraed merely to concern
the schools ; and we must, in the meanwhile, prepare ourselves to ex
pect, on the part of Luther, a most singular doctrine respecting origi
nal sin. Moreover, the non-distinction adverted to, had partly its foun
dation in the endeavour of the Reformers to be in their teaching very
practical and generaUy intelligible. Hence they avoided, with as much
care as possible, all distinctions and abstract expressions, as a scholastic
abuse, but thereby frequently fell into a strange and most pernicious
confusion of ideas.
The second main point of difference between the two confessions, in
the matter under discussion, is the doctrine of free-will. Luther as
serted (and he would have this assertion maintained as an article of
faith), that man is devoid of freedom; that every (pretended) free ac
tion is only apparent ; that an irresistible divine necessity rules all
things, and that every human act is at bottom only the act of God.*
Melancthon taught the same. He also comprised aU things in the
circle of an unavoidable necessity and predestination, declared the
doctrine, that God is the sole agent, to be a necessary part of all Chris
tian science, for thereby the wisdom and cunning of huraan reason
were duly repressed and condemned, and he repeatedly insisted, that
the word " freedom of election " was unknown to Scripture, and that

bitate consistit, a nobis quoque, Deo adjuvante, perficitur." God can give us no ac
tions. Further on Bellarmine says : " Ex his igitur tot patrum testimoniis cogimur -
admittere, non esse omnino idem imaginem et similitudinem, sed imaginem ad na-
turam, similitudinem ad virtutes pertinere." The well-known passage in Genesis
raay, or may not, bear such an interpretation ; but the distinction has a value in it
self, independently of all scriptural interpretation.
* Luther, de servo arbitrio adv. Erasm. Roterod. Opp. ed. Lat. Jen. tom. iii. f 170.
" Est itaque et hoc imprimis necessarium et salutare Christiano nosse, quod Deus
nihil prcescit contingenter, sed quod omnia incommutabili et asterna infallibilique
voluntate et providet, et proponit, et facit. Hoc fulmine sternitur et conteritur peni
tus liberum arbitrium. Ideo qui liberum arbitrium volunt assertum, debent hoc ful
men vel negare vel dissimulare, aut alia ratione a se abigere.'' (foi. 171.) " Ex quo
sequitur irrefragabiliter, omnia quce facimus, etsi nobis videntur mutabiliter et con
tingenter fieri et fiant, et ita etiam contingenter nobis fiant, revera tamen fiunt ne-
cessario et immutabiliter, si voluntatem Dei spcetes." (foi. 177.) " Alterum para
doxon : quidquid fit a nobis, non libero arbitrio, sed mera necessitate fieri." The
book closes with these words (foi. 238). " Ego vero hoc libro non contuli, sed
asserui et assero, ac penes nullum volo esse judicium, sed omnibus suadeo, ut prees-
tent obsequium." The Solida Declaratio (ii. de libero arbitrio, p. 639) sanctions this
book, and especially approves what it says " de absoluta necessitate contra omnes
sinistras suspiciones et corruptelas," and thus concludes : " Ea liio repetita esse volu
mus, et ut diligenter legantur, et expetantur omnes hortamur."

1-22 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
its meaning must be rejected by the judgment of the spiritual man.
He added, that this expression, like the very pernicious word, " reason,"
to which he declared equal hostiUt}^ had been introduced through phi
losophy into the Christian Church. From no other cause did he deem
hiraself so weU justified in daring to apply to the professors of the theo
logical faculties in the middle age, — the so-called schoolmen, — tho
terras sophists, theologues, and the like, as on account of their crime
in having established araong Christians the doctrine of huraan free-will
so firmly, that, as he complained, it was scarcely any longer possible
to root it out.* Perceiving, after more diversified experience, and ma
turer reflection, especially after the controversy with the Catholics, the
prodigious abvss into which such a doctrine raust precipitate the Church,
he subsequently abandoned, and even combated it.f On the other
hand we are unacquainted with any such recantation on the part of
Luther ; and the formulary of concord gives an express sanction to
the writing of the latter against Erasmus. This doctrine of the servi
tude of the huraan wUl has had the greatest weight ; and its influence,
according to Melancthon's assurance, pervades even the whole religious
system of the Lutherans.:j:
In regard to the original constitution of the human body, both con
fessions are agreed ; and if the Lutheran formularies speak not ex
pressly of that property of Adam's body, whereby, if he had never
sinned, he would have remained exempt from death, this sUence is to
be ascribed to the total absence of aU controversy on the raatter.§
* Melancth. loc. Theol. ed. August, 1821. " Sensim irrepsit philosophia in Chns-
tianismum, et receptum est impium de libero arbitrio dogma. Usurpata est vox liberi
arbitrii, a divinis Uteris, a sensu et judicio spirittis alienissima.... .additum est e Plato-
nis philosophia vocabulu-m rationis (Bque perniciosissimum. (p. 10 ) In quaeetionem
vocatur, sitne libera voluntas et quatenus libera sit ? Respons. Quandoquidem om
nia, quffi eveniunt necessario juxta divinam praedestinationem eveniunt, nulla est
voluntatis nostrffi libertas." (p. 12.)
t This he did in the editions of the Loci Theologici, dating from the year 1535.
It is a remarkable fact, that he now reproaches the schoolmen with having taught
the doctrine of an absolute necessity, but observes a total silence respecting himself
and Luther, while in the earlier editions of the same work he had charged these very
schoolmen with an arrogant assertion of the tenet of free-will. "Et quod asperior
paulo sententia de praedestinatione vulgo videtur, debemus illi impiffi sophistarum
theologiae, quee inculcavit nobis contingentiam et libcrtatem voluntatis nostrae, ut a
veritate scripturae moUiculae aures abhorreant." This is the language of the first edi-
tion : but on the other hand, in the editions from the year 1535 down to 1543, we read
as follows : " Valla et plerique alii non recte detrahunt volimtati hominis libcrtatem."
Who are then these plerique ? A vast number of such indecencies do we meet with
in the writings of the Reformers. In the editions dating from the year 1 543, this doc
trine is referred to the Stoics. " Hkc imaginatio orta ex Stoicis disputationibus," etc.
X Melancth. 1. c. p. 13. " In omnes disputationis nostras partes incidet."
§ Cf. Gerhardi loo. theolog. tom. iv. p. 268 (loc. ix. c. iv. § 99}.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 123
§111. — The Calvinistic doctrine on the primitive state of man.
In enlarging on the spiritual condition of the paradisaic man, Calvin,
by representing it, with Luther, as one devoid of supernatural graces,
set himself up in opposition to the Catholic Church ; but, by expressly
ascribing to the first man the gift of free-will, he equally opposed the
Lutherans.* In other respects, we find in this article no difference of
doctrine ; and the same remark will hold good of the confessions of
the reformed Churches.f In respect to the injurious consequences pro
duced by the sin of our first parent on his corporeal existence, and that
of his posterity, most of the formularies of the reforraed expressly
teach, with Calvin, that death is the fruit of Adam's transgression. :j:
But the question here occurs, how Calvin could feel himself justified
in attributing free-will to Adam, when, in common with Zwingle, he
completely shared Luther's doctrine touching a divine necessity of all
occurrences, and even pushed this opinion to the extremest verge.
Conscious of this discrepancy, he observes undoubtedly, that the ques
tion as to the mysterious predestination of God is here unseasonably
mooted ; for the matter at issue is not what could have happened, but
how man was originally constituted. § In despite of this express de
mand, to hold the two doctrines distinct, — that of a divine necessity,
of an absolute eternal destiny, which enchains and holds all things to
gether, and that of the freedom of man, prior to his fall, we are at a

* Calvin. Institution. 1. i., c. 15. § 8. foi. 55. ed. Gen. 1559. " Animam hominis
Deus mente instruxit, qua bonum a malo, justum ab injusto discemeret ; ac quid se-
quendum vel fugiendum sit praeeunte rationis luce videret ; unde partem hanc direc-
tricem TO »'j,»i«ov;x.i» dixerunt Philosophi. Huic adjunxit voluntatem, genes quam
est electio. His praeclaris dotibus excelluit prima hominis conditio, ut ratio, intelli-
gentia, prudentia, judicium non modo ad terrenje vitae gubemationem suppeterent,
sed quibus transeenderent usque ad Deum ad aetemam felicitatem. In hac integritate
libero arbitrio pollebat homo, quo si vellet adipisci posset aetemam vitam."
tHelvet. i. c. vii. (Corpus libr. symbol, eccles. reform, ad August. 1817) p. 16 : ii.
p. 95 ; iii. p. 103. Yet without any minuter definition they merely say, man was
created after God's image, and except in the first Helvetic Confession, they make no
mention of free-will. The Scottish Confession (art. ii. 1. c. p. 145) accords to Adam
freedom : the Gallic and the Anghean are silent on the subject ; and the Belgic
again concedes this gift to the first man (c. xiv. p. 128). These are differences which
maybe easily accounted for.
t Helvet. i., c. viii. 1. c. p. 17; Belg. c. xiv. 178. "Quo (peccato) se morti cor-
porah et spiritual! obnoxium reddidit."
5 Calvin. 1. c. § 8. " Hie enim intempestive quaestio ingeritur de occulta prasdes-
tinatione Dei : quia nonagitur, quid accidere potuerit, necne, sed quahs fuerit hommis
natura."

124 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
loss to discover how this claim can be satisfied ; for these two doctrines
are in fact incompatible ; and with the adoption of the one, the other
must be abandoned ; unless to the word " freedom " a notice be at
tached, which in reality destroys its very existence. And such is
really the case ; for, as we shall have occasion to show, Calvin, evi
dently after Luther's example, makes, not inward necessity, but out
ward constraint, the opposite to freedom.* On the other hand, Me
lancthon has expressjd himsslf op3aly anJ hansstly on the mutu
al correlativeness of these two articles of doctrine, and declared
that, from that very correlativeness they should be simultaneously
treated. f
We shall find, moreover, that Calvin even teaches an eternal, immu
table predestination of the fall of the first man ; an opinion which is
certainly quite incompatible with the proposition, that Adam was free,
that is to say, could have avoided sinning. Hence it has happened
that, though some symbolical writings of the reformed coraraunities
have with Calvin expressly ascribed free-will to Adara, others have
judged it more expedient, in what they teach respecting the paradisaic
man, to pass this matter over in silence ; and this was evidently the
most consistent course.
We think it still proper to direct attention to the internal reasons,
which Calvin aUeged in behalf of the doctrine of an absolute ne
cessity destructive of all huraan freedom, partly because it will
then follow, that it ought not, at least absolutely and imraediately,J

* Luther, de servo arbitrio ad Erasm. Roterod. 1. i. foi, 171. " Optarim sane aliud
melius vocabulum dari in hac disputatione. quam hoc, Necessitas, quod non recte
dicitur, neque de divina, neque de humana voluntate : est enim nimis ingratae et in-
congruae significationis pro hoc loco, quandam velut coactionem, et omnino id quod
contrarium est voluntati, ingerens intellectui : cura tamen non hoc vellt causa ista
quoe agitur. Voluntas enim, sive divina sive humana, nulla coactione, sed mera
lubentia vel cupiditate quasi vere libera, facit quod facit, sive bonum sive malum.
Sed tamen immutabilis est voluntas Dei, qu« nostram voluntatem mutabilera guber-
nat, ut canit Boetius : ' stabilisque raanens das cuncta raoveri.' " This is a very in
appropriate citation, for Manlius Torquatus Boethius was no believer in Luther's doc
trine of necessity.
t Melancth. loc. theolog. p. 13. " Sed ineptus videar, qui statim initio opens de
asperrimo loco, de prasdestinatione disseram. Quamquam quid attinet in compendio,
primo an postrerao loco id agara, quod in omnes disputationis nostra partes incidet."
t Calvin (Instit. rel. Christ, lib. i. c. 16, n. 8) takes notice of this parallel, and ob
serves as follows : " Non enim cum stoicis, necessitatem comminiscimur ex perpetuo
causarura nexu et implicita quadara serie, quae in natura contineatur : sed Deum
constituimus arbitrura ac raoderatorem omnium, qui pro sui sapientia ab ultima ffiter-
nitate decrevit quod factorus esset, et nunc sua potentia, quod decrevit, exsequitur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PR0TEST-4.NTS. 125
to be confounded with the Vagan fatum, and partly because a know
ledge of this reasoning will be of importance in later investigations.
If Melancthon, after indulging in harsh assertions, could assign no
other practical ground for this doctrine, than that the relation of man
towards God adverted to was very useful towards subduing* human
arrogance, Calvin on the other hand observed, that the knowledge not
merely that God guided the affairs of the world in small, as in great
things, but that nothing whatever could occur without the express ordi
nance of God (destinante Deo,) comprised a very abundant source of
consolation ; for it is only in this way man feels himself secure in the
hands of an all-wise, aU-ruling, powerful and indulgent Father.']' Hence,
the idea of a Divine permission, and such a conduct of things, that ulti
mately every thing, even evil, in the world, conduces to the benefit of
those who serve God, did not satisfy him. He believed the elect inse
cure, and the notion of a divine providence not sufficiently defined,
unless, for exaraple, the assaults of the enemy on an elect were abso
lutely wUled and ordained by God. IMoreover, even the public confes
sions of the reformed occasionally adopt this view, which Calvin here
enforces, of the providential guidance of all things, mitigating, con
siderably, however, this opinion, and evincing a very laudable dread of
stamping on their articles the harsh spirit of Calvin J By the latter,
however, as well as by his disciple Theodore Beza,§ the opinions adverted

A special defence against the charge of fatalism, laid to Calvin's doctrine, was writ
ten by Beza. Abstersio calumniarum, quibus aspersus est Joan. Calvinus a Tille-
mano Heshusio, a Lutheran professor in Heidelberg, p. 208, seq.
* Melanct. hb. c. " Multum enim omnino refert ad premendam damnandamque
humanse rationis tum sapientiam, tum prudentiara, constanter credere, quod a Deo
fiant omnia."
t Calv. Instit. rel. Christ, lib. i. c. 17, § 3. Tet Luther, in this matter, had pre
pared the way for him with some hhits. Luther, de servo arbitrio. Opp. tom. iii.
foi. 171. b. " Ultra dice, non modo quam ista sint vera, de quo infra latius ex scrip
turis dicetur, verum etiam, quam religiosum, pium, et necessarium sit, ea nosse ; his
enim ignoratis, neque fides, neque uUus Dei cultus consistere potest. Nam hoc esset
vere Deum ignorare, cum qua ignorantiSl salus stare nequit, ut notum est- Si enim
dubitas, aut contemnis nosse, quod Deus omnia, non contingenter, sed necessario et
immutabiliter praesciat et velit, quomodo poteris ejus promissionibus credere, certo
fidere, ac niti ? Cum enim promittit, certum oportet te esse, quod sciat, possit et
veUt praestare, quod promittit ; alloqui eum non veracem, nee fidelem aestimabis, quse
est increduhtas ct summa impietas et negatio Dei altissimi."
X Confess. Belgic. u. xiii. in Augusti. Corp. hbror. symbol, eccles. reform, p.
177, seq.
§ Theod. Bezoe qusstionum et respons. christian, lib. ed. 4to. 1573, p. 105. (N. B.
Place where printed is not named.) " Qu£so, expone, quid providentiam appellas ?
Resp. Sic appello non iUam modo vun inenarribilem, qua. fit, ut Deus omnia ab

1'26 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
to, respecting divine providence, were held with such tenacity, and carried
out with such consistency, that they found it a matter of extreme diffi-
culty to convince the world, nay, in despite of aU their eloquence and
dialectic art, they utterly failed to convince very many, that they did
not in fact refer all evil to God. We are bound to enter more fully into
the investigation of this subject.
5 IV. — On the cause of moral cvU.
In all the more important doctrinal manuals and polemical writings
of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries — in tho works of Bellarmine,
Becanus, Chemnitz, Gerhard, and others, nay, even in several pubhc
confessions, the reader meets with a special and copious chapter, bearing
the title of the present section. As, in the second and third centuries of
the Church, no writer could enlarge on the religious concerns of his
times without entering upon the question, " whence is evil ;" so the
same question was now again most aii-xiously investigated ; and it soon
became apparent that the opposition between Catholicism and Protest
antism could not be duly appreciated, and that the inmost essence of
the latter would remain eternally misconceived, if the different replies
which had been made to that question, were not well considered.
]N'o subject in tho first times of the Reformation so embittered the
Catholics against the authors of that revolution, as their doctrine
respecting the relation wherein the Deity stands to raoral evil. It was
precisely on this account the Catholic Church laid down again, with so
much earnestness and emphatic energy, the proposition, that raan was
created with the endowment of freedora, in order that, without any
restriction, and without subterfuge, the guilt of evil in the world raight
fall on the head of man. For fhe denial of free will on the part of Lu
ther, Melancthon. ZTvingle, and Calvin, was calculated to excite an
apprehension, that, in consequence thereof, the Catholic doctine of
God's perfect sanctity, to whora sin is an abomination, would be
thrown into the shade ; and, on the other hand, that even the most
vicious man would be thus sheltered from all responsibility. And, in
fact, ^lelancthon, in his commentary on the epistle to the Romans, in
the edition of the year 1525, had the hardihood to assert, that God
wrought aU things, evil as well as good ; that He was the author of Da
vid's adultery, and the treason of Judas, as well as of Paul's conversion

aetemo prospexerit, omnibusque futuris sapientissime providerit, sed imprimis decre
tum illud aeternum Dei sapientissirai simul et potentissimi, ex quo quicquid fuit,
fuit ; quicquid est, est ; et quicquid futurum est, erit, prout ipsi ab aetemo decemere
libuit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 127
Now, howsoever strange and prejudiced" a notion an individual may
have formed of the errors pf the Catholic Church, we ask hira, would
he dare to assert, that all these errors put together can outweigh the
single enormity here uttered by Melancthon? And yet Chemnitz, to
whom we are indebted for the original passages in question (for in the
later editions of Melancthon's aforesaid work they have disappeared) — ¦
Chemnitz, as we say, excuses his teacher, Melancthon. And how does he
excuse him ? In so complicated a matter, he says, among other things, all
in the beginning could not be systematically and properly treated, more
especially as, on the part of Catholics, the doctrine of free-will had been
exaggerated.* Just as if the question " whence is evil ?" had only in
the sixteenth century first excited attention ; — just as if holy writ left
us all in doubt how that question was to be answered ; — just as if in
the second and third centuries the question had not been really settled
by the Church ! However, in this raatter, Melancthon merely spoke
after Luther, as the writing of the latter against Erasmus wUl show.
But it was Melancthon's assertion the CouncU of Trent had in view,
when it anathematized the proposition, that God works evU as well as
good, and that it is not in the power of man to abstain from wick
edness, f
In proportion, however, as the notions which the Saxon Reformers,
especially Melancthon, had entertained respecting free-will, became
purer, they abandoned the opinion that God was the author of evil ; and
the last-named writer had even the courage to revoke in the Augsburg
confession his former doctrine.:]: The later formularies of the Lu
therans are in perfect accordance with this amelioration in opinion. &
* Martin. Chemnit. loc. theol. ed. Leyser. 1615. P. i. p, 173. The words of Me
lancthon are : " Hsec sit certa sententia a Deo fieri omnia, tara bona, quam mala
Nos dicimus, non solum permittere Deum creaturis, ut operentur, sed ipsum omnia
proprie agere, ut sicut fatentur, propriam Dei opus fuisse Pauli vocationem, ita fate-
antur, opera Dei propria esse, sive quae media vocantur, ut comedere, sive quae mala
sunt, ut Davidus adulterium ; constat enim Deum omnia facere, non permissive, sed
potenter, i. e. ut sit ejus proprium epus Judffi proditio, sicut Pauli vocatio."
t Sess. vi. Can. vi. " Si quis dixerit, non esse in potestate hominis, vias suas ma-
las facere, sed mala opera ita ut bona Deum operari, non permissive solum, sed etiam
proprie et per se, adeo ut sit proprium ejus opus non minus proditio Judae, quam voca
tio Pauli, anathema sit."
} Art. xix. p. 81. " De causa peccati decent, quod tametsi Deus creat et con-
servat naturam, tamen causa peccati est voluntas melorum, videlicet diaboli et im.
piorum, qua, non adjuvante Deo, avertit se a Deo, sicut Christus ait (Joan. viii. 44 :)
cum loquitur mendacium, ex ipso loquitur."
§ Solid, declar. i. § 5, p 613. " Hoc extra eontroversiam est positum, quod Deus
non sit causa, creator, vel auctor peccati, sed quod opera, et raachinationibus sata
nae, per unum hominem (quod est diaboU) m mundum sit introduotum."

128 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
But it was quite otherwise with the Swiss Reformers, who remained
obstinately addicted to their errors. The importance of the subject
calls upon us to describe at greater length the nature of their opinions.
In his w riting on Providence, addressed to the Landgrave Philip of
Hesse (anno 1530,) Zwingle asserts, that God is the author, mover, and
impeller to sin ; that also He makes the sinner : that by the instru
mentality of the creature He produces injustice and the like.* In
numberless places Calvin uses the expression, man, at the instigation
of God, doeth what it is unlawful to do ; by a mysterious divine inspi
ration, the heart of man turneth to evil ; man falleth because the provi
dence of God so ordaineth.f If these principles fill us with just
detestation, they were pushed still further by Theodore Beza ; although
what he brought forward w as only deduction, and indeed a necessary
deduction, from the doctrines just adduced. This leader of the
Reforraed, after Calvin's death, is not satisfied with repeating, that God
incites, impels, and urges to evil ; but he even adds, that the Almighty
creates a portion of men as His instruments, w'llli the intent of working
evil through them. J
The reasoning atterapted in support of these notions is quite of
a character with thera. In order to shew that God, although he urge

* Zvvuigli de providentia, c. vi. Opp. tom. i. (without date or place) foi. 365, b. —
" Unura igitur atque idcra facinus, puta adulterium aut homicidium, quantum Dei
auctoris, motoris, impulsoris opus est, crimen non est, quantum .autem hominis est,
crimen ac soclus est." foi. 366, a. "Cum movet (Deus) ad opus aliquod, quod perfi.
cicnti instruraento fraudl est, sibi tamen non est, ipse emm libcre movct, neque instru-
mento facit injuriara, cura crania sint raagis sua, quam cujusque artificis sua instru-
menta, quibus non facit injuriara, si nunc limam in malleum, ct contra mallcura in
limam convcrtat. Movet ergo lati'oncm adoccidendum innocentem, etiamsi impara-
tura ad mortem."
t Calvin institut- lib. iv. c. 18, § 2. " Homo justo Dei impulsu agit quod sibi non
licet." Lib. iii. c. 23, § 8. "Cadit igitur homo, Dei providentia sic ordinante."
With this proposition Calvin found himself in a singular situation. On one hand, he
held the maintenance of it as theoretically necessary, and practically useful ; and,
on the other, he was extremely incensed if any attempted to deduce from it tho con
sequences which it involved. I have scarcely ever read any work clothed in coarser
language, than the reply which Calvin made to an anonymous, but very learned, theo
logian, who in fourteen theses had condensed all contained in the doctrine of Calvin
respecting the origin of evil, and then fumished copious illustrations on each article.
We find the writing and the reply in " Calumniae nebulonis cujusdam, etc. Joannis
Calvini ad easdem responsio." Genev. 1558. Calvin concludes his reply with
these words : " Corapescat te Deus, Satan. Araen."
X Beza Aphorism, xxii. " Sic autem agit (Deus) per ilia instramenta, ut non
tantum sinat ilia agere, nee tantum moderetur eventum, sed etiam incitet, impcUat,
moveat, regat, atque adeo, quod omnium est maximum, et creat, ut per ilia agat,
quod constituit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS; 129
to wicked actions, doth nevertheless not sin, but only man, Zwingle
observes : God, as the just one, is subject to no law ; for it is written,
the law is not given for the just ! Thus, should' God make an angel
or a raan transgress the law [cum transgressorum facit,) He himself doth
not transgress it ; but the creatures, whom the law oppresses and
accuses.* A more pitiable train of reasoning it would be impossible
to invent, whether we consider the notion which Zwingle here gives of
the just man, (for, according to the meaning of the passage in St. Paul
adverted to, the just man is in himself the living moral law, and there
fore does not stand in a mere extraneous relation to its precepts, but
bears them in himself and constantly fulfils them,) or, whether we look
to the essence of the Deity, from whose wisdom and holiness the moral
law is only an emanation, and which in pure and eternal glory He
realizes ; or, whether, lastly, we contemplate the moral law in itself
alone, which Zwingle, however much he may incidentally exalt it, treats
as an arbitrary, and merely positive code.f
The Reforraer of Zurich completely destroys the objectiveness of
evil, and has not a perception of a holy moral government of the world,
even in those passages where he seems to speak in such a sense. For
these reasons he did not perceive, that, if God were to impel to the
transgression of a moral law given by Himself, He would then be in
contradiction with Hiraself, and would violate His own nature, and not
merely an outward rule ; that is to say, the Reformer did not see that
his theory destroyed the Very notion of the Deity. The injurious
* Zwingl. de providentia, c. v. " Cura igitur Angelum transgressorum facit et
hominum," etc. c. vi. foi. 365, b. " Quantum enun Deus facit, non est peccatum.
quia non est contra legem ; illi enim non est lex posita, utpote justo, nam justis
non ponitur lex, juxta Pauli sententiam. Unum igitur atque idem facinus, puta
adulterium aut homicidium, quantum Dei auctoris, motoris, ac impulsoris, .ipus est,
crimen non est, quantum autem hominis est, crimen est ac scelus est. Ille enim
lege non tenetur, hie autem lege etiam damnatur."
t ZwingU de provid. u. v. lib. i. p. 364, b. "Duobus eiemphs id fiet luculentius.
Habet pater familia3 leges quasdam domesticas.quibus liberos a deliciis ac desidia avocet.
Lecythum mellis qui tetigerit, vapulato : calceum qui non recte induxerit, aut induc-
tum passim exuerit ac dimiserit discalceatus incedito — et similes. Jam si mater
familiae, aut audulti liberi rael non tantum attrectaverint, sed etiam insumpserint,
non continuo vapulant, non enim tenenttu: lege. Sed pueri vapulant, si tetigerint,
illis enim data est lex. Taurus si totum armentum ineat et impleat, laudi est. He
ms tauri, si unam modo prKtor uxorum agnoscat, reus fit adulterii. Causa est,
quia, huic lex est posita, ne adulterium admlttat ; ilium nulla, lex coercet. Ut bre-
viter, verissime, sicut omnia, Paulus summam hujus fundamenti pronuntiaverit, ubi
non est lex, ibi non est prajvaricatio. Deo, velut patri familiae, non est lex posita,
idcirco nee peccat, dum hoc ipsum agit in homine, quod homini peccatum esti, »bi
vero uon est."

130 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
influence of this doctrine on the public morality is evident of itself, and
was strongly represented to Calvin.*
Zwingle still endeavours to justify his unhappy doctrine by tho pre
tence, that God is ever guided by pure intentions, f'liat consequently
the end sanctifies the moans, and, in a somewhat strange connexion
with this matter, he adds, that David's adultery, whereof God was tho
author, could as Uttle convict God of a bad action, as when a bull im.
pregnates a whole herd of cows.f Here he only overlooks the circum-
stance, that raan is no more a cow, than God is a bull ; that, accord
ingly, if man had been instigated by God to adultery, this could not
occur without a violntion of man's moral nature, and consequently the
guilt would revert to God. , Zwingle's conception, more ncarl)' examin
ed, consists herein, that God wrought on the sensuality of David, which
by its power overmastered his will ; that, in consequence, God, perform
ed only the outward work indifferent in itself, and not the evil in it, —
the work, which, in the nuptial union as well as in adultery, is identical.
But how could he distinguish between the temptations of Satan, and
such an agency as here described ?
Reverting to the observation which Zwingle deemed calculated to
justify the Deity, that, in alluring to bad actions, God had good objects
in view, it raust be said that this notion was shared by Calvin nnd Beza ;
though, by the latter, it was put forth with more acuteness. Hence it
will be our duty to state the opinions of these two Reformers. Calvin
admits, that the opinion, according to which God determines raan to
moral corruption and impels him to sin, is not compatible with the
known wiU of the Deity. Hence, like Luther, in his book against
Erasraus, he has recourse to a hidden will of God, whereby His raode
of proceeding is indeed very just, though its equity be not obvious to our
perception.:]: If this be the ordinary way wherein Calvin in his Insti-

*Calurani:e nebul. Calv. rcsp. p. 19. "Hrcc sunt, Calvrae, qU!E adversarii tui de
doctrina tui perhibent, adraonentque homines, ut de doctrina ista ex fructu judicent.
Dicunt autem te et tuos diseipulos ferre multos fiuetus Dei tui : esse enim plerosque
litigatores, vindictae cupidos, injurite tenaces et meraorcs, cteterisque vitiis, qute
Deus suggerit, praeditos  Jam vero doctrinft Christi qui credebant, reddebantur
meliores, sed tui doctrina, aiunt homines manifcste fieri deteriores. Prieterea quum
dicitis, vos habere sanam doctrinam, respondent, non esse vobis credondum. Si enun
Deus vester sojpissime aliud cogitat et vult, metuendum esse, ne vos, Deum vestrura
imitantes, idem facialis, atque homines decipiatis."
+ L. t. " Quod Deus facit, libere facit, alienus ab omni affectu noxio, igitur et abs.
que peccato, ut adulterium David, quod ad auctorem Deum pertinet, non magis Deo
sit peccatum, quara cum taurus totum armentura inscendit et implet." What a com
parison ! !
X Calvin. Institut. lib. ni. e. 23, § 9. "Nos vero inde negamus, rite excusari

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 131
tutions seeks to defend himself, in his instruction against the so. called
libertines, who, evidently induced by his own and Zwingle's writings,
had denied the distinction between good and evil, and placed redemption
in the knowledge, obtained through Christ, that no distinction exists
between the two, he still labours to show the great difference existing
between the act of God, and the act of the impious, in one and tho same
deed. So he says, God works to exercise justice, while the wicked
man is actuated by avarice, covetousness, &c.* God, for instance, insti
gates a raan to raurder, but from no other motive than to punish a crime
coraraitted. We leave it to the judgraent of every one, whether the
employment of such raeans be compatible with the very notion of the
Deity, and how extremely pernicious it would bc, and subversive of al!
huraan raoraUty, were men herein to iraitate the Deity so represented ?
But it is evident that the inquiry must here be carried back as far as
the fall of man, and the question arises, what share is to be allotted to
God in that event,. Calvin never thinks of deducing the fall of Adam
from the abuse of human freedom ; but, on the contrary, in perfect
accordance with his own fundaraental principles, he admits that God
had ordained the fall, and by an eternal decree brought it about.')"

(homines,) quandoquidem Dei ordinationi, qua se exitio destinatos queruntur, sua
constet equitaa, nobis quidem incognita, sed illi certissima."
* Calvin instructio advers. libertines, c. 14 (in Joan. Calvini opuscula omnia in
unum vol. coUecta. Genev. 1552, p. 52S.) "Altera exceptio, cujus infelices isti
nullam habent rationem, ha3c est, — magnam esse differentiam inter opus Pei, et opus
impii, cum eo Deus vice instruraenti utitur. Impius enim sui avaritia aut ambitione,
aut invidia, aut crudelitate incitatur ad facinus suum, nee alium finem spectat. Ideo
ex radice ilia, id est, ex animi alfectione, et fine, quem spectat, opus qualitatem sumit,
¦et merito malum judicatur. Sed Deus respectum omnino contrariura habet: nempe
ut justitiam exerceat ad conservandos bonos," etc.
Cf de aetema praedest (Opusc. lib. 1. p. 946.) " Turpi quidem et illiberali calumnia
nos gravant, qui Deum peccati auctorem fieri obtendunt, si omnium, qu« aguntur,
causa est ejus voluntas. Nam quod homo injuste perpetrat, vel ambitione," etc. . . .
Beza (in his Quaest. et Respons. lib. i.p. 113,) distinguishes between in aliquo agere,
and per aliquem agere, and accordingly adds, " adjiciendum est, Deum agere quidem
in bonis et per bonos: per malos vero agere, et non in malis." Zwingle raakes use
of the expression in aliquo agere, when speaking of that act of God, whereby He pro
duces evy^ De Provid. c. v. p. 364.
t Calvim Institut. lib. iii. c. 23, § 4. " Nonne ad earn, qua pro damnationis causa
obtenditur, corruptionem, Dei ordinatione prasdestinati ante fuerant ? Cura ergo in
sua corruptione pereant, nihil aliud quam pcenas luunt ejus calamitatis, in quam ejus
prcedestinatione lapsus est Adam, ac posteros praBcipites secum traxit. ^ 7. Disertis
verbis hoc exstare negant (sophists so. papistici,) decretum fuisse a Deo, ut sua defec-
tione periret Adam, quasi vero, etc. § 8. Cadit igitur homo, Dei providentia sic ordi
nante."

132 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
In Beza, we find these monstrous errors pushed to a still furthef
length. The principal points of his reasoning are as follows : God
wished on one hand to show mercy, and on the other to reveal His jus
tice. Adam was created morally just and holy ; for from God's hand
nothing unclean can come forth. But how could God unfold His mer
cies, since the sinner only can be the subject of these? How could He
manifest His justice, if no one committed Wrong, and thereby incurred
punishment ? Hence, for the unfolding of these attributes, the Deity
must prepare a channel which was found in ordaining the fall of the first
man. These divine objects being perfectly just and hqlyy their quality
is transmitted to the means also selected! for their execution.* Here
Beza does not speak of a mere co-operation of fhe Deity in the perform
ance of the mere outward part in an evil action ; for God, whether to
punish or to exercise mercy, has regard to the inward evil sentiment,
since, without this, sin is not possible. It was thus fhe part of the
Deity to caU forth somehow an evil sentiraent, in order to attain His

Beza (Quaest. et Respons. p. 117,) deduces the sin of Adam from a spontaneo motU
voluntatis, that is to say, from a natural impulse, the meaning whereof is, that God
80 formed human nature, that evil could not fail to arise, which He then makes use
offer Hisown ends.
* Beza Absters. calum. Heshus. adv. Calvin. (With (he xftaxft-yia, ^ve Cyclops; in
one volume, Genev. 1561, p. 231 .) " Superest, ut ostendamus, ita decretum esse a
Deo Adami lapsum, ut tamen tota culpa penes Satanann et Adamum resideat. Hoo
autem liquido apparebit, si, quemadmodura paulo ante Calvimia nos monnit, diversa
atque adeo penitns contraria Dei, Satance, et hominis consilia, ac deinde etiam diver-
sos agendi modes consideramus. Quid enim Deo propositum fuit, quum lapsum ho-
minis ordinaret 7 Nerape patefaciendae suae misericordiae in electis gratuito servandis,
itemque justo suo judicio in reproborum damnanda maJitia viam sibi aperire. Nam
nisi sibi et postens suis lapsus esset Adam, nee ulla extaret in hominibus miseria, cujuB
misereretur Deus in filio suo, nee ulla malitia, quam condemnaret ; ac proinde neque
appareret ejus misericordia, neque etiam judicium. Hoc igitur quura molitar et exe-
quitur Dominus, quis euit, uUius injustitia; coarguerit ? Quid autem moliebatur Satan,
quamvis imprudens Dei oonsilio subserviret ? Nempe quia Deum odit, et totus invi.
dia exeestuat, inimicitias serere voluit inter Deum et hominem. Quid antera cogitant
Adamus et Heva, simul atque se dociles Satanae diseipulos prffibuerunt 7 Nempe
Deum ut invidum et mendacem coasrguere, et eo invito sese in illius soHo coUocare."
The outlines of Beza's reasoning may be seen in Zwingle (De Provid. cap. vi. p.
364.) How little, moreover, tbe sound common sense of the Christian, mho, on one
hand, upholds the idea of God's holinesi, and justice, and, on the other hM, clings to
the doctrine of rewards and punishments according to man's works, could be led astray
by such dialectic arts, the anonymous writer al.eadv cited, very Well points out, when
he says : " Equidem favi ego aliquando doctrins tuae, Calvine, eamqile, quamvis non
satis mihi perspicuam, defendi, quod tantum tribuebam anctoritati tuae, ut vel contra
cogitare putarem nefas ; sed nunc auditis adversariorum argumentis, non habio quod
respondeam  Nam tua rationes sunt obscurm, et fere ejusmodi, ut statim, depo-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 133
ends ; that is to say, he must annihilate His sanctity, in order on its
ruins to attain to compassion and justice. Hence, Beza does not deny
that the first man, when he sinned, succumbed under an invincible des
tiny ; that it was thus not left to his freedom to abstain from sin. But,
like Luther and Calvin, distinguishing between necessity and compul
sion, he says the latter does not occur in sin ; that on the contrary,
Adam sinned willingly, with an inward pleasure (spontaneo motu, in
opposition To libero and voluntario mot-H,) and although he was not able
to avoid sinning, he did not wish to avoid it ; and it was this very thing
which constituted his criminality.*
It is by these principles, that passages in the Reformed confessions
are to>be estimated. They all assert, that God is not the author of sin,
that is to say, in the sense wherein Zwingle, Calvin, and Beza, attempt
to exculpate the Deity, after having denied man's free will.f

sito de manu libro, excidant ex memoria, neque adversarios convincant. At adversa
riorum argumenta sunt aperta, acria, et qu<B facile memoria mandentur, et ab illite.
ratis, quale^fere erant qui Christum sectahantur, percipiantur, Hinc fit, ut tui dis-
cipuli fere magis authoritate tua nitantur, quam ratione. Et quum adversarios vin
cere non possunt, habent eos pro haritices et pertinacibus, et ab eorum coniartio absti
nent, et omnes ubique monent, ut abstineant." And such doctrines were to be -held
as formal articles of faith !
• Beza Absters. lib. i. " Quaerenda est vitii origo in instrumentorura spontaneo
motu, quo fit ut Deus juste decreverit, quod illi injuste fecerant," etc. A distinction
very famUiar to Beza ! Compare his " Quaesk et Respon*. hb. i. p. 120.
t Confess. Helv. cap ix. (ed. August, p. 19.) " Ergo quoad malum sive peccatum,
homo non coactus vel a Deo, vel a diabolo, sed sua sponte malum fecit, et hac parte
liberrimi est arbitrii, cap. viii. p. 18. Damnamus praeterea Florinum et Blastum,
contra quos et Irenaeus seripsit, ut omnes. qui Deum faciunt auctorem peccati. Con
fess. Gallic, cap. viii. lib. c. p. 1 13. Negamus tamen ilium (Deum) esse autorem
mali, aut eorum, quae perperam fiunt, uUam culpam in ipsum transferri posse, quum
ipsius voliuitas sit summa et certissima omnis justitiae norma. Habet autem ipse admi'
rabiles potius quam explicabiles rationes, ex quibus sic utitur diabolis omnibus et pec-
eantibus hominibus, tanquam instrumentis, ut quicquid illi male agunt, id ipse sicut
juste ordinavit, sic etiam in bonum convcrtat." The Belgic Confession (cap. xiii. lib'
o. p. 177; speaks in the same way.

134 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFEREXCKS

CHAPTER n.

O?. OKIGINAL SIN -'^^"D ITS COiSSEdUENCES.

^ V. — The Catholic doctrine of original sin.
It is one of fhe most remarkable phenomena in the history of the reli
gious controversies of the last three centuries, that the Reformers,
according to whose principles Adam in his fall only succumbed under a
sentence of irresistible necessity pronounced upon hira, should have re
presented the Deity as kindling into so fearful a wrath, and inflicting
so frightful a chastisement for this act of the first raan, which, accord
ing to their own views, should be called rather his pure misfortune. It
is no easy task to explain how ideas so unconnected should Jiave been
associated in one and the same head. When we just now used the
comprehensive word " Reformers," we did so advisedly ; for even Lu
ther and Melancthon had both completely framed their theory of origi
nal sin, when they were entangled in those opinions described in the
preceding section, — opinions which Zwingle and Calvin only took up,
and further developed. How could Adam be the subject of such fear
ful wrath, if he did only what he was obliged to do ; if he perpetrated
only what he could not avoid?* Hence arises a conception of original
sin on tho part of Protestants, which is in almost every respect (we trust
we may be pardoned the expression,) devoid of sense and reason. By
the most exaggerated description of the effects of Adam's fall, they
seem anxious to resuscitate the feeUng of sin, and the consciousness of
guilt, which, by their view of God's relation to evil, they were on the
point of utterly destroying. And yet they only aggravate the matter,
as will appear in the course of the present chapter, which must, however,
in the first instance, be devoted to an examination of tho principles laid
down by the Council of Trent.
The doctrine of the Catholic Church on original sin is extremely

* Calvin (Instit. hb. iii. cap. i. see. 4, foi. 77) very well enlarges on the magnitude
of Adam's sin ; but his whole description makes no impression, so soon as we remem
ber the author's assertion, that Adara must needs sin. He shows acutely enough the
unbehef, ingratitude, and pride of Adara ; but it is only a pity that our first parent was
obliged to lose faith, gratitude, and humility. *

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 136
simple, and may be reduced to the following propositions. Adam, by
sin, lost his original justice and holiness, drew down on hiraself by his
disobedience the displeasure and the judgments of the Almighty, incur
red the penalty of death, and thus, in all his partSj in his body as well
as soul, became strangely deteriorated.* This his sinful condition is
transmitted to all his posterity, as descended from him, entailing the
consequence that man is of himself incapable, even with the aid of the
most perfect ethical law offered to him from Avithout (n6t excepting
even the one revealed in the Old Covenant,) to act in a manner agree
able to God, or in any other way to be justified bffore Him, save only
by the merits of Jesus Christ, the sole mediator betwixt God and man.']"
If to this we add, that the fathers of Trent attribute to fallen man free-
wUl, representing it, however, as very much weakened, | and in conse
quence teach, that not every religious and moral action of man is neces
sarily sinful, although it be never, in itself and by itself, acceptable to
God, nor anywise perfect,^ we then have stated all, which is to be held
as strictly the doctrine of the Church. That, moreover, fallen man
still bears the image of God, (section 1,) necessarily follows from what
has been advanced. 11

* Concil. Trid. sess. v. decret. de peccat. orig. " Si quis non confitetur primum
hominem Adara, cum mandatum Dei in paradiso fuisset transgressus, statim sancti
tatem et justitiam, in qua constitutus fuerat, amisisse, ineurrissequeperoffensamprEB-
varicationis hujusmodi iram et indignationem Dei, atquerdeo mortem  totumque
Adam  secundum corpus et animam in deterius corarautatum fuisse, anathema
sit." t Loc. cit. " Si quis hoc Adas peccatum, quod origine unum est, et propagatione,
no nimitatione, transfusum omnibus, inest unicuique propriura, vel per humanae naturae
vires, vel per aliud reraedium asscrit toUi, quam per meritum unius mediatoris Domini
nostri Jesu Christi, qui nos Deo reconciliavit sanguine suo, factus nobis justitia, sanc-
tificatio, et redemptio, anathema sit."
X Concil. Trid. sess. vi. cap. v. " Si quis liberum hominis arbitrium post Adse pec
catum amissum et extinctum esse dixerit, aut rem esse de solo titulo, imo titulura sine
re, figmentum denique a Satana invectum in ecclesiam, anathema sit." Cap. i. :
" Primum declarat sancta synodus, ad justificationis doctrinam probe et sincere intel-
]igendam, oportere, ut unusquisque agnoscat, et fateatur, quod cura omnes homines in
praevaricatione Adee innocentiam perdidissent, factiira mundi, et, ut Apostolus inquit,
natura filii irae,  usque adeo servi erant peccati, et sub potestate diaboh ac mortis,
at non modo gentes per vim nature, sed ne Judasi quidem per ipsam etiam literam
legis iVIoysis, inde liberari, aut surgere possent, tametsi in eis liberum arbitrium mi.
nime extinctum esset, viribus scilicet attenuatum et inchnatum."
§ Loc. cit. vii. " Si quis dixerit, opera omnia quie ante justificationem fiunt, qua-
cumque ratione facta sint, vere esse peccata, vel odium Dei raereri, anathema sit."
II Bellarmin de gratia primi hominis, cap. ii. " Imago ad naturam, similitudo ad
virtutes pertinet ; proinde Adam peccando non imaginem Dei, sed similitudinem per-
didit."

136 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
If, in reading these decrees of the Council of Trent, wc call to raind
all those questions, which, since the rise of the Pelagian heresy,
and even much earlier, were, on the matter at issue, proposed to scien
tific investigation, we shall not fail to observe, that the assembled fathers
found it expedient in their decision not to touch upon a considerable
number of these questions, and to express themselves in regard to them
with a certain generality. We say, in regard to these questions ; for,
on the matter itself, considered according to Scripture and ecclesiastical
tradition, the council has pronounced very definite and full declarations.
But, as in this doctrine the Lutherans were driven to the most perni-
cious exaggerations ; and as, in the first years of the Reformation, some
Catholic theologians, — for example, Albertus Righius, (as is often the
case in the refutation of extreme opinions) approximated to the opposite
extreme ;* the decrees of Trent were received with feelings of very
great prejudice by the Protestants, who, in their rash vehemence,
charged them with Pelagianism.
As regards the deliberations of Trent, Payva ab Andrada, a Portu
guese theologian who assisted at tbem, informs us, in the third book of
his defence of the councU, that it purposely abstained from any minuter
definitions. And Pallavicini says, that the council has expressed itself
more negatively, yet with such distinctness, that the errors on this mat
ter then current were, as such, clearly and distinctly rejected. If the
Church, he continues, ie unable to give any accurate definition of ori
ginal sin, it is sufficient for her to denote what original sin is not ; and
this she can do with as much propriety as one, who, having no clear
notion of heaven, could stUl assert with confidence, that it was not com
posed of Unen adorned with gold-paper ! The same celebrated histo
rian also relates, that the papal legates reminded the assembled fathers
not to decide on the nature of original sin itself, because Scripture and
tradition are silent upon this matter ; and he adds, the holy synod was
not convoked to pronounce upon opinions, but to condemn errors. We
shall soon be enabled to see the great propriety of this judgment of
Pallavicini's.f * To this Chemnitius (Exam. Concil. Trid. ed. Francof. 1599, Pt. i p. 168)
refers, when he exclaims : " Ad perpetuam igitur rei memoriam notum sit toti orbi
Christiano," etc. See also his " Loci Theol." P. i. p. 227. Gerhard loci theolog.
tom iv. p. 518, floe. ix. sec. 58).
+ Loc. cit. p. 248, lib. vii. cap. x. p. 247 : " Hie vero adlnonuerunt (Legati) ne quid
certi statuerent de natura ipsa originalis culpae, de qua sSolastici discordant : nee
enim synodus collecta fuerat ad deeidendas opiniones, sed ad errores recidendos."
Further on, it is said : " Quoties damnantur haeretioi, optimum consilium est, magis
generalia, quippe magis indubitata coraplecti, quod a synodo peractum est. Quoties
in eosdem scriptis agitur, prudentis estimuUam ipsis ansam prieferre transferend? dis-
putationis a. re ipsa, quae certa est, ad mWum, qui est incertus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 137
In order to point out more nearly the points whereon the various
schools were united, and the points about which they were at variance,
we shall lay before our readers a summary statement of the scholastic
views respecting original sin, in so far at least as their relation to the
Protestant errors may require. By showing their agreement, it will
appear, that it was only the most envenomed prejudice which could
venture to charge the schoolraen with a superficial Pelagianisra ; that
is to say, with the denial of original sin, or at least with the misappre
hension of its magnitude. But while We mark the point at which the
schoolmen diverge in opposite directions, we encounter the limit which
a higher hand hath set to the investigations of human science. If their
efforts to extend this boundary have been somewhat unsuccessful, — if
they explain nothing, or much less than they ought, — it would still be
unjust to regard what has been explained as the sole criterion of that
which it was their task to have explained.
" AU who descend from the seed of Adam," says St. Bonaventu-
ra, " have a nature marred not only by punishment, but by guilt.
This is manifest in the want of God's intuitioin, in the ignominy which
weighs upon reason, and in the preponderance of evil desire (c^bupis-
centia). The want of the divine intuition evidently presupposes guilt ;
because no one can be deprived of eternal good, for the enjoyment
whereof he has been created, unless there be in him something which
renders him unworthy of standing in the presence of his God. Ih re
spect to the second, no one need be ashamed of anything which is
the property of his nature ; but is not reason ashamed of certain mo
tions of the flesh 1 This, too, betokens an inherited guilt. The pre
ponderance of evil lust is a raatter of certainty also, because then only
is the soul of man well ordered, when the spirit is in subjection to Gpd,:
and the flesh and animal faculties are in subjection to the spirit.* But
ill-ordered, and therefore perverted, is the soul of man, when its relation
to God and the senses has been inverted. This is now the case ; and
not only doth faith teach so, but philosophy herein concurs. The vio
lence of wicked lust, and the law of the members, which each one hath

• From this it is clear, in what estimation we should hold the objection made to the
divines before the Reformation, that they merely admitted the soul to have fallen into
disorder, in consequence of original sm. Such was the reply made to the following
passage cited by me from Duns Scotus. " Deordinat autem peccatum originale totam
animam ; ergo si est aliqua una culpa, in ilia potentia est, ad cujus deordinationem
tota anima deordinatur. Ilia sola est voluntas : quia ipsa ordinata ordinat alias, ita
deordinata deordinat." (Lib. ii. Sent. Dist. xxx. q. 2.) To form a right judgment
on this matter, men must understand the usus loquendi of the schoolmen ; but for
this knowledge a study of their writings is requisite.

138 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
frora its birth, holds the spirit captive, and overmasters it. It is thus
undeniable that the soul of each one is from his birth perverted {pcrrrr-
sa) ; but if the right state of the soul be justice, its perverted state is
guilt ; and as we are perverted from our birth, we bear about with us
from our birth the stain of guilt. Of this no one doubts, except he who
is ignorant of the power of evil desire, and doth not know in what way
the rational spirit should be obedientunto God. For it is acknowledged,
that, unless our spirit love God above all things, and for His own sake,
it is not perfectly obedient unto Him. It is also acknowledged, that
without the gift of grace, no one in the state of corrupt nature loveth
God above all things, and for His own sake ; nay, he is necessarily
overcome by the force of wicked lust, so as to be more enamoured of
himself and of sorae apparent good. Thus is every soul from its birth
a sinner, because perverted and disordered. -Vnd hence the apostle,
speaking in the person of fallen humanity, saith : " I see another law
in ray merabers, which striveth against the law of the spirit, and hold
eth me captive under the law of sin." Then he exclaims : '' Unhappy
man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death V
And he replies : " The grace of God through Jesus Christ." Whoever
pays attention to this law in the merabers, and to our false relation to
Go(i, will certainly not deny that man from his birth is sinful ; nay, he
wUl clearly see that it is impossible to doubt the existence of original,
any more than of actual, sin. If phUosophers and some heretics have
not acknowledged this, it is- because they had no notion of the recti
tude of the soul, of justice, nor how much the soul should turn to God.
Thus all human nature is given up to corruption ; and not only because
it has incurred a penalty, but because it is in fact sinful."* " Original
sin," adds this great teacher of the Church, " may be described as the
want of original justice, whereby the perversity of nature and evU con
cupiscence hath arisen."
Let us hear now St. Thomas Aquinas, the head of another great
school in the middle age. He thus enlarges on the subject of original
sin. " As between things opposite, there is an opposite relation, so
from original justice its opposite, original sin, may be explained. But
the whole order of original justice consisted therein, that the wiU of
man was obedient to God, — an obedience which in an eminent degree
was practised by the will ; for it is the province of. the wiU to direct aU
other parts of the soul, in conformity to this its highest destination.
Hence, when the wiU foU away from God, disorder in all other faculties
* J. Bonavent. ad lib, ii. Sent. dist. xxx. q. 11, art. 1, Op. Lugd. 1668, t. vi. P. xi.
p. 373.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 139
of the soul ensued. Thus, in original sin the deprivation of original
jusfice is the formal part, that is to say, the causal, determining, and
essential part ; but every other disorder in the faculties of the soul is the
material part of original sin, that is to say, the thing determined, — the
consequence, — the manifestation of the essence. The disorder of the
other powers of the soul shows itself in the perverted affection to tran
sitory good, — a disorder which may be denoted by the well-known ex
pression, wicked desire, concupiscentia. Thus in its essence (forma,)
original sin is the want of original justice ; in its manifestation (materia)
it is evil desire."*
In another place he says : " All the faculties of the soul have been,
to a certain degree, displaced frora their proper direction and destina
tion, — a displaceraent which is called the wound of nature. But there
are four powers of the soul, which can become the conduits of virtue —
namely, reason, wherein is recognition ; the wUl, wherein is justice ;
the faculty of exertion, wherein is courage ; the faculty of desire,
wherein is temperance. In so far as reason has been diverted from its
bearing towards truth, has arisen the wound of ignorance ; inasmuch
as the will has been diverted from its bearing towards good, has arisen
the wound of wickedness ; inasmuch as the faculty of exertion has been
diverted from its bearing towards the arduous, has arisen the wound of
frailty ; lastly, inasmuch as the faculty of desire has been diverted from
its course, as directed by reason, towards the term of pleasure, has
arisen concupiscence. "¦("
As original sin was represented by Bonaventura in the more practical
tone of eloquent complaint, and by Thomas, with more scientific accu
racy, and subtlety of distinction ; so we find the sarae generally ex
pounded in the ecclesiastical schools prior to the period of the apostacy
from the Church ; so that any one who judges the matter with sobriety,
and with competent knowledge, will be utterly unable to discover in
them any, even the slightest, traces of Pelagianism.
If we turn now to the differences of opinion which divide the school
men, the most important will be found to consist in the representation
of the mode wherein the sin of Adam was transmitted to his descend
ants. It raust be especially observed, that, for very weighty reasons,
the schoolmen rejected as erroneous the opinion that souls were trans
mitted through generation by the parents to their children (tradueianis-
mus) ; and on the other hand, held as alone true and orthodox, the doc-

* Thom. Aquin. I. P. ii. q. 82, art iv. The words " forma" and " materia" can
not always be rendered into our language in the same way.
t Thom. Aquin, hb. i. q. 85, art, iii.

140 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
trine that souls are ever created by God (creatianismus). If, according
to the first view, the transmission of original sin (from the principle,
that like comes of its like, and so that a sinner will beget a sinner) is
apparently easy to explain ; so, on the other hand, the doctrine of the
successive creation of souls offers at the first view great difficulties, in
the scientific treatment of the article of belief, which now engages our
attention. For what happens to the soul created by God, and created
in all soundness, purity, and integrity, that, at the moment of its union
with the body, it should be deprived not only of all supernatural giftsj'
but so deeply wounded in all its natural faculties, and placed in so fear
fully incongruous a relation to the Deity ?
The teachers of science have at all times found it a matter of diffi
culty to acknowledge their ignorance. The expectation of scholars, to
be able to comprehend every thing, is met by the presumptuous confi
dence of teachers to make all things comprehensible. The proposition
is indeed defended, that in the true religion there must be mysteries, —
there must be things incomprehensible. But instead thereof, it should
be broadly maintained, that for us, in our present condition, the true re
ligion is itself a mystery, — that it is the mystery, and that, in conse
quence, all its particular parts must offer mysteries. Here is the whole
mysterious — therefore its parts ; not this or that only is mysterious, but
all is so.
Yet there is within us an irrepressible longing after comprehension :
it is the same which in its excess leads to the denial of every thing above
comprehension. This very longing to comprehend, like the fact, that
we are surrounded by incomprehensible mysteries, points to the distrac
tion which has convulsed our nature, to the wound inflicted on our rea
son, — to a lost intuition, and, in so far, to an unhappy past. Yet it be
tokens, too, a happy futurity — an intuition for which we are destined,
which beams upon us frora afar, and for which, even in this Ufe, we
seek sorae sort of compensation. This desire to comprehend, is a
meagre vital sign of a yet extant, but deeply concealed, germ of future
intuition, and a warranty, that that intuition will be one day imparted
to us. So a well-regulated development ought not to be refused to this
inborn desire. But full satisfaction here below, we may rest assured,
it neither finds nor coramunicates. ShaU then this very effort after
comprehension, which is so closely connected with the original convul
sion of our nature — with the night which has since spread over our
spirit, be crowned with success in the attempt to dispel this darkness ?
We may be permitted to entertain a doubt. Who comprehends evil in
itself? Whose eye has ever penetrated into the deep connexion be
tween moral and physical evil ? Who has ever explored the mysterious

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTBSTaNTS. 141
ties which unite the soul and the body ? Who knows the sexual rela
tions, and comprehends what is life, and the generation of life ?
Some schoolmen taught, that, by the fall of Adam, a destructive and
infectious quaUty Was introduced into the human body j and that this
quality, propagated by generation, contaminated the soul at the moment
of its Union with the body, debased it, and communicated to it the dis
order of the body. But even overlooking the fact, that the rise of a
positive bad quality is itself an enigma, nay, is utterly inconceivable ;
still this theory takes a very material view of eVil. And although it
may appear to offer some satisfactory explanations as to bodily diseases,
and as to death ; yet in the spiritual region it is utterly unavailing.
How could the infusion of such a corporeal poison convey to the soul
the germs of all which, in the most comprehensive sense, constitutes
self-seeking-^^to wit, revolt against God,— arrogance and envy towards
our feUow men,— -vanity and complacency in regard to ourselves? If
so disordered a spiritual condition, if so distempered a moral state could
be engendered by the connexion of the soul with the body, it would be
then certainly very difficult to uphold the notion of moral evil.
This theory Was in consequence rejected by most of the schoolmen ;
and, instead of this, another Was adopted, naraely, that, with the excep
tion of his heritage of guilt, faUen man is born exactly like Adam, when
considered without his supernatural graces,— that is to say, with all the
natural faculties, powers, and properties of the paradisaic man, as well
as without any quality, evil in itself. The conflict between reason and
sensuality is caused by the two very heterogeneous essences, whereof
man is composed ; and therefore, without the divine principle imparted
to him, which held the inferior in subjection to the superior part,
Adam would have gradually felt this combat within him (vide section i,)
and indeed without incurring thereby the guilt of sin ; for it is the na
ture of sensuality to be irrational. The conflict we speak of, would
have been a natural event. The evil of that corrupt condition, wherein
man is now born, consists in the fact, that, in Adam, he has deserved
to be deprived of the justice conferred by supernatural grace ; that is to
say, to feel the rebellion of the flesh against the spirit. What nature,
without supernatural grace, would have been, is now, in consequence of
the self-incurred loss of that divine gift, the penalty of aU born of Adam.*

* Bellarmin de gr. primi hom. Cap. v. " Nos vero existimamus rectitudinem illam
etiam partis inferioris fuisse donum supernaturale, et quidera per se, non per accidens,
ita ut neque in naturae prmcipiis fluxerit, neque potUerit fluere. Et quia donum illud
supernaturale erat, ut statim probaturi sumus, eo remote natura humana, sibi reliota,
puguam illam experiri coepit partis inferioris cum superiori, quae naturalis futura

1-12 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
But as this theory doth not explain, and is unable to cxjilain, the per
versity of the will, wherewith wc are born, it also is insuflicient. It
speaks only of a conflict between tho sensual and the rational principle,
which without the Divine aid would have arisen as a natural occur
rence. But the question before every other is, to account for the
wounds of the spirit, especially for the perversity of the will. Would
the spirit of raan, because it is an essence distinct from God, when con
sidered in itself, — that is to sny, as void of the gift of supernatural
grace, and as a bare finite being, be found in that attitude of opposition
to God, nnd all things holy, wherein man is now born? Then man, as
a finite being, would be of himself disposed to sin, and would not be so
merely through abuse of his freedom. The supernatural, divine prin
ciple, can certainly not be destined merely to remove that inclination
to opposition against his Creator existing in man as a creature, or rather
only to prevent its outbreakings. It is not by the nlisence of this super
natural grace, without which all are now born, that man is perverted in
his will ; he may become so, and doubtless easily, but he is not yet so at
the moment of his creation.
The inadequacy of this theory, to an explanation of tho subject, has
given rise to many objections against the Catholic doctrine of original
sin. Mon went on the supposition suggested by excited passions, that
Catholic theologians would admit as notions of original sin, only what
was really explained by the above-stated theory. Instead of accusing
the weakness of speculation, the}' impeached the principle itself.*
§ VI. — Doctrine of the Lutherans respecting original sin.
The Augsburg confession expresses itself in the following manner re
specting original sin. " They (the Protestants) teach, that, after
Adam's fall, all men, who are engendered according to nature, are born
in sin, — that is to say, without fear of God, without confidence in Him,

erat, id est, ex conditione materiae secutura, nisi Deusjustitiffi donum homini addidlfl-
set. Quare non magis differt status hominis post lapsura Adae a statu ejusdem in
puris naturalibus, quam differat spoliatus a nudo, neque dcterior est humana natura,
si culpam originalem detrahas, neque magis ignorantia. et infirmitate laborat, quam
esset et laboraret in puris naturalibis eondita. Proinde corruptio natura; non ex alieu
jus doni naturalis carentia, neque ex alieujus malae qualitatis accessu, sed ex sola
doni supernaturalis ob Ada; peccatum amissione profluxit."
* Even Bellarmine, who defends, with great acuteness and subtlety, the last-stated
opinion, says of original sm :
" Omnibus imputatur (peccatum Ads) qui ex Adamo nascuntur, quia omnes in
lumbis Adami existentes, in eo, et per eum, peccavimus, cum ipse peccavit. . . Prffl-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 143
and with concupiscence."* This article describes original sin as some
thing at once privative and positive ; as the deprivation of good, and
the establishment of evil. It is our duty, in the first instance, to deter
mine more accurately the nature of the good withdrawn. The Catho
Uc theologians at the Diet of Augsburg, Eck, Wimpina, and Cochlaeus,
who had prepared a refutation of the Lutheran confession there read,
remarked in their essay, that the description of original sin, " men were
born without fear of God, and without confidence in Him," was very
unfitting and inadmissible ; because the fear of God and confidence in
Him, consisted in a succession of intellectual acts, which not any one
would think of demanding of the unconscious child. Hence, they said,
fhe absence of such acts is by no means to be considered as constituting
a sin in the new-born ; the non-existence of those virtues would esta
blish guilt perpetrated with self-consciousness and with freedom, and
would not, in consequence, denote the essence of original sin, because
man is born therewith, and this sin exists in him prior to all self-con
sciousness. f
The author of the apology saw himself hereby forced to express him
self on this subject with the scientific accuracy to be desired. The ob
scure meaning of the passage he elucidated with the remark, that, by
it, nothing raore was signified, than that man, engendered in the course
of nature, wanted the capacity or fhe gifts for producing the fear of God,
and confidence in Him.:]: Hereby, in fact, the tenet of the Protestants
was stated with the utmost precision ; yet in a manner to be inteUigible
only to one who knew its connexion with other doctrines. The reader
will remember, that, according to the views of Luther and his foUow-

terea dicimus, quemadmodum in Adamo, praeter actum illius peccati, fuit etiam per.
versio voluntatis et obliquitas ex actione relicta, per quam peccator proprie et formali-
tcr dicebatur et erat ... ita quoque in nobis oranibus, cura primum homines esse in-
cipimus, praeter iraputationem inobedientiae Adami, esse etiara sirailem perversionem
et obliquitatem unicuique inhaerentem, per quara peccatores proprie et formaliter dici-
mur." * Confess, August, art. ii. p. 12. " Docent, quod post lapsum Adae omnes ho.
mines, secundum naturam propagati, nascantur cum peccato, hoc est, sine metu Dei,
sine fiducia erga Deum, et oum concupiscentia."
+ Resp. theolog, Cath. ad art. ii. " Declaratio articuli est omnino rejicienda, cum
sit cuilibet Christiano manifestum, esse sine metu Dei, sine fiducia erga Deum, potius
esse culpam actualem, quam noxam infantis reeens nati, qui usu rdtionis adhuc non
poUet." t Apol. ii. sect 2, p. 54. " Hie locus testatur, nos non solum actus, sed et poten.
tiara, seu dona effioiendi timorem et fiduciam erga Deum adimore propagatis secun
dum carnalem naturam,"

144 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
ers, man was originally endowed with only natural powers ; — ^an opi
nion which in the present matter exerts a very important influence.
For as fallen man, as such, is evidently utiable to exercise those virtues,
which were possible to him in his state of original purity ; and as be is
unable to do so, because the powers fail him ; the Reformers saw thera
selves in a situation to put forth the doctrine, that certain natural powers
man no longer possessed.*
But most insight into these lost natural powers is afforded us by the
Formulary of Concord. In the synergistic controversies, which agita-
tated the Lutheran Church, Victorinus Strigel,f (a leader of the hetero
dox party, an acute, well-informed thinker, who was very familiar with
the Catholic points of defence,^ and convinced of the incontrovertible
character of the dogma of free-will,) asserted, that even fallen man pos
sesses at least the faculty, the capacity, the aptitude, to know God, and
to will what is holy ; although this faculty is completely paralized, and,
as it were, benumbed, and is not susceptible of any spontaneous exer
tion. The formulas, which he made use of, are these : fallen man pos.
sesses still the " modum agendi, capacitatem aptitudinem ;'' that is to
say, he stUl at least enjoys, in reference to spiritual things, the empty
form of knowledge and of will, void, though that form be, of all real and
essential purport.^ Although Victorinus considered the consequences

* Luther (in c. iii. Genes.) says, after the above-oited passage, Wherein he rejectn
the doctruie of Catholic theologians respecting the supernatural powers of Adam :
" Haec probant, justitiam esse de natura hominis, eA autem per peccatum amissa, non
mansisse integra naturalia, ut delirant scholastici,"
t See Plank's " History of the Rise, Changes, and Formation of our Protestant
System of Doctrine," (in German) vol. iv. p. 584.
X He was a learned scholar in the old Christian Greek literature, and we are, as ia
well known, indebted to him for some translations from that literature into the Latin
leinguage. But the Greek Church shows only advocates of the doctrine of free-will.
§ Calvin (Instit. hb. ii. sect. 14, foi. 87) gives us the wished.for explanation of the
notion, which, in the sixteenth century, was attached to the word " aptitude." We
may compare with great utihty this passage wilh one in St Thomas Aquinas, (See
Summa tot. theolog. p. i. q. xciii. art. iv. ed. Cass. Lugd. 1580, vol. i. p. 417.) St.
Thomas here inquires, wherefore the spirituality of man constitutes his simihtude to
God ; and he then says, the divine image within us may be considered in a threefold
point of view. " Uno quidera modo secundum quod homo habet aptitudinem naturalem
ad intelligendum et amandum Deum. Et haec aptitude consistit in ipsa natura men
tis, quae est comravmis omnibus hominibus. Alio modo secundum quod homo actu
vel habitu Deum cognoscit et amat," etc. Aptitudo accorduigly signifies, in oppo
sition to actus, the natural disposition, — the faculty, — and here, the moral and reli
gious faculty. See more copious proofs of this in my work, — " New Inquiry," &e. in
reply to Dr. Baur, p. 35, second edition.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 145
of the sin of Adam, in respect to his whole posterity, as of a far more
destructive character, than Catholics, by the decisions of Trent at least,
are immediately bound to regard thera ; still his view did not satisfy
the orthodox party in his own Church. They called him a Pelagian,
and asserted that even that bare faculty of knowledge and will,— that
mere empty form in the soul of man, had been utterly destroyed ; and
here they doubtless spoke quite in the sense of Luther. The formulary
of concord likewise rejected the view of the Synergist, and declared
that fallen man no longer possessed even the mere natural faculty to
understand God and his holy will, and, in conformity to that know
ledge, to direct his own will.* In one word, the faculty of know
ledge and will, inasmuch as it has reference to divine things, or (if we
prefer the expression) the rational aptitude, is denied to the mere natu-
ral man,' — the man as born of Adam. The truth of this mode of con
ceiving the Lutheran doctrine, on original sin, is not done away with,
nay, is confirmed, by the declaration of the Formulary of Concord, that
it was not thereby intended to hold fallen man for an irrational crea-
ture.f For to that faculty of the human mind, which it terras reason,
it assigns raerely the finite world as the sphere of activity ::]: and thereby

* SoUd. declar. ii. de lib. arb. sect. 44, p. 644 : " Eam ob causam etiam non recte
dicitur, hominem in rebus spiritualibus habere modum agendi aliquid, quod sit bonum
et salutare. Cum enim horao ante eonversionem in peccatis mortuus sit, non potest
in ipso aliqua vis ad bene agendum in rebus spiritualibus inesse ; itaque non habet
modum agendi, seu operandi in rebus divinis." I. sect. 21, pp. 616, 617: "Repu-
diantur, qui docent, hominem ex prima sua origine adhuc aliquid boni, quantulum-
cunque etiara et quam exiguum atque tenue id sit, reliquum haiere; capacitatem
videlicet et aptitudinem et vires aliquas in rebus spiritualibus," e^c.
t Solid, declar. ii. de lib. arbitr. sect xvi. p. 633. " Non tamen in eam sententiam
sic loquuntur, quasi horao post lapsum non amplius sit creatura rationalis."
X Solid, declar. i. de peccat. orig. sect. x. p. 614. " In aliis enim extemis et hujus
mundi rebus, qua rationi subjecttB sunt, relictum est hommi adhuc aliquid intellec-
tfis, virium, et facultatum, etsihae etiam raiserae reliquias debiles, et quidem haec ipsa
quantulacunque per raorbura ilium haereditarium infecte sunt atque contaminata, ut
Deus abominetur ea. (Sect. xl. p. 644.) Et verum quidem est, quod homo etiam
ante eonversionem sit creatura rationaUs, quae intellectum et voluntatem habeat : in.
tellectum autem non in rebus divinis ; et voluntatem, non ut aliquid boni et sani ve
lit.'" Victorinus Strigcl, in his commentary ou the Psalms, which appeared in the year
1563, had adduced the following passage from St. Augustine : " Non omnino deletum
est in corde hominis per peccatum, quod ibi per imaginem Dei, cum crearetur, im-
pressum fuerat, neque adeo imago Dei deirita est ilia labe, ui nulla in anima veluti
lineamenta extrema remanserint, remansit enim quod homo non nisi rationalis esse
possit." These words the theologians of Wurtemberg note as reprehensible See
Plank's " History of the rise and changes of the Protestant system of doctrine, (in
German) vol. iv. p. 682. We see ihat Victorinus Strigel attached a different meaning
10

146 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
clearly shows, that, in its opinion, Adam, rejected of God, and all his
descendants, considered merely as such, have no longer preserved any
spiritual aptitude for God and His kingdom.
We arrive at the same result by various ways. The first, presenting
itself to our view, is the following. The Lutheran confessions, as was
proved above, (see section ii.), describe the image of God, as the na
tural capacity in man to know God, to fear Him, and to confide in
Him. But it is precisely this capacity, which wc especially revere as
rationality, — the rational disposition in man. Yet of this veiy divine
image the Lutherans repeatedly assert, that it has been utterly effaced
by original sin, aud thereby plucked from the posterity of Adam.*
Tho seeond course which leads to the above-mentioned result, consists
in the views entertained b} the Lutherans' respecting man's free-will
subsequently to his fall. They hold that he possesses only a certain
external freedom, but none at all in spiritual things ; and that, in re
spect to the latter, he is no more than a stone or a stock (these are
comparisons they frequenti} usc).f In like manner, the Formulary of
Concord observes, that fallen raan can neither think, believe, nor irill,
any thing having reference to divine and spiritual concerns ; that he is
utterly dead to all good, and no longer possesses any, eccn the liatt,
spark of spiritual potj:crs.\ The e.\pros.,ion " spiritual power.s" is here

to the word reason, from that which was attached to it by the Formulary of Concord.
He considered it as the faculty for the apprehension of the supcr-scnpual, as the prin-
ciple of the Divine similitude in man ; for as man appeared to him a being necessa.
rily rational, he apscrtcd, that remains of that faculty had survived his fall. This
view, now, his adversaries rejected, and consequently regarded fallen man as really
irrational, that is lo say, as devoid of every faculty for the apprehension of the super-
mundane. Solid, declar. i. de pecc. or. ^ 9, p. 614, "Docctur, quod peccatum originis sit
horribilis defectus Concreatce in paradiso justitiae originalis, et amissio seu privatio
imaginis Dei "
t Confess. Aug Art. xvm. " De libero arbitrio decent, quod humana voluntas habeat
aliquam libcrtatem ad efiiciendam citilem justitiam, ct diligcndas res rationi subjec-
tas." Here is reason, the higticst faculty in raan that has survived his fall, confined
purely to the finite. Let the reader corapare the Solida Declaratio, ii de lib.
arb. § 21, p. 635, ibidem: " Aniequam homo per Spiritum Sanctum illuminatur.
 ex sese et propriis naturalibus suis viribus, in rebus spiritualibus nihil inchoare,
operari, aut cooperari potest : non ptag, quam lapis, truncus aut limus "
} Sohd. declar. ii. de lib. arb.§ 7, p. 629. •' Credimus igitur, quod hominis nonrcnati
intellectus, cor, et voluntas in rebus spiritualibus et divinis prorsus nihil intelligere,
credere, amplocti, cogitare, vcllc, inchoare, pcrficere, etc., possint. El affirmamus,
hominem ad bonum (vel cogitandum vel faciendum) prorsus corruptum ct raortuum
esse; ita quidera, ut in hominis natur.'i , post lapsum ct ante rcgenerationera, ne scin-
tillula quidem spiritualium virium reliqua sit.
We must remeraber that here the question is only respecting the natural powers of
roan, since, according to the Protestant theory, he had no «!tperno(ura? powers to lose.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 147
constantly employed as synonymous with " the powers of free-will.''
Yet we need no further investigation, for even Plank admits, " Luther
gave to the assertion, that man no longer possesses any will for good,
so extensive a sense, that it would thence follow, that man, corrupted
by original sin, no longer possesses the power of will, that is, the faculty
of will."* Had Plank only added, "and no longer possesses the faculty
<f knowledge for the superabundance'' (for both are included in liberum
arbitrium,) he would then have stated with perfect accuracy the Lu
theran doctrine.^ Thus, according to Lutheran orthodoxy, did man
lose, through Adam's fall (to express ourselves once more with com
prehensive brevity,) the most exalted and most subtle portion of this
spiritual essence, — the part of his substance kindred to divinity, — the
implanted organ for God, and for divine things inherent in his nature ;
so that, after its loss, he sank down into a mere earthly power, having
henceforth organs only for the finite world, its laws, its ordinances, and
its relations.
It is indeed absolutely inconceivable, how out of the organism of the
huraan mind a link could be plucked and destroyed ; how any faculty
of a simple essence, uncompounded of parts, whose faculties science
only separates and distinguishes (for they in themselves are one in
all, and all in one,) should be loosed from the others, and be annihi
lated : but we have not yet done with the impenetrable obscurity of the
Lutheran theory of original sin.:]: Of the positive part which supplied
the place of the one withdrawn, it is as difficult to arrive at any sort of
clear conception. In his commentary on the third chapter of Genesis,
Luther institutes a coraparison between original sin and original justice,
and, from the essential character of original sin, draws conclusions
as to the essential character of original justice. § If, accordingly, with

* Plank's History of Protestantism (in German), vol. vi. p. 715. But when the
revered author adds, that every genuine follower of the theology of St. Auo-ustine is
of this opinion, he certainly advances an assertion without proof, nay, very easy of
refutation. t Solid, declar. ii. de lib. arb. § 9, p 628, " Hie est verus et unicus controversiae
^atus, quid hominis nondum renati intellectus et voluntas  ex propriis suis, et post
lapsum rehquis, viribus praestare possit."
X Beza (Quaest. et resp. p. 45) reproaches the Lutheran doctrine with leading to
Epicurianism, since, if it were consistently followed out, the immortality of the soul
must be denied.
" Quaestio. Ais igitur in summa, corruptas esse anima? qualitates, non essentiara?
Resp. Aio, et contrarium dogma dice esse certum et apertum ad Epicuraeismum
iter, id est, ad mortalitatem animae adstruendam, quoniam posit! essentite ipsius vel
levissimi corruptione, necesse sit, rem ipsam interitfis obnoxiam confiteri," etc.
§ Luth. in Genes, c. ih. " Vide, quid sequatur, ex ilia sententia, si statuamus

148 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Luther, original justice be the faculty to love and discern God, original
sin must in his opimon be the faculty not to love God and not to discern
Him, or rather to hate Him, and to be in a state of darkness as to all things
appertaining to Him. This is about the same, as if a man were to say,
every one possesses the faculty not only to have no property, but more
over to have debts ! To Luther it was not only perfectly clear, that,
through Adam's faU, the whole human race had lost an integral portion
of its spiritual existence ; but also, that in man an opposite essence
had been substituted in its room. And the latter occurrence he con
ceived to be so placed beyond the reach of doubt, that without the least
hesitation he inferred from it, as a matter perfectly indisputable, and,
as it were, self-evident, ulterior consequences I If it is inconceivable
how the image of God can be utterly eradicated from the huraan spirit,
it is stUl raore inconceivable how a new essence could be inserted into
the snul ! And then evil was converted into something substantial I
Such-like opinions, after indescribable efforts on the part of the Chuich,
had, together with those of the Gnostics and the Manicheans, alraost
entirely disappeared ; and now they again emerged, fuU of vigour and
lofty pretension !
The substance which Luther found in original sin, was, moreover, ac
cording to him, implanted alike in the soul and body of raan. The
following passages, which are found in different books coraposed by
him, may serve as proofs of what has been stated, as well as set beyond
doubt the nature of his opinions on this subject. His expressions are as
follows : " It is the nature of man to sin ; sin constitutes the essence of
man ; the nature of man, since his fall, is become quite changed ;
original sin is that very thing which is born of father and mother.'
Of like import are these forms of expression : " The clay, out of which
we are formed, is damnable ; the foetus in the maternal womb is sin."
He says likewise : " man, as he is born of his father and mother, together
with his whole nature and essence, is not only a sinner, buf sin itself."*

justitiam originalem non fuisse naturae, sed donum quoddam superfluum (I), superad-
ditum. Annon sicut ponis, justitiam non fuisse de essentia hominis, ita etiara sequitur,
peccatum, quod successit, non esse de essentia hominis ?" We know the leasons by
which it raay bo alleged, that Luther's words are not to be so strictly construed. But
if he meant to assert nothing more than what was long customary, why did he not
make use of the custoraary form of speech ? The new language evidently betokens
new conceptions. And how shall we account for the subsequent doctrines of Flacius,
if Luther had given no occasion thereto ? It is also said, essentia is very diflerent
from substantia ; but let any consider the preceding note, and determine by it the
usus loquendi.
* Quenstedt CTheologia didactico-polemica, WhiUenberg, 1669, par. ii. p. 134,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 149
Melancthon also caUs original sin, " an innate power," and indeed the
context would lead us to suppose, that he ascribed to this power some
thing substantial.*
At last, Matthias Flacius arose, and broadly asserted, that original
sin was the very substance of fallen man ! Error having now reached
its highest pitch of extravagance, a retrogressive movement necessarily
took place. The mere negative and private character of evil was anew
understood, and men again more approximated towards the Catholic
view of the subject, without however rejecting the notion that a " posi
tive" evU power, accompanied with the inmost and deepest corruption
of all human nature, particularly of the yet surviving higher energies of
the soul, was transmitted by parents to their children, f
The positive evil now, — the true image of the devil, — which after the

135) has collected, and indeed excused, the above-cited formulas of doctrine. They
run thus in the Latin language : " Naturam hominis esse puram, hominis essentiam
esse peccatum, hominis naturam post lapsum esse mutatam, peccatum originis esse id
ipsum quod naseitur ex patre et raatre ; hominem esse ipsum peccatum," etc. See
also Bellarmine de statu peccati, lib. v e. 1. The same Bellarmine said, it is in
conceivable that the soul, which is created by God in the act of generation, should
receive from its Creator any bad ingredients, in the same way that a bad material
power should pass into the soul, which is a spiritual essence. To this Gerhard re
plied : " Contra nos, qui animae corruptae ex anima corrupta propagationem propug-
namus, argumentum hoc nonpugnat!" Loci theol. tora. iv, p. 331, loc. x, § 88.
Hence the doctiine of Creationism, als well as the opinion of the schoolmen, that un
baptized children go not to hell, but are admitted into a third place, Gerhard declares
to be Pelagianism (oblique pelagianizare.) Bellarmine, moreover, blames the ex
pression of the Lutheran divines, that original sin is a positive quality, Gerhard is
very much offended with hira at this : then he says, the expression is not to be taken in
its metaphysical strictness ; next he adds, no quaUty is really thereby meant, " Quando
pravam concupiscentiam dicimus esse qualitatem positivam, non intelligimus hoc
secundum dxg/^/yst metaphysicam  non quasi aliqua vis agendi sitpeccatem, sed quia
ilia vis agendi in homine est tantum ad peccatum prona atque prompta." This may
be listened to, but is by no means Luther's meaning, as Gerhard thinks, but am im
provement on it. In the same way speaks Chemnitius. Exam. Concil- Trid. par. i,
p. 162.
* Melancthon loci theol. p. 19. " Sicut in igne est genuina vis, qua sursura fertur-
sicut in magneto est genuina vis, qua ad se ferrum trahit ; ita est in homine nativa
vis ad peccandum."
t Solid, declar, i. § 10, p. 614. " Prffiterea afErmatur, quod peccatum originale in
humana natm-a non tantummodo sit talis, qualem diximus, horribilis defectus omnhim
bonarum virium in rebus spiritualibus ad Deum pertinentibus ; sed quod etiam in lo
cum imaginis Dei amissae suecesserit intima, pessima, profundissima (instar cujusdam
abyssl,) inscrutabilis et ineffabilis corruptio totius nature et omnium virium, imprimis
vero superiorum et principahum animae facultatum, quas infixa sit penitus intellectui,
cordi et voluntati hominis. Itaque jam, post lapsum, homo haereditario a parentibus
accipit congenitam pravam vim, unmunditiam cordis, pravas concupiscentias, et
pravas inclinationes."

150 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
loss of the divine image is to be propagated by generation through the
w hole huraan race, constitutes the Lutheran notion of concupiscence,
which the Reformers wished to enforce on the Christian world, as the
sole scriptural, the sole just, accurate, and comprehensive view of origi
nal sin.* The}' understand by concupiscence a complete rise and set
ting of aU the impulses, inchnations, and efforts, of faUen and unre
generated man in evil, and indeed in virtue of a wicked energy trans
mitted to hira from Adam.
Luther, it cannot be denied, here touched on the borders of Mani-
cheisra, if he did not actuaUy overstep the frontier ; and we are bound
gratefully to acknowledge the fact, that his followers resisted with so
much energy the intrusion of such monstrous errors. Yet the expressions
which they ever employed respecting original sin, such as congenita
prava vis, posili.rn qualitas, betray the original stamp of Ihcir master's
doctrine. The Protestant belief, too, that so long as man lives here
below, original sin is not totally effaced from him even by regeneration,
even by the power of God, presupposes that essential substance, which
Luther discovered in the unborn evil : — a beUef, which, as we shall have
occasion later to show, constitutes an essential difference between
Catholicism and Protestantism.
Moreover, when the first glimpses of his new theory respecting origi
nal sin flashed on his, mind, Luther must have been in the most singular
disposition of mind, and raust have been agitated by the darkest, the
gloomiest, and the most perplexed feelings. For if he then taught, with
Melancthon, that God works evil in man, how could he ascribe to it any
sort of essence, and speak of a sinful stuff, out of which we are formed ?
The establishment of such a relation between God and evil, — to wit,
that God is the author of the latter, is not indeed in conformity to
Manichean principles, but would conduct us if we were to give the
speculative notion of the Lutheran doctrine respecting original sin) to a
quite special view, which, in the proper place, we shall lay before our
readers, as soon as all the interraediate points, which may furnish a
coraplete insight into the subject, shall have been stated.
Here we shaU only point out some of the consequences, which the
symbolical writings of the Lutherans deduce from the fundamental
doctrines already set forth.
It is there taught, that in fallen man, not the slightest good, how
paltry soever it may be conceived, has survived ;f that corrupt nature.

* Apolog. ii. tj 3, seq. p. 54 seq.
t Sohd. declar. i. de pecc. orig. § 21, p. 716, 717, Those are noted as heretics,
who assert : " Adhuc aliquid boni, quautulumcunque etiam, et quam exiguum atque
tenue id sit, reliquum habere."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 151
of itself, and by its own force, can do nought but sin before God ;* thaf
fallen man is all evil.j- After this, we are nowise surprised at tlife
opinion, that all so-called actual or personal sins, coraraitted in the self-
consciousness of freedom, are only the particular forms and manifesta
tions of original sin, — the boughs, as it were, and branches, and blos
soms, and fruits of the wicked stem and its root.:]; The Catholics, on
the other hand, believe that in fallen and unregenerated man, the
transition from original to actual sin is determined by free-will, which
possesses the power to resist the carnal propensity in a manner not
totaUy unsuccessful, and not merely exterior : although abandoned to
itself, it is unable to accomplish perfect actions, in their inward spirit
morally good, and consequently acceptable to God.
On this Lutheran doctrine of original sin, we shall now take the
liberty of indulging in the following remarks. It is not to be denied
that the feeUng which called forth this article of belief, was in itself
very laudable. It evidently sprang out of a deep sense of human
misery, of the universal sinfulness of mankind, and their need of re
demption : and it would fain keep that sentiment alive. If we acknow
ledge this with pleasure, it is yet equally certain, that the doctrine in
question attains this object only where thought does not exercise much
sway, and we yield to the pressure of dark, unconscious feelings. It
is forgotten that when God makes man the mere mechanical instru
ment of his activity — when there occurs in raan a violent oblitera
tion (so revolting to all rational, and still raore to all Christian minds)

* Solid, declar. 1. c. § 22, " Insuper etiam asserunt, quod natura corrupta ex se
viribus suis coram Deo nihil, nisi peccare, possit."
t Solid, declar. ii, de lib. arb. § 14, p. 632, " Docent, ut ex ingenio et natura sua
totus sit malus."
X Melancthon loci p. 19, " Scriptura non vocat hoc originale, illud actuale,
peccatum : est enim et originale peccatum plane actualis quaedam prava cupiditas,"
etc. Luther, Works, Wittenberg, Part ii. 1551. p. 335. "And original sin may be
called the arch-sin or chief sin, because it is not a sin which is committed like any
other, but it is the only sin, the une which commits and incites to other sins, frora
which all other sins are derived, and are nought else than the mere fruits of this
hereditary* or arch.sin." This writing was from the pen of Justus Menius, but the
preface was composed by Luther. In the work entitled " Fundamental Doctrines of
Dogmatic Divinity," by Dr. IVlarheineke, the present professor of theology at Berlin,
second edition, § 207, p. 158, we find quite the same principle laid down, at least
quite the same form of speech. It is as great an error to identify the sin of nature
with the sin of person, as to separate the latter frora the former. There is here the
same vice, as in the rude antagonism of Nominahsm and Realism.

* In the German original, sin is called erb-simde, hereditary sin. The play of
words in the original of the above passage cannot be rendered in English. — Trans.

152 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
of a natural spiritual faculty, and indeed the moral and religious
faculty,— (the prerogative which solely and truly distinguishes hira
frora the brute)— sin then, from Adam to Christ, raust be a thing un
known, and all moral must be transformed into physical evil. Tlow
should raan sin, when he has not even the faintest knowledge of God
and of his own destination ; when he has not the faculty to will what
is holy ; when he is even devoid of freedom ? He may rave,— he may
be furious,— he may destroy ; but his raode of acting cannot be con
sidered other than that of a savage beast.
The second consideration, which presses itself upon our attention, is
this : that Luther's exaggeration, so soon as it was recognized as un-
tenable by his disciples, necessarily led the way to another doctrinal
excess. From the one extreme opinion, that through Adam's faU all
germs of good were utterly, even to the last vestige, eradicated from
the whole human race, raen passed to the other extrerae, that even
now, man in every respect is as well conditioned, and the universe
wears as good an aspect for hira, as for the paradisaic man. As soon
as the dam of vigorous but unenlightened feelings was broken through,
nothing could prevent the whole doctrine of the fall being swept away :
for this in fact was the offspring of the most confused feeUngs, and in
its construction no scope had been conceded to the influence of the
higher intellectual faculties.
Thirdly. When, in the times of the primitive Church, the heathens
so often put the question. Wherefore did God send the Redeemer only
after thousands of years, which had elapsed since the faU, and deny him
to so many generations ? the holy fathers (as, for instance, the author
of the epistle to Diognetus and Saint Irenteus) were wont, viewing the
subject frora the pedagogic point of view, to make the following reply :
The Alraighty, by a long and severe experience, wished to teach the
human race what, when abandoned to itself, it was capable of. He
designed to bring it thus to self-knowledge, to consciousness of its sin
fulness and guilt, to a lively feeling of its disorders, and to a sense of
humUiation before Him, in order to awaken within it a more intense
desire after supernal aid, and to cause that aid to be received with a
clearer insight as to its absolute necessity for redemption. The theo
logians of the Middle Ages, also, frequently gave the same reply.*

* Eonav. Brevilog, p. iv. u. 4. Opp. ed. Lugd. 1668, p. 27. " Ratio autem ad
intelligentiara horum haec est : quia incamatio est opus primi principii reparantis
juxta quod decet et convenit secundum libcrtatem arbitrii, secundum sublimitatem
remedii, et secundum integritatem universi : nam sapientissimus artifex in agendo
omnia haec attendit. Quoniam ergo libertas arbitrii hoc requirit, ut ad nihil tradatur

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 153
But what reply could the Lutheran divines make ? That man, with
out the faculty of knowledge and of will for divine things, must reraain
far from God and his kingdom, is very conceivable ; it is as evident as
that a man, having no feet, cannot walk. But to what end is this act
of violence, that obliterated from the soul of man all religious aptitude
— the very image of the Creator T Who would, in such case, venture
on a Theodicea ? who, even in the slightest degree, would be bold
enough to justify Providence in the draraa of the world's history ?
The Formulary of Concord attempts, moreover, to extract from its
theory some grain of solace. It observes, that, if the Christian can
discover in himself only a little spark of desire after eternal life, he may,
by this feeling, convince himself, that God has coraraenced His opera
tions within hira ; and he may joyfully look forward to the moment,
when He will consuramate the work begun.*
Frora the opinion, that in fallen man all the higher spiritual facul
ties are utterly destroyed, it follows of course, that not the faintest or
remotest longing after God could spring up in his bosora : but if such
a desire exist in the Christian, then, in the opinion of the authors of the
above-naraed symbolical writing, such a desire is the surest proof that
the work of regeneration is begun. But from the belief, that in raan,
after his fall, there still survives the religious aptitude, and that there
fore the possibility of higher aspirations yet reraains, no such consola
tion, according to these authors, can possibly flow ! A dangerous self-
delusion ! for that even in the breast of the heathens such a divine

invita, sic debuit Deus genus humanum reparare, ut salutem inveniret, qui vellet
quaerere salvatorem ; qui vero noUet quaerere salvatorera, nee salutera per consequens
inveniret. NuUus autem quaerit modicum, nisi recognoscat morbum : nuUus quaerit
adjiitorem, nisi recognoscat se impotentem. Quia igitur homo in principio sui lapses
adhuc supcrbiebat de scientia et virtute ; ideo praemisit Deus tempus legis naturae, in
quo convinceretur de ignorantia. Et post cognita ignorantia, sed per manente
superbi de virtute, qua dicebant, non deest qui faciat, sed deest qui jubeat, addidit
legem preceptis moralibus erudientem, ceremonialibus aggravantem : ut habita
scientia et cognita impotentia, confugeret homo ad divinum misericordiam et gratiam
postulandam, quae data est nobis in adventu Christi : idet) post legem naturae et
6criptura^ subsequi debuit incamatio Verbi." We see how this whole theory, to which
St. Paul in his epistle to the Galatians has furnished the first materials, is based on
Freedom. Compare Alex. Halens. sum. theolog. p. Ul. Q. L. V., art. ii. Ed. Ven.
1575, p. 231. b. Also Hugh St. Victor, and others.
• Solid, declar. ii. § 11. p. 631. " Densest, qui operatur in nobis velle et perficere
pro bona voluntate ; quae Scripturae dulcissima sententia omnibus piis mentibus, quae
scintillulam aliquam et desiderium gratioB divinae et vitffi aeternae in cordibus suis
sentiunt, eximiam consolationem offert. Certi enim sunt, quod Deus ipse initium il nd
verae pietatis tanquam flammulam in cordibus ipsorum accenderit," etc.

154 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
spark beyond a doubt stiU glowed, is evident, frora a contemplation of
their history, on which we shall now take the liberty of offering a few
remarks. § vn. Considerations on Heathenism, in reference to the doctrines controverted
between the two Churches.
We said above, that a very different representation would be formed
of the entire history of mankind, according as we contemplated it from
the Catholic, or the orthodox Lutheran, point of vicw. We are now
enabled to make good this assertion ; but before entering on the proof,
we wish to premise a few remarks, for which we beg to claim the indul
gence of the reader, as he will meet with statements in part previously
advanced. Nothing raore distressing for the Church could possibly oc6ur, than
to see herself called upon to set a limit to the idea of the magnitude of
original sin. For it becoraeth the Christian to give himself up with all
his soul fo an infinite grief at that alienation from God, and at that
misery, wherein fallen humanity is sunk ; and it is irksome, araid feel
ings of sorrow, which are boundless in theraselves, to be obliged to think
of a Umitation to an error, that rushes with violence from an extraneous
source. It is, however, consoling for the Church that this liraitation
should be raade, in order to uphold the notion of moral evil, and thereby
to impart to the sense of pain and sorrow a true and a solid basis,
which, as has been stated above, is wanting in the system of her adver
saries. It is only so long as an irregular excitement of the feeUngs and
the imagination endures, that it can furnish any nurture to this sense of
pain. But so soon as this ebulUtion of sentiment subsides, and calm,
sober reflection awakes, the utter groundlessness of such feeUngs is dis
covered, and then they totally vanish, along with their empty motives.
What man can grieve, on perceiving that his existence is not conse-
crated to God, so soon as he seriously reflects on the import of those
words, that God had deprived him of all power for so doing ? To re
cognize the evU in its true and entire magnitude, it should not be repre
sented in such exaggerated colours, as we find it in the public formula
ries of the Lutheran faith. Hence, if in the following pages we lay
before our readers a sketch of the religious and ethical life of the hea
then nations, — a sketch hitherto rarely or never completed frora the
Catholic point of view, — we trust no one will imagine we are insensible
to the enormity of that hereditary evil which afificts our race, and
thereby to the fulness of the blessings conferred by the Redeemer. It
is precisely in order to give a firm basis to our feelings of thankfulness
to Him, that we bring out the brighter side of the heathen world ; and

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 155
we can only regret fo be obliged to give no more than a very iraperfect
account of the subject.
The extensive researches of our age in the ancient world, and the
reraotest parts of the New Continent, have brilUantly corroborated the
truth of the Catholic doctrine, respecting fallen man. No people has
been found without a belief in God, and without sacrifices, whereby it
rendered its homage to the Deity. Nowhere are the religious ideas
found pure, — nay, everywhere they are polluted with great errors ; yet
in superstition faith lies concealed ; and this is the good element in the
former. Even in the grossest Fetish-worship, the aspiration of the
human soul towards God is not to be denied ; — it proves, that fallen raan,
to speak the language of the Lutheran formularies, is stiU in possession
of spiritual powers.
Melancthon appears to have had a perception of the weight, which
this fact throws into the Catholic scale, for the endeavours to restore the
equipoise, by observing, that these remnants of faith are to be ascribed
to primitive traditions.* Without these traditions, doubtless (and this
was ever the CathoUc view,) faith would have been lost ; but had they
not likewise found in the breast of man a point of contact and a hold,
they could not possibly have been preserved. As things raerely extra
neous to raan, they must have soon been entirely forgotten, and have
perished. The union of men in social life, and the formation of states, were
certainly not possible without religion ; and this truth is evidenced by
the fact, that nations had their divinities, to whose protection they com
mitted their commonwealth, to whora they erected temples, and sent up
their supplications. The nations manifested thereby a sense of their
dependence on a higher power, which, although it received no worthy
adoration, yet really guided and protected the suppliants. This inde
structible propensity in man to unite and to associate with his fellows,
is at bottom erainently reUgious, and is an indelible proof of surviving
faculties of a higher kind. The man all evil (totus malus) would have
felt no social inchnations, and he and his feUows must have annihilated

» Melancth, loci, theol. p. 67. " Ita ut mihi poene libeat vocare legem naturas non
aliquod congenitum judicium seu insitum et insculptum natura mentibus hominum,
sed leges acceptas a patribus et quasi per manus traditas subinde posteritati, Ut de
creatione rerum, de colendo Deo docuit posteros Adam : sic Cainum docuit, ne fra
trem occideret." The Solida Declaratio asserts still more (§ ix, p. 630 ;) but in per
fect contradiction with itself. It says, that human reason retains a little spark of the
knowledge that there is a God (" notitiae illius scintdlulam, quod sit Deus ;") but how
is this possible without a spark of spiritual powers ('' scintiUula spiritualium vhium "?)

156 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
each other in the savage conflict, had, even under such circumstances,
a plurality of men by possibility corae into existence. When Calvin
imagined these societies, — these types of the future Church, — to have
been forraed without religion, and without faith, and to have sprung up
solely out of the exercise of raan's lower faculties, he proved himself ut
terly unacquainted with their nature.*
This is especially exeraplified in China, — that empire of the Jledium,
— which, according to the spirit of its primitive constitution, was des
tined to be a real theocracy. The emperor was to hearken to the voice
of God, and be His organ in respect to the people, who formed the
family of the prince. All evUs and calamities, which afflict the citizens
of this paternal empire, are, according to this principle, considered as
divinely inflicted chastisements for disobedience to the invisible ruler
and moral iraprovement, and recurrence to pious ancestral simplicity
are looked upon as the condition for the renewal of the country's pros
perity. Who could suppose the spiritual powers of man to be oblitera.
ted here, where the religious view of all existence is so consummate,
and is interwoven with the inmost vitals of the constitution and adrai
nistration of the state ? Who has ever read any fragments of the
writings of the Chinese sages, without admiring the earnest view of
life, the excellent ethical precepts, and the often profound wisdom
which they frequently exhibit 1 Doubtless, Melancthon would have
passed on the virtues of Lao-tseu, Confucius, and Mang-tseu, the sarae
sentence he pronounced on the fortitude of Socrates, the continence of
Xenocrates, and the teraperance of Zeno, — to wit, that only selfish
raotives were at the bottom of these qualities, and that hence they
should be accounted vices. f We undoubtedly are not disposed to re
vere these Chinese or Greek sages, as pure patterns of virtue, who, as
far as they rested on themselves, could stand before the judgment-seat
of God, or to assert that all their endeavours flowed from a source ac
ceptable to God. But the question is not, whether any one, who
neither knows Christ, nor is penetrated by his light, nor strengthened
by his divine grace, be in and by himself pure and just in the eyes of
God ; but the question is, whether fallen man be entirely corrupted,
whether all which he does and thinks be sin,:j: and be daranable,§
* Calvin. Instit. lib, ii. ^. 2, § 13, p. 87.
t Melancth. loc. theolog. p, 22. " Esto fuerit quaedam m Socrate constantia, in
Xenocrate castitas, in Zenone temperantia . . . non debent pro veris virtutlbus, sed
pro vitiis haberi."
) Melancth. 1. e. " Negant tamen (Pelagiani) eam esse vim peccati originalis, ut
omnia hominum opera, omnes hominura conatus sint peccata.''
§ Calvin. Instit lib. li. c. 3, foi. 93. The title of the chapter runs even to the
effect: " Ex corrupta hominis natin-a nihil nisi damnabile prodire."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 157
whether he have lost all moral and religious qualities, whether those
virtues ought to be considered as things merely extraneous, and in no
more intimate relation to man, than wealth and corporeal beauty.*
This we deny, and deny at the risk (not indeed very great in our times,)
of this being imputed to us as a crirae, and of our being held up as bad
theologians, in the same way as Philip and Melancthon reproached our
noble ancestors for having introduced into the schools philosophic stu
dies, and recommended the reading of Plato and Aristotle, the former
full of presumption which he easily communicates to his admirers, and
the latter, in fact, teaching only the art of contention. f That those
venerable men were yet capable of better conceptions and higher moral
exertions, the CathoUc deems a proof of the surviving faculties for good
in the human breast. That those conceptions were not pure, and those
exertions not perfect, nay, very imperfect, and for the most part posi
tively evil, he holds to be a necessary consequence of the fall.
Let us now turn from the Chinese to the Hindoos. The feeling of
estrangement from God, and of the deep degradation of humanity, was
so intense araong the latter, that they conceived the infantine (and
when we take into consideration the intellectual modes of conception
in the youthful world, which in order to preserve the pure, eternal idea
of man in God, ever imparted to it a concrete reality in time,) they
conceived the no less infantine and amiable, than earnest, doctrine of
the pre-existence of spirits, who on account of their sins had been by
God cast out on the earth. Hence, they looked on all human existence
as a period graciously vouchsafed by God for purification and purga-
tion, as this is so clearly and vividly expressed in the well-known frag
ment of HolweU, and is generally believed not only in Hindostan, but in
Thibet, in the kingdom of the Birmese, by the Siamese, &c. This idea
is also stamped on the civil life of the Hindoos, and is particularly per
ceptible in the mutual relations of the several castes.
Who can possibly, we ask, be so painfully alive to this alienation
from God, without retaining in his bosom soraething kindred to divinity,
— the image of the God-head '>. Were the means, employed to attain

Melancth. 1. u. " Effundit autera hujusmodi virtutum umbras Deis in gentes,
in impios quosvis non ahter atque formara, opes, et similia dona largitur." Thus in
a manner purely mechanical, so that no higher spiritual activity was to be found.
Moreover, such a view is doubtless consistent, when man no longer possesses spiritual
faculties for the exercise of virtue.
t " Pseudotheologi nostri falsi cffico naturas judicio commendarunt nobis philoso-
phica studia. Quantum in Platone tumoris est et fastfis ? Neque facile fieri mihi
posse vidfitur, quin ab ilW Platonica ambitione, contrahat aliquid vitii," etc.

15S EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
to the reunion with the Deity, mistaken, they were so, only because no
other name is given to us, whereby we can bc just before God, save that
of Christ Jesus alone. But in these oft convulsive, these raost tragic
efforts to be united again to God, Ues the irrefragable evidence of the
desire after eternal life never obliterated from the breast of man. Who
can look at the temples of Elephanta and Salsette, and deny the Hin
doos the capability of religious feeling? Who has ever reflected on
their doctrine of the present period of humanity, — the Cali-yuga, in its
relation to anterior ages, and can refuse to acknowledge the deep senso
of the ever-growing degeneracy of mankind, which this people hereby
evinces ? Who has ever examined their doctrines on the divine incar-
nations, and can fail to recognize in them the remote desire at least for
a divine deliverance from the fall ? — a desire, indeed, which is to be
found in all antiquity. If the earUer Indian theism often degenerated
into pantheism, we must seek the cause of this in the finite reason of
man, more and more debilitated by the progress of sinfulness. But that
no atheism, — no consummate impiely, — was openly avowed, wc must
ascribe to that indelible iraage of God stamped on the human soul.
What would a Luther and Melancthon, a Musoeus and Wigand, a
Flacius and Hesshuss, have replied to any one, who had pointed to them
the doctrine of the Parsi, who were so deeply impressed with a senso of
the monstrosity of evil, that they fl'ere at a loss how to explain its ex
istence in the good creation, otherwise than by supposing some self-
existent wicked principle, who eternally counteracted the good one?
Doth not a tenderer reUgious feeling lie here concealed, than in the
above-stated opinion of Melancthon, Calvin, and Beza, that the good, holy
God Himself instigates to evil, and needs the same for the execution of
His designs ? If the Parsi confounded moral and ph3sical evil,— if
they did not at least duly separate them, — this by no raeans justifies an
objection against the judgment we have pronounced ; for we would
have only invited the Reforraers to reflect, whether their doctrine were
better than that of the Parsi, who were so very differently circum
stanced (for they were ignorant of the Christian doctrine,) while the
Reformers contended against the truth, which shone beside them in all
its lustre.
In the whole ancient world we discern a seeking after truth. Let
us but consider what that signifies ! If none by their own faculties
were enabled to discover it, — for to every creature must it be com
municated,— stiU it was the object of desire. The man all cvil,-~the
man who hath been despoUed of aU spiritual powers,— in whora the
likeness of God hath been utterly effaced,— strives not after truth,
and cannot so strive. Undoubtedly, truth was but too frequently sought

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 159
for in the world of creatures ; and it was only rarely that man could
persuade himself to raise a look of joy upwards to heaven. But if we
discover one such example only, it can then be no longer a matter of
doubt, that man could do so, when he wished,— -and the freedora, even
of the fallen creature, is then fully established.
History raakes us acquainted with endless gradations of moral cha-
racter, and religious forms. From the most hideous depravity, up to
an affecting piety, we find living examples in countless grades ; and in
all these do we find no evidence of moral freedom, but merely of an
outward and civil liberty. Why was one individual, in exactly the
sarae relations, other than his fellow raan, in a moral and religious point
of view ? In truth, if everything be unconditionally referred to God, — ¦
everything considered as His deed, and evU, as well as good, ascribed
to Him, as the primary cause,— then assuredly we shall find no evi
dence of the truth, that man, even in his fall, has retained his freedom,
and IS endowed with moral and religious faculties, the use whereof is
left to himself: then we must cease to speak of good and of evil, and
must class the opinion of an all holy God, and of man's moral capabili
ties, among the drearas of fancy.
History, accordingly, confirms the Catholic doctrine of original sin,
and incontrovertibly deraonstrates, that deep as his fall might have
been, man lost not his freedom, nor was despoiled of the image of God ;
that not aU which he thought and did, was necessarily sinful and
damnable ; and that he possessed something more than the " mere
liberty to sin," — as the Lutheran symbolical books assure us. More
over, it is by no means astonishing, when we consider the extravagance
of the view, as to the world before Christ, expressed in the Lutheran
formularies, that in the course of time, it should have been opposed by
another opinion equally extravagant,— an opinion which regards the
profoundest doctrines of the Gospel as mere heir-looms of heathenism :
or even, in the mildest view, holds Christianity to be a natural result of
the progress of our species, and consequently reveres paganism, inde
pendently of man's fall, as a ^'tage, necessary in itself, of human civili»
zation. § VIU. — Doctrine of the Calvinists on original sin.
In their account of priginal sin and its consequences, the Calvinists
did not proceed to near such lengths as the Lutherans. It raay cer
tainly be asserted in more than one respect, that the Reforraed system
of doctrine, as invented or arranged by Calvin, derived on many points
undeniable advantages from the mistakes and errors of the earlier Re.

160 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
forraers. Hence the raore learned and scientific Calvin shows himself
here and there raore equitable towards the CathoUcs, presents their
doctrine at tiraes in a form not quite so disfigured as his predecessors,
and on the whole proceeds with far more calmness and circumspection
than Luther. Thus it happened, that, in the same way as Zwingle's
cold and inane theory on the sacrament of the altar was by Calvin
brought much nearer to the true Christian standard, so, in the doctrine
which now engages our attention, only a slight removal from the truth
is perceptible. But this retrogade raovement, when it occurred, — for
it did not often take place, — was almost always brought about at the
cost of clearness and distinctness of ideas ; and if the mitigation of a
too great severity afford pleasure, the uncertainty and fluctuation of
notions that is substituted, is but the more perplexing.
Even Calvin expresses himself in various ways respecting original
sin and its consequences. In some places he says, the iraage of God
has been utterly effaced from the soul of man.* In other passages he
expresses the same thing to the following effect. " Man," says he,
" has been so banished from the kingdom of God, that all in him which
bears reference to the blessed life of the soul, is extinct ;f and he
asserts, that man has received again organs for the divine kingdom only,
by the new creation in Christ Jesus. f
These assertions are, however, oppossed by other passages, in which
it is asserted, that the divine image stamped on the human soul, has
never been totally destroyed and obliterated, but only fearfully dis
figured, mutilated, and deformed.^
The same indistinctness, the same vaciUation is apparent, when
Calvin investigates in detail the faculties yet belonging to the sinful
and unregenerated raan : or when he subjects to a most comprehensive
examination the principle of freedom, which, according to the Catholic
dogma, survives even in fallen man. He observes, that reason (ratio,

* Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. c. 2, n. 12. "Denique sicut primi hominis defectione
deleri potuit ex ejus mente et anirad imago Dei," etc.
t Calv.n. Instit. hb. ii. c. 2, § 12, p. S6, " Unde sequitur, ita exulare a regno
Dei, ut quaicumque ad beatam aniraas vitam spectant, in eo extincta sint."
X Calvin. Instit. hb. iii, c. 29. 5 2, p, 355, •' Ac ne glorietur, quod vocanti et
ultro se offerenti saltern responderit, nullus ad audlendum*esse aures, nuUos ad
videndum oculos affirmat Deus, nisi quos ipse feeerit."
§ Calvin. Instit. lib. i. c. 15, § 4, p, 57, " Etsi demus non prorsus exinanitam ac
deletam in eo fuisse Dei imaginem, sic tamen corrupta fuit, ut, quidquid superest,
horrenda sit deformitas. Ergo quum Dei iraago sit integra naturaj humana) praestan-
tia, quae refulsit in Adam ante defectionem, postea sic vitiata ac prope deleta est, ut
nihil ex ruina, nisi confusum, mutilum, labeque infectum supersit," etc.

BETWEEN CATHO L|CS AND PROTESTANTS. 161
intellectus), and the will (voluntas,) could not be eradicated from man, for
these faculties formed the characteristic distinction between raan and
the brute.* In the circle of social institutions, of the liberal and me
chanical arts, of logic, dialectics, and mathematics, he accords to reason
(he had better said understanding) the most glorious scope, even among
the heathens] and takes occasion to indulge in a bitter sally against
that contempt of philosophy, so prevalent among the Protestants of his
day.f But when he comes to describe the religious and moral facul
ties of raan, then the most singular indistinctness appears. As regards
the knowledge of God, he by no means calls in question, that some
truths were found scattered even among the nations unfavoured with a
special divine revelation ; and he seeras, on that account, not to approve
the opinion of a total destruction of the spiritual powers.:}: But, then,
he destroys the hope which this concession offers, by adding, that the
Almighty had granted such glimpses in the depth of night, in order to
be able lo condemn, out of their own raouth, the raen whom they had
heen imparted to, or rather forced on ; for then they could not excuse
themselves as having been unacquainted with the ways of the Lord.§
Accordingly, he appears again indisposed to regard those traces of
the true knowledge of God, as the result and property of higher human
faculties co-operating with God. Nay, he seems to look upon them as
the consequence of some strange and marvellous influence of the Deity
upon certain men, for certain purposes ; and this is the more remark
able, as he elsewhere deduces the anxiety for a good reputation from
the feeling of shame, and this again from the innate sense of justice
and virtue, wherein the germ of reUgion is already involved. || Thus
we see throughout, a sound, excellent mind, struggling for the victory
with disordered feelings, but, after a short vigorous onset for the mas
tery, compelled to succumb.
Nearly in the same way he treats the moral phenomena of the ancient

• Calvin. Instit. lib, ii. c. 2, J 22, p. 86.
t L. u. § 15, foi. 88. " Pudeat nos tantae ingratitudinis, in quara non inciderunt
ethnici poetae, qui et philosophiam, et leges, et bonas omnes artes Deorum inventa
esse confess! sunt."
t L. c 5 12, foi. 86. " Hoc sensu dicit Joannes, lucem adhuc tenebris lucere, sed
a tenebris non comprehendi : quibus verbis utrumque clare exprimitur, in perversa et
degenere hominis natura micare adhuc scintillas, qu% ostendant, rationale esse animal
el a bnitis differe."
§ L. cit. $ 18, foi. 89. " Prsebuit quidem illis Deus exiguum divinitatissuas gustum,
ne ignorantiam impietati obtenderent : et eosinterdum ad dicenda nonnulla impuht,
quorum confessione ipsi convincerentur."
II L. cit. lib. i. c. 15, n. 8.
11

162 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
world. The Catholics were wont at times to refer to men, like Camil'
lus, and from their lives to demonstrate the moral freedora enjoyed even
by the heathens, and the remnants of good to be found araong them,
They defended, moreover, the proposition, that God's special grace,
communicated for the sake of Christ's merits, working retrospectively,
and confirming the better surviving sentiments in the human breast,
is undeniably to be traced in many phenomena.*
What course does Calvin now pursue to explain such phenomena ?
He observes, that it is very easy to let ourselves be deceived by the
same, as to the true nature of corruption, and he does not precisely
deny the finer traces of a moral spirit. But, he says, we should remem
ber that the Divine grace here and there works as an impediment, not
by its aid to strengthen and purify the interior of raan, but mechanically
to prevent the otherwise infallible outbreaks of evil. f
The conduct of the good Camillus he accordingly explains by the
assumption, that it might have been purely exterior and hypocritical,
or the result of the above-mentioned grace mechanically repressing evil
in his breast, but in no wise rendering him better than his fcllows.|
By such more than mechanical attempts at explanation, Calvin shows
beyond doubt, that when he speaks of reason and the will as undestroyed
and indestructible faculties of the soul, distinguishing man from the
brute, he is far from thinking that man has preserved out of his un
happy catastrophe any raoral and religious powers u-haterer.
Extravagant, however, as the judgraent might bc which Calvin
formed of unregenerated man,§ he yet did not forget himself so far a:?

* Constitut. Unigenitus (Harduin. Consil. tom, xi. foi. 1635). This bull reject*,
in consequence, the following Calvinistico-Jansenistieal propositions: '*N, xxvi.
Nullae dantur gratiae, nisi per fidem." " N. xxix. Extra ecclesiam nulla conceditur
gratia." By fides, " faith in Christ," is to be understood.
t Calvin. Instit. lib. ii, c, 3, § 2, foi. 94. " Exempla igitur ista monere nos viden
tur, ne hominis naturam in totum vitiosam putemus  Sed hie succurrere nobis
detret, inter iUara naturae corruptionem esse nonnullum Dei gratiae locum, non quas
illam purget, sed quae intus cohibeat."
X L. cit. 5 3, foi, 95, " Quid autem, si animus pravus fuerit et contortus, qui
ahud potius quidvis quam rectitudinem sectatus est ?  Quamquam haec certissima
est et facillima hujus quniistionis solutio, non esse istas communes naturae dotes, sed'
speciales Dei gratias, quas varie et in certura modum profanis alioqui hominibus dis-
pensat." § Calvin. Instit. lib. ii. c. .5, n. 19. In this passage he says, in reference to the
man who had fallen among robbers, whom the good Samaritan took pity on : " Neque
enim dimidiam homini vitam reliquit Dei verbum, sed penitus interiisse docet, quan
tum ad beatae vitm rationem." The Catholics appealed to this parable, to show that
fallen man stiU retained some vital powers. Then Calvm proceeds : " Stet ergo

'" BETWEEN CATHOLIpS AND PROTESTANTS. 168
the Lutherans. When he teaches that the will and the reason exist
even after the fall, he means thereby the faculty of faith, and of the
higher will. Those passages, wherein he seems to deny this faculty to
fallen man — and of these there are very many — 'must be corrected by
others, wherpin he expressly asserts, that, when he speaks of a destruction
of the wiU, he understands only the reaUy good will, and not.the mere
faculty of will ;* so that the opinion of Victorinus Strigel, which
was rejected by the Lutherans, appears to be precisely that of Calvin.
., Of concupiscence, moreover, as is evident from the preceding
account, Calvin entertains nearly the same notion as the Lutheran
formularies profess,f only that he is unWilling to use this technical
word : and hence we can understand why in the confessions of the
Calvinistic Churches it is but very rarely employed.:};
As regards the Calvinistic formularies, they may be divided into
several Classes ; since those which were fraro.ed under the immediate
or remoter influence of Zwingle, are clearly distinguishable from those
wherein the spirit of Calvin breathes. In the Tetrapolitana the doc
trine of original sin is not specially treated, but is only incidentally
touched on under the article of Justification : a fact, for the explana
tion whereof, we shall have occasion to notice later the doctrine of
Zwingle on original sin.
The most ancient Helvetic Confessions (ii. and iii.) express them
selves on this head with rauch caution and circuraspection, and could
we be only assured of their spirit, — that is to say, were we but eertain
that this their boasted peculiarity did not proceed frora the same mo
tive which induced the Tetrapolitana to take no special notice of ori-

nobis indubia esta Veritas, quae nullis machinamentis quatefieri potest ; mentem
horainis sic alienatam prorsus a Dei justitia, ut nihil nonirapium, contortum, foedum,
impurum, flagitiosum concipiat, concupiseat, moliatur : cor peccati veneno ita penitus
deUbutunl, ut nihil quam corruptum foetorem cfflare queat."
* Instit. lib. ii. c. 3, a. 6. " Voluntatem dico aboleri, non quatenus est voluntais ;
quia in hominis oonversione integrum manet, quod prima est natura : creari etiam
novam dico, non ut voluntas esse incipiat, sed ut veriatur ex mala in bonum. Haec
in solidum a Deo fieri affirmo." Compare lib. i. u. 5, u. 16 ; where he allows, that
the good which may happen through us, may be called our own, because the faculty
of will is ours.
t L, c. hb. ii, c. ] , II, 8. " Neque enim natura nostra boni tantum inops et vacua
est ; sed malorum omnium adeo fertilis et ferax, ut otiosa esse non possit. Qui
dixerunt esse concupiscentiam, non nimis aUeno verbo usi sunt, si raodo addcretur
(quod minime conceditur a plerisque, namely, the Catholics) quidquid in horaine est,
peccatum est, ab iutellecta ad voluntatem, ab anima ad camera usque, hac con
cupiscentia inqumatum refertumque esse,"
t Except in Aiticle ix, of the Thirty-nme Articles of the Anglican Church, I do
not remember to have read it anywhere.

164 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
ginal sin,— they might call forth from the Catholic, e.vpressions of per
fect satisfaction.""
To the Helvetic Confessions we may add that of the Anglican
Church, which on every point endeavours to avoid a tone of exag
geration. t
The first Helvetic Confession, (which however is not tho most
ancient,) the Gallic, Belgian, and Scotch Confessions on the other
hand, unequivocally express Calvin's doctrine, that raan is thoroughly
and entirely corrupted. :j: However, in these, as in the writings of
Calvin, wc meet with many indeterminate and wavering expressions.
It is worthy of observation, moreover, that the first Helvetic formulary
pronounces the Lutheran opinion, that fallen raan no longer possesses
the faculty of wUl and knowledge for the kingdom of God, to be
Manichean. §
The following fact is worthy of our attention : —
Even tho Confessions of the Reformed consider actual sins as onl-y

« Confess. Helvet. ii. c. xiii. p. 95. "Atque haec lues, quam originalem vocant,
genus totum sic pervasit, ut nulla ope irae filius inimicusquc Dei, nisi divina per
Christura, curari potuerit. Nam si quid bonos frugis supcrstes est, vitiis nostris as
sidue dLbilltatum in pejus vergit. Superest enim mali vis, ct ncc rationem persequi,
nee mentis divinitatcm cxcolcrc sinit." What moans mentis diriniias?
Confess. Helvet. iii. c 2, p. 103. "Confitemur, hominem ab initio, secundum
,Dei imaginem, et justitiam, ct sanctitatem a Deo integro factum. Est autem sua
eponte lapsus in peccatum, per quem lapsura totum humanum genus corruptum ct
damnation! obnoxium factum est. Hinc natura nostra vitiata est, ac in laintam pro-
pensioncm ad peccatum dcvcnit, ut nisi eadem per Spiritum Sanctum redintegretur,
homo per sc nihil boni faciat, aut velit."
t Confess. Anglic, art. ix. p. 129. " Peccatum originale non est, ut fabulantur
Pelagiani, in imitatione situm, sed est vitium et depravatio naturas cujuslibet hominis
CX Adamo naturaliter propagati, qua fit, ut ab origuiali justitia quam longissimc dis.
tet, ad malum sua natura propundcat, et caro semper adversus spiritum concupiseat,
unde in quoque nascentiura iram Dei atque damnationera meretur."
X Confess. Helvet. 1. c. viii.-ix. p. 15; Gall.c. x.-xi. p. 114; Scot. Art. iii. p. 146;
Belg. i;. xiv. p. 178. The Hungarian Confession speaks not at all of original sin, yet
from motives different from the Tetrapolitana. In respect to the discrepancies no
ticed in the text, we find several in the first Helvetic Confession, which we cannot
now enter into, as it would lead us into too many details. Tho Belgian Confession,
for example, says that by original sin man hath been entirely severed from God, and
yet in another place it leaves him some vestigia exiqua of the earlier gifts of divine
simihtude. ^ Confess. Helvet. i. c. ix. p. 19. «' Non sublatus est quidem homini intellectus,
non erepta ei voluntas, et prorsus in lapidem vel truncum est commutatus." P, 21 :
" Manichaei spoliabant hominem omni actione, et veluti saxum et truncum faciebant :"
words which, by the employraent of the peculiar Lutheran expressions, can refer only
to the Lutheran opinions.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 16.5
the manifestations of original sin — as the gradual revelation of the
same in special determinate phenomena. According to them, also,
Adam's sin is the unique, the only source, whence all sins flow, without
ever exhausting it ; the infinite source, ever active and stirring to find
an outlet, and, when that outlet is found, impatient to find a new one.*
With reason. Catholics were able to reply, that, according to this
view, all sins would be necessarily equal, since, according to the max
ims of a false realism, the person is considered as absorbed in nature,
the individual in universal being ; and the fact, that not all the uncon
verted are in a like degree rogues and villains, not all fratricides and
parricides, robbers and poisoners, the Calvinists can by no means ex
plain by the different use of freedom, since, according to their doctrine,
no one posseses it. Thus, observe the Catholics, the primitive evil, ac
cording to the raaxiras of Calvin, progresses with a blind necessity, and
finds in every man a ready, though servile, instruraent for the pei-pe-
tration of its most horrible deeds. It can, therefore, be regarded only
as an accident, when one appears as a frightful criminal, the other as
a moral raan : the latter at bottora is'as bad as the forraer ; the sinful
ness, alike in each, and repressible by none, manifests itself soraetiraea
here, sometimes there, in more violent explosions. The first Helvetic
Confession guards itself against these and such like consequences, and
conderans the Jovinians, the Pelagians, and the Stoics, who taught the
equality of all sins.j" But it can establish no other difference of sinSj
than that of external manifestation, according to which, truly, not one
sin perhaps is like to the other. However, we honour in this cautious
ness a sound feeling — a welcorae perception of that deep, indescribable
abyss of error, out of which the Reforraation sprang.
The doctrine of the Reforraed Confessions respecting wicked lust
(concupiscentia,) we shall not set forth at length, since it does not ma
terially differ from the view of the orthodox Lutherans. In respect to
the boddy death, this is regarded, as in the. Catholic Church, to be a
consequence of original sin. J
§ IX. — Zwuigle's view of original sin.
To explain some phenoraena in the Formularies of the Reformed
Churches, we annex the doctrine of Zwingle on original sin. This
Reformer ventures on the attempt, not raerely to deterraine according
* Confess. Belg. c. xv. p. 179. t Confess. Helv. 1. c. viii. p. 17,
X Confess. Belg. c. xiv. p. 178. " Quo morti corporeae et spiritual! obnoxium red
didit." Helvet. 1. c. viii. p. 17. " Per mortem itaque intelligimus non tantum cor-
poream mortem," etc.

166 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
to Scriptural evidence the nature of man's hereditary evil, but to give
a psychological explanation of the sin of Adam — an attempt for which
he is utterly incompetent, and which is very inferior to preceding efforts
for the illustration of this very obscure mystery, nay, in reality explains
absolutely nothing, and presupposes original sin. In the first place,
Zwingle troubles the serious reader with a very untimely jest, when he
says, that it was a bad prognostic for the future married man, that Eve
should have been forraed out of a rib of the sleeping Adara ; for, from
observing that her husband, during this operation, was not awakened
nor brought to consciousness, the thought naturally arose in her raind,
that her raate raight be easily deceived and circuravented ! I Satan
now observed Eve's growing spirit of enterprise, and, withal, her total
inexperience in all intrigues. Aiding, therefore, her internal desire to
play a trick, and her utter impotence to accomplish her purpose, he
pointed out to her the way for deceiving her husband, and the result
was the first sin. This man, sporting over sin, seriously observes,
that from this whole process of Satanic seduction, and especially from
the enticements offered, it is easy to conclude, that the self-love of
Adam was the cause of his sin, and that consequently from self-love
flows all huraan misery. But then, as, according to all the laws of the
outward world, the like can only proceed from its like, so, since Adam's
fall, all raen were born with this self-love, the germ of all moral evil.
Zwingle then proceeds to describe original sin, which in itself is not
sin, but only a natural disposition to sin — a leaning and propensity to
sin; and endeavours to illustrate his meaning by the following com
parison : A young wolf has in all respects the natural qualities of a
wolf, that is to say, it is one, thaf, in virtue of its innate ferocity, would
attack and devour the sheep, though yet it has not actually done so ;
and huntsmen, on discovering it, will treat it in the sarae manner as
the old ones, for they feel convinced, that, on its growing up, it will,
like others of its species, fall upon the flocks, and commit ravages.
The natural disposition is the hereditary sin, or the hereditary fault ;
the special robbery is the actual sin growing out of the former ; the
latter is sin in the strict sense of the word, while the former ought not
to be considered either as a sin or as a debt.*
This account, whUe it explains nothing, is withal of a genuine Pro-
* Zwingli de peccato origin, declarat. op. tom. ii. foi. 117. " Quam ergo tandem
causam tam imprudentis facti aliam esse putemus, quam amorem sui ? etc. Ha
bemus nunc praevaricationis fontera, ^tKcLwrlM sciheet hoc est sui ipsius amorem : ex
hoe manavit quicquid uspiara est raalorura inter raortales. Hoc raortuus jam homo
filios degeneres procreavisse neutiquam cogitandus est : none magis, quam quod
ovem lupus aut corvus cygnum pariat .... Est ergo ista ad peccandum amore sui

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 167
testant stamp. That it explains nothing is evident, frora its represent
ing self-love as the cause of Adam's sin, which accordingly before his
fall lay concealed in him, and by the mediation of Satan was only
introduced into the outward world. This self-love is represented as the
effect of Adam's sin extending to all his posterity — as the natural dis
position of all his sons ; so that original sin appears as a corruption
already innate in Adam ; and it must be considered, not so much as
inherited of Adam, but as implanted by God himself. But this ex
planation also is a genuine Protestant one, since it frankly and undis-
guisedly holds up God as the author of sin, and looks upon all particular
actual sins as the necessary results, — the outward manifestations of a
natural disposition; a disposition which is well illustrated by that of
the young wolf, that, devoid of freedom, is totally unable to resist the
irapulse of instinct. Hence, also, Zwingle with reason regards original
sin, not as sin, but only as an evil, clinging to human nature : he is,
however, chargeable with an inconsistency, in considering actual sins
to be sins, for they are only the necessary growth of a natural dispo
sition. It would have been also more in conformity with his above-
mentioned principles, as to the cause of evil, to have considered no
moral transgression as contracting a debt.
propensio peccatum originale : quffi quidera propensio non est proprie peccatura, sed
fons quidem et ingenium. Exemplum dediraus de lupo adhuc catulo .... Ingenium
ergo est peccatura sive vitium originale : rapina vero peccatum, quod ex ingenio
dimanat, id ipsum peccatum acttl est, quod recentiores a<etuale yoeant, quod et pro.
prifi peccatum est."

168 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES-
CHAPTER III.
OPPOSITE VIEWS ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION.

§ X. — General statement of tbe mode in which, according to the different Confess
sions, man becomes justified.
Tub different views, entertained respecting the fall of man, must,
necessarily, exert the most decisive influence on the doctrine of his
regeneration. The treatment of this doctrine is of so much the more
importance for us, and claims so much the more our attention, as it was
in the pretended improvement on the Catholic view of raan's justifica
tion, according to the special observation of the Smalcald articles, that
the Reformers placed their principal merit. They call this subject not
only the first, and the raost important, but that, without the mainte
nance whereof, the opponents of Protestantism would have been com
pletely in the right, and have come victorious out of the struggle.*
In conformity with this, Luther says, very pithily, in his Table-talk,.
" If the doctrine fall, it is aU over with us." We shall, in the first
place, state generally the various accounts which the opposite Confes
sions give of the process of regeneration, and then enter, with the
minutest accuracy, iuto details.
According to the Council of Trent, the course is as follows: — The
sinner, alienated from God, is, without being able to show any merit
of his own, without being able to put in any claim to grace, or to par
doning mercy, called back to the divine kingdom. f

* Pars. ii. § 3, cf. Sol. Declar. iii. p. 65Si
t Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. u. 5. " Declarat praeterea, ipsius justificationis exor
dium in adultis a Dei per Christura Jesum praeveniente gratia sumendum esse, hoc
est, ab ejus vocatione, qua, nullis eorum c.xistentibus meritis, vocamtur ; ut, qui per
peccata a Deo aversi erant, per ejus excitantem atque adjuvantem gratiam ad con-
vertendum se ad suam ipsorum justificationem, eidem gratiae libere assentiendo et co-
operando disponatur : ita ut tangente Deo cor hominis per Spiritus Sancti illumina-
tionem, neque homo ipse omnino nihil agat, inspirationem illam recipicns, quippe qui
illam et abjicere potest, neque sine gratia Dei movere se ad justitiam coram illo hbere
sua voluntate possit. Unde in sacris literis, cum dicitur, — convertimini ad me, et
ego ad vos convertar, libertatis nostras admonemur. Cura responderaus, — converte
nos Domine ad te, et convertemur, Dei nos gratia praeveniri confitemur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 169
This divine caU, sent to the sinner for Christ's sake, is expressed not
only in an outward invitation, through the preaching of the Gospel, but
also in an 4ternal action of the Holy Spirit, which rouses the slumber
ing energies of man, more or less sunk in the sleep of spiritual death,
and urges him to unite himself with the power from above, in order to
enter upon a new course of life, and in order to renew the communion
with God (preventive grace.) If the sinner hearkens to this call, then
faith in God's Word is the first effect of divine and human activity,
co-operating in the way described. The sinner perceives the existence
of a higher order of things, and with entire, and lUl then unimagined,
certainty, jiossesses the conviction of the same. The higher tpths and
promises which he hears, especially the tidings that God has so loved
the world, as to give up his only-begotten Son for it, and offered to all
forgiveness of sins, for the sake of Christ's merits, shake the sinner.
While he compares what he is, with what, according to the revealed
wUl of God, he ought to be ; while he learns that so grievous is sin, and
the world's corruption, that it is only through the mediation of the Son
of God, it can be extirpated, he attains to true self-knowledge, and is
filled with the fear of God's judgments. He now turns to the divine
compassion in Christ Jesus, and conceives the confiding hope, that, for
the sake of his Redeeraer's raerits, God may graciously vouchsafe to
him the forgiveness of his sins. From this contemplation of God's love
for man,. a spark of divine love is enkindled in the huraan breast, —
hatred and detestation for sin arise, and man doth penance.*
Thus, by the mutual interworking of the Holy Spirit, and of the
creature freely co-operating, justification really coraraences. If raan
reraains faithful to the holy work thus begun, the Divine Spirit, at once
sanctifying and forgiving sins, coraraunicates all the fulness of His
gifts, — pours into the heart of raan the love of God, so that he becomes
disentangled from the inmost roots of sin, and, inwardly renewed, leads ¦
a new and virtuous life, — that is to say, becometh really just in the
sight of God, — performeth truly good works, — the fruits of a renovation
of spirit, and sanctification of feeling, — ^goeth from righteousness on to
righteousness, and, in consequence of his present religious and moral
* L. c, c. vi. " Disponuntur ad ipsam justitiam, dum excitati divina gratia et
adjuti, fidem ex auditu coneipientes, libere moventur in Deum, credentes vera esse,
quae divinitus revelata et promissa sunt, atque illud imprimis, a Deojustificari irapiura
per gratiam ejus, per redemptionem, quae est in Christo Jesu, et dum peccatores, se
intelligentes, a divinae justitiae timore, quo utiliter concutiuntur, ad considerandam
Dei misericordiam se eonvertendo in spem eriguntur, fidentes Deum sibi propter
Christum propitium fore, illumque, tanquam omnis justitiae fontera, diligere inci-
piunt, ac propterea moventur adversus peccata per odium aliquod et detestationemi"
etc.

170 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
qualities, acquired throuffh the infinite merits of Christ, and his Holy
Spipit, he is rewarded with celestial happiness.* However, without a
special revelation, the just man possesses not the unerring certainty
that he belongs to the number of the elect.
The Lutheran view, on tho other hand, is as foUows : When the
sinner hath been intiraidated by the preaching of the law, which he is
conscious of not having fulfilled, and hath been brought to the brink of
despair, the Gospel is announced to him, and with it the solace admi
nistered, — that Christ is the Larab of God, that taketh upon him the
sins of the world. With a heart stricken with fear and terror, he grasps
at the Redeeraer's merits, through faith, which alone justifieth. God,
on account of Christ's merits, declares the believer just, without his
being so in fact : though released from debt and punishment, he is not
delivered from sin (original sin ;) the inborn sinfulness still cleaves to
the just, though no longer in its ancient virulence. If it be reserved to
faith alone, to justify us before God, 3'et faith is not alone : on the con
trary, sanctification is annexed to justification, and faith manifests itself
in good works, which are its fruits. Justification before God, and sanc
tification, must not by any means, however, in despite of their close
connexion, be considered as one and the same thing ; because
this would render irapossible the certainty of the forgiveness of sins,
and of salvation, which is an essential property of Christian faith.
Lastly, the whole work of regeneration is God's doing, alone, and man
acts a purely passive part therein. God's act doth not only precede
the workings of man, as if this could, or ought to foUow ; as if the lat-
ter co-operated with the former, and so both together ; but the Holy
Spirit is exclusively active, in order that to God alone the glory may
accrue, and all pretensions of human merit be rendered impossible. f

* L. e, c, vii. " Hanc dispositionem, seu praeparationem, justificatio ipsa consequitur,
quse non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et sanctificatio et renovatio interioris homi
nis per voluntariam susceptionera gratis et donorum, unde homo ex injusto fit Justus,
et ex inimico amicus, ut sit haeres secundum spem vitas aeternae  Ejusdem sanc-
tissimae passionis merito per Spiritum sanctum caritas Dei diffunditur in cordibus
eorum, qui justificantur," etc.
1- Solid, declar. v. de lege et Evang. ^ 6, p. 678. " Peccatorum cognitio ex lege
est. Ad salutarem vero eonversionem ilia poenitentia, quae tantum contritionem habet,
non sufficit : sed necesse est, ut fides in Christum accedat, cujus meritum, per dulcissi-
mam et consolationis plenam Evangelii doctrinam, omnibus resipiscentibus peccatori-
bus ofiFertur, qui per legis doctrinam perterriti et prostrati sunt. Evangelion enim re-
missionem peccatorum non securis mentibus, sed perturbatis et vere poenitentibus
annuntiat. Et ne contritio et terrores legis in desperationem vcrtantur, opus est
preedicatione Evangelii: ut sit poenitentia ad salutem." Apolog. iv. ^ 45, p. 87:

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 171
The Calvinists, though with some differences, agree in the raain
with the disciples of Luther. Calvin is dissatisfied with the Reformers
of Wittemburg, for having ascribed to' the law, alone, the property of
exciting a sense of sin, and a consciousness of guUt. He thinks, on
the contrary, that the first place is due to the Gospel, and that it is by
the enlargement of the divine mercy, in Christ Jesus, that the sinner is
made attentive to his reprobate state, — so that repentance follows on
faith.* That the severe remark of Calvin at the passage, where he states the
relation between faith and repentance, to wit, that those understood
nothing of the essence of faith, who conceived this relation other than
hiraself, is not entirely destitute of foundation, nor based on an empty
spirit of controversy, we shall clearly prove later, when it will be shown,
that, with Calvin, repentance bears a very different signification from
the terror caused by sin, in the Lutheran system ; and, that according
to the forraer, justification and sanctification appear in a more vital
connexion. More important still is fhe departure of the Calvinists from the Lu
theran formularies, by their assertion, that it is only in those elected
from aU eternity, that the Deity worketh to justification and to regene
ration. On the other hand, the Lutherans, like the Catholics, reject
the doctrine of absolute predestination. Finally, the Calvinists lay a
still more violent stress on the certainty, which the believer raust have
of his future happiness.
It follows, accordingly, that we must treat in succession, first, the
distinctive doctrines in respect to the operation of God and of man, in
the affair of regeneration ; secondly, the doctrine of predestination ;

" Fides ilia, de qua loquiraur, existit in poenitentia, hoc est, concipitur in terroribus con.
scientiae, quae sentit iram Dei adversus nostra peccata et quaerit remissionem peccato
rum, et liberari a peccato.'' Apolog. iv. de justit. ^ 26, p 76 : " Igitur solli fide justi-
ficamur, intelligendo justificationem, ex injusto justum effici seu regenerari." ^ 19, p.
72 : "Nee possunt acquiescere perterrefacta corda, si sentire debent se propter opera
propria, aut propriam dilectionem, aut legis impletionem placere, quia haeret in came
peccatum, quod semper accusat nos." ^ 25, p. 25 : " Dilectio etiam et opera sequi
fidem debent, quare non sic excluduntur, ne sequauitur, sed fiducia meriti dilectionis
aut operum in justificatione excluditur."
* Calvin. Instit. lib. iii e. 3, ^ 1, foi. 209. "Proximus autem a fide ad poenitentiam
erit transitus : quia hoc capite, bene cognito, melius patebit, quomodo sola fide et mera
venia justificetur homo, ne t.^men a justitia imputatione separetur realis (ut ita loquar)
vitae sanctitas : poenitentiam vero non modo fidem continue subsequi, sed ex ea nasci
extra eontroversiam esse debet. Quibus autem videtur, fidem potius praecedere
poenitentiae, quam ab ipsa manari vel proferri, tanquam fructus abfarbore, nunquam ejus
vis fuit cognita, et nimium levi argumento ad id sentiendum moventur."

172 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
thirdly, the differences in the notion of justification ; fourthly, those
respecting faith ; fifthly, those touching works ; and sixthly, those in
respect to the certainty of salvation. When these points shall have
been first gone through in detail, then comprehensive reflections on
" the nature and deeper signification of this opposition between the Con
fessions, in respect to the doctrine of justification, will follow in a more
intelligible, as well as instructive form. Then he who, after a general
view, would not have suspected any practical or theoretical differences,
important enough to occasion an ecclesiastical schism, will clearly see,
that the Catholic Church could not possibly exchange her primitive
doctrine for the new opinion ; nay, could not, even by any possibility,
tolerate in her bosom the two opposite views. The minute investiga
tion of particulars wUl bring out, in the clearest light, those divergen
ces of opinion, which, in a general survey, raay be easily overlooked ;
and in the considerations which we have announced, we wiU clearly
establish the absolute incompatibility of the two doctrines in one and
the same sjstera ; and will point out the raomentous interests, which
the Catholics defended in the maintenance of their dogma.
§ XI. — Of the relation of the operation of God to that of man, in the work of regene
ration, according to the Catholic and the Lutheran systems.
According to Catholic principles, in the holy work of regeneration
we find two operations concur — the Divine and the human ; and when
this work succeeds, they mutually pervade each other, so that this re
generation constitutes one theandric work. God's holy power pre
cedes, awakening, exciting, vivifying ; — man, the whUe, being utterly
unable to merit, call forth, or even desire, that divine grace ; yet he
must let himself be excited, and follow with freedom.* God ofiers his
aid to raise the sinner after his fall ; yet it is for the sinner to consent,

* Concil Trident. Sess. vi, c. v  " ut, qui per peccata a Deo aversi erant,
per ejus excitantem atque adjuvantem gratiam ad convertendum se ad suam ipsorum
justificationem, eidem gratiae libere assentiendo et co-operando, disponantur, ita ut,
tancrente Deo cor hominis per Spiritus Sancti illuminationem, neque homo ipse omnino
nihil agat, inspirationem illam recipiens, quippe qui illam et abjicere potest, neque
tamen sine gratia Dei raovere se ad justitiam coram illo libera sua voluntate possit.
Unde in sacris literis cum dicitur, — convertimini' ad me, et ego convertar ad vos, liber-
tatis nostrae admonemur. Cum responderaus, — converte nos Domine ad te, et con.
vertemur, Dei nos gratia prieveniri confitemur" Can. iv. " Si quis dixerit, liberum
arbitrium a Deo raotum et excitatura nihil co-operari assentiendo Deo excitanti atque
vocanti, quo ad obtinendam justificationis gratiam se disponat ae praeparet, neque posse
dissentire, si velit, sed velut inanime quoddara nihil omnino agere, mereque passive se
habere, anathema sit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. I'TS
and to receive that aid. By accepting it, he is accepted by the Divine
Spirit ; and through his faithful co-operation, he is exalted again gra
dually (though never corapletely in this Ufe) to that height from which
he was precipitated. The Divine Spirit worketh not by absolute ne
cessity, though he is urgently active : His omnipotence suffers human
freedora to set to it a bound, which it cannot break through, because an
unconditional interference with that freedom would bring about the
annihilation of the moral order of the world, which the Divine wisdom
hath founded on liberty. With reason, therefore, and quite in confor
mity with her inmost essence, hath the Church rejected the Jansenis-
tical proposition of Quesnel, that huraan freedom must yield to the
omnipotence of God.* This proposition involves, as an iraraediate
consequence, the doctrine of God's absolute predestination ; and asserts
of those who attain not unto regeneration, that they are not the cause
of their own reprobation, but that they have been absolutely cast off by
the Deity Hiraself ; for a mere inspiration of the Divine Spirit would
have moved their free-wUl to faith, and to holy obedience.
/It is not difficult to see, that the above-stated doctrine of the Catho
lic Church, is deterrained by her view of original sin ; for, had she as
serted that an utter extirpation of all gerras of good, a coraplete anni
hilation of freedora in raan, had been the consequence of his fall, she
then could not have spoken of any co-operation on his part, of any fa
culties in hira that could be excited, revivified, and supported. Man,
who in this case would have lost all affinity, all likeness unto God,
would no longer have been capable of receiving the Divine influences"
towards the consuramation of a second birth ; for the operation of God
• would then have found in him as little response, as in the irrational
brute. On the other hand, it is evident, from the Lutheran representation
of original sin, that the Lutherans could not admit the co-operation of
man : and the reason wherefore they could not, is equally obvious ;
naraely, because, according to them, the hereditary evil consists in an
obliteration of the Divine iraage from the human breast ; and this is

* The Constitution of Pope Innocent X. (Apud Hard. Concil. tom. xi. foi. 143,) re
jects the proposition. No. ii. "Interiori gratis in statu naturae lapsae nunquam re-
sistitur;" and the Constitution Unigenitus ( Hard. 1. c foi. 1634,) No. xm. "Quando
Deus vult animam salvam facere, et cam tangit interiori gratiae suae raanti, nulla volun
tas huraana ei resistit." No. xvi. "Nullas sunt illecebras, quae non cedant illecebris
gratias : quia nihil resistit omnipotent! " No. xix. " Dei gratia nihil aliud est, quam
ejus omnipotens voluntas : haec est idea, quam Deus ipse nobis tradit in omnibus suis
Scripturis." No, xx. " Vera gratias idea est, quod Deus vult sibi a nobis obediri et obe-
ditur, imperat et omnia fiunt, loquitur tanquam dominus, et omnia sibi submissa sunt."

lii EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
precisely the faculty capable of co-operating with God. Accordingly,
they teach, that man remains quite passive, and God is exclusively ac.
tive. Even so early as the celebrated disputation at Leipsig, Luther
defended this doctrine against Eck, and corapared man to a saw, that
passively lets itself be moved in the hand of the workman. Afterwards
he delighted in comparing fallen man to a pillar of salt, a block, a clod
of earth, incapable of working with God.* It may be conceived, that
not only was such a doctrine necessarUy revolting to Catholics, but
that even among Luther's disciples, who, in the first unreflecting ex
citement of feeUngs, had followed him, a sound Christian sense, rallying
by degrees, must offer resistance to such errors. In Melancthon's
school, more enlightened opinions spread ; and his followers, after
Luther"s death, had even the courage openly to defend thera. Pfcffin-
ger,f and, after him, the above-named Victorinus StrigelJ arose ; but
their power went no further than to occasion a struggle, wherein they
succumbed. Luther's spirit gained so complete a victory, that his
views, nay his very expressions, were adopted into the pubUc forraula
ries. §
I shaU take the liberty of citing a passage frora Plank, which states
the opinion of Arnsdorf, on the nature of God's operation in respect to
mau, — an opinion, which was put forth araid the synergistic controver-
sies. Nicholas von Arnsdorf said : " By his will and .speech, God
worketh aU things, with all creatures. When God wills, and speaks,
stone and wood are carried, hewn, and laid, how, when and where He will.
Thus, if God wills, and speaks, man becomes converted, pious and just.
For, as stone and wood are in the hand and power of God, so, in like
manner, are the understanding and the will of man in the hand and ,
power of God ; so that raan can absolutely will and choose nothing, but
what God wills and speaks, either in grace or in wrath. "|| Who wUl
* Luther in Genes, o. xix. " In spnitualibus et divinis rebus quas ad animae salu.
tem spectant, homo est instar statute ealis, in quam uxor patriarchas Loth est con-
versa, imo est similis truneo et lapidi, statuae vita carenti, quae neque oculorum, oris,
aut uUorum sensuum cordisque usum habet. "
t Pieffinger piopositiones de hbero arbitrio. Lips. 1555,4. Compare Plank, lib.
cit. p. 567.
X Plank, lib. cit. p. 584.
§ Solid declar. ii. de lib. arbitr. § 43, p. 644, ad eonversionem suara prorsus nihil
conferre potest." § 20, p. 635. " Praeterea sacrae literae hominis eonversionem, fidem
in Christum, regenerationem, renova'.iouem .... sirapliciter soli divmaE operationi et
Spiritui Sancto adscribimt." On the comparison of man with a stone, and so forth,
see § 16, p. 633, § 43, p. 644.
11 Plank, History of the rise, the changes, and the formation of the Protestant
system of doctruie, vol. iv. p. 708.

BETWEEN CATttOLlCiS AND PROTESTANTS. Itg
hot here see the remarkable influence, which liUther's theory, touching
the mutual relation between the divine and the human operations, con
sidered in themselves, and even independently of the fall, has exerted
on this article of beUef ? God's wrath, thought Nicholas von Arnsdorf,
forces one person to evil, in the same way as His grace absolutely de
termines another to good. So much doth the human mind find itself
constrained to reduce to general laws, that special relation between
God and man, which was revealed by the redemption of Christ Jesus^
Reraarkable is the subterfuge, which the Forraulary of Concord saw
itself forced to adopt, in order to prevail upon men to hear preaching, — ¦
a subterfuge which of itself should have convinced its authors, how er
roneous was the doctrine which they inculcated. For as, according to
their view, man on his part can contribute nought towards justification,
as he possesses not even the faculty of receiving the Divine influences^
and thus, in consequence of the loss of every trace of sirailitude to his
Maker, is cut off from all possibility of union with God, what blame
could be uttered, and what reproaches made, if any one remained ob
durate, when it depended on God alone to remove that obduracy ?
What blame was yet possible, when any one was disinclined to read the
Bible, or obstinately resisted hearing the evangelical sermon, which was
laid down by the Reformers, as the condition for receiving the Divine
Spirit 1 To be asked to listen to a sermon, must certainly seem to one*
devoid of all spiritual qualities and susceptibilities, as the most singular
demand, — not less singular than if he were asked to prepare for flying ;
nay, more singular, for in the latter case he could understand the pur
port of the deraand, while, in default of every spiritual organ for under
standing the serraon, he could not even comjB*hend what was the pro
posed design : he might conjecture, indeed, that it was intended to pass
a joke on him I The Formulary of Concord can say nought else than,
that man hath still the power to move from one place to another ; he
still possesses outward, though no inward, ears ; his feet and his exter
nal ears he need only exert, and the consequences he must attribute only
to himself, if he fail to do so. So must the feet supply the place of the
will, which, according to the Catholic doctrine, has yet survived the
fall ; the ears discharge the functions of reason ; and the body under
take the responsibUity of fhe mind."*
* The Solida Declaratio ii, (de hb. arbit, § 19, p. 636,) allows man still the " !o-
comotivam potentiam" seu externa membra regere. § 33, p. 640. " Non ignoramus
autera et enthusiastas et epicureos pia hac de impotentia et mahtia naturalis liberi ar
bitrii doctrina, qua conversio et regeneratio nostra soli Deo, nequaquam autem nostris
viribus, tribuitur, impie, turpiter et maligne abuti, . Et multi impii illorum sernionibus
offenai atque depravati, dissoluti et fori fiunt, atque omnia pietatis exercitia, orationera,

176 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
In general, the Reformers were unable to succeed in finding, in their
system, a tenable position for the idea of human responsibility, — an idea
not to be effaced from the raind of man, and whereon Kant established
what he deemed the only possible proof of the existence of God. They
observe, indeed, as wc have seen, that man can repel the Divine influ
ence, though he cannot co-operate with it ; whereby, they think, his
guilt is sufficiently established. But this solution of the difliculty in
question is unsatisfactory, because every raan can onZ^ resist; since all
are in a like degree devoid of freedora, and of every vestige of spiritual
faculties. The explication of the fact, that sorae become just, and
others reraain obdurate, can be sought for, not in man, but in God only,
—whom it pleases to remove in one case, and to let stand in another,
the obstacle which is the same in all I
At least, we cannot at aU see, how it would cost the Almighty a
greater exertion of power, to supply araong some, rather than among
others, the spiritual faculties that arc wanting: for, all are herein
equally passive. In other words, the doctrine of the non-co-operation of
man, which rests on the original (hcory of Luther and Melancthon,
touching the absolute passiveness of the created spirit towards its Cre
ator, finds only in this theory its metaphysical basis, and presupposes
accordingly, absolute predestination, which, in the course of the syner
gistic controversies, was embraced by the raost consistent Lutheran the
ologians, Flacius, Hesshuss, and others,* while the Forraulary of Con
cord sacrificed to a better feeling the harraony of its own systera. f
Proceeding, now, to the task of more nearly determining what is the
work of regeneration, which the exclusively active Spirit of God hath
to achieve, we can discbver nought else but that the religious and raoral
qualities, — the faculty of faith and of wiU, which had been lost through
Adam's fall, — must be inserted anew in the defective spiritual organi
zation ; and, accordingly, lhe inward ears bc replaced. While, there-

sacrura lectionera, pias raeditationcs remisse tractant aut prorsus negligunt, ac dicunt,
— Quondoquidem propriis suis naturalibus viribus ad Deura sese convertere nequeant,
perrecturos se in ilia sua adversus Deum conturaacia, aut expectaturos, donee a Deo
violenter, et contra suam ipsorura voluntatem convertantur," etc. 5 39, p- 642.
" Dei verbum homo etiam nondum ad Deum conversus, nee renatus, extemis aur'.bus
audire aut legere potest. In ejusmodi enim extemis rebus horao adhuc, etiam post
lapsum, aliquo raodo liberum arbitrium habet, ut in ipsius potestate sit ad coetus publi-
cos ecclesiasticos accedere, verbum Dei audire, vel non audire."
* Plank, loc. cit. vol. iv. p. 704, 707.
1 Solid, declar. p. 644. " Etsi autem Dominus hominem non cogit, ut converta-
tur (qui enim semper Spiritui Sancto resistunt  ii non convertuntur), attamen
trahit Deus hominem, quem convertere decreverit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 177
fore, according to the CathoUc system, the first operation of God con
sists in the resuscitation, excitement, higher tuning, strengthening, and
glorification of these faculties, it is, according to the Lutheran system,
to exert itself in a new creation of the same. In this way, we can un
derstand, in some degree, the remark in the Formulary of Concord,
that, in the further progress of regeneration, raan co-operates with God,
not indeed, as to the integrity of his being, but only through his reno
vated parts, — through the new divine gift, — the reraaining portion of
his being, — the raere natural man, who had come down from that earlier
state of alienation from God, — being never active for the kingdom of
God.* Moreover, by this doctrine, the identity of consciousness is
destroyed ; and we cannot see how the man, new-born or newly crea
ted, can recognize himself to be the sarae, — at least it is not easy for
him to do so, unless he stands before tbe mirror, and perceives to his
contentment, that he has ever the same nose, and consequently is the
same person as heretofore. Nor can we conceive how repentance can
be possible ;. for the new-created faculties will have difficulty to repent
for what they have not perpetrated ; and the old cannot repent, for the
divine is not within their competence.
Here, we may remark, that, by the Lutheran doctrine here stated,
the reproach which its professors so perpetually urge against the Ca
tholic tenet, to wit, that it is Pelagian, receives its explanation. f In
truth, we discover everywhere we might almost say, an intentional
misrepresentation of the Catholic doctrine : and Melancthon, in this,
surpasses Luther hiraself. Want of solid historical inforraation had an

* Solid, declar. ii. de lib. prbitr. § 45, p. 645. " Ex his consequitur, quam primum
Spiritus Sanctus, per verbum et sacraraenta, opus suura regenerationis et renovationis
in nobis inchoaverit, quod revera tune pervirtutem Spiritus Sancti co-operari possimus,
ac debeamus, quamvis multa adhuc infirmitas concurrat. Hoc vero ipsum, quod co-
operaraur, non ex nostris carnalibuset naturalibus viribus est, sed ex novis illis viribus
et donis, qua Spiritus Sanctus in oonversione in nobis inchoavit." This decision, of
necessity, presupposes the opinion, that the faculty lost through original sin, and re
curring in regeneration, can be no raere quality of the human spirit. It is the higher
faculty of will and of knowledge, if the passage cited is to bear any sort of sense.
t Calvin (Instit. lib, iii. c. 14, § 1 1, foi 279) is far raore just and equitable. " De
principio justificationis nihil inter nos ct saniores scholasticos pugnae est, quin peccator
gratuito a daranatione lihcralus justitiam oblineat, idque per remissionem peccatorum,
nisi quod illi sub justificationis vocabulo renovatiimcm comprehend unt, qua per Spirit
um Sanctum renuvamur in vitas novitalem. Justitiam vero hominis regenerati sic
describunt, quod homo per Christi fidem Deo semel conciliatns, bonis operibus Justus
censeatur et eorum merito sit acccptus." In thi^ there ia soraething inaccurate, but
how much more conscientious is Calvin here, than the Solida Declaratio, ii. 52,
p. 648, 12

178 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
undoubted share in this charge ; and this becomes more evident, when
we see the Thomists called Pelagian ; nay, the views of Litthcr, on the
relation of Grace and Nature, represented as containing the true old
Catholic doctrine in opposition to Pelagianism ; for never was it taught,
not even by St. Augustine, that, by original sin, man was bereft of the
moral and religious faculties. But in all this there evidently existed an
internal obstacle to the full comprehension of the Catholic doctrine, —
an obstacle which we feel ourselves called upon to point out, — while it
makes the Lutheran view appear more pardonable since it shows that it
sprang out of a true Christian zeal, which, in this, as in almost every
instance, was foolishly directed. The Catholic dogma, that even, in
faUen raan, moral and religious faculties exist, — faculties which are not
always sinful in themselves, and raust bc exercised even in the work of
regeneration, — led sorae to believe, that such an exercise of the facul
ties in question was the natural transition to grace, so as to suppose that,
according to Catholic principles, a very good use of them was the me
dium of grace, or in other words, merited it. Such an opinion were
undoubtedly Pelagian ; and in that case, not Christ, but man, would
merit grace, or rather, grace would cease to be grace. To escape now
the like errors, the Reformers supposed man was unable to achieve any
thing, and received only, in regeneration itself, those faculties which can
be active in and for the kingdom of God. But the fine and delicate
sense of the Catholic dogma, which very carefully distinguishes between
nature and grace, totally escaped the perception of the Reformers.
The finite, even when conceived as without sin, though it may stretch
itself on every side, can never attain to the infinite, nor ever cling to it
but with an illusive gra,sp.
Nature may honestly exert all her powers ; she will never of herself,
and by herself, reach a supernatural transfiguration : the human, by no
strain of power, will become of itself the divine. There would remain
an eternal gap betwixt the two, if it were not filled up by grace : the
divinity raust stoop to humanity, if humanity is to becorae divine.
Hence did the Son of God become man, and not man become God, in
order to reconcile humanity with the Godhead. The Uke must typi-
cally recur in every believer. Thus the Church may look on the non-
regenerated as endowed with the fairest faculties of nature, and as
turning them to the best account. Yet it is not by the use of such
faculties that they acquire life in grace, either its beginning, its middle,
or its end. On the contrary, Divine grace raust ever corapassionately
stoop to our lowliness, and irapart to our sin-polluted faculties the first
heavenly consecration, in order to prepare them for the kingdom of
heaven, and the receiving of Christ's image. Here, accordingly, we

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 179
see how important is the difference, which divides the Confessions in
their view of man's original state. As in the finite, though yet un
stained, faculties of the paradisaic man, Catholics deem the aid of a
high supernatural power to have been absolutely necessary to preserve
him in a living intimate coraraunion with God ; so they must necessa
rily look on the restoration of the fallen Adam to that communion, by
means of his mere unaided natural powers, as a thing utterly iniposible,
or, in other words, as solely the result of grace. But while the Protes
tants, on the other hand, conceived that primeval raan accoraplished
this union with God through his finite faculties alone, they necessarily
considered the existence of a Divine sirailitude in the natural powers of
fallen raan, and stiU more, the exercise and expansion of such powers
in the work of regeneration, as quite incompatible with the notion of
grace, and as very derogatory to, if not utterly subversive of, the merits
of Christ. That man should retain the possession of all his natural
powers and faculties, signifies, according to the Protestant system, that
he is able of himself to attain to the perfect knowledge and love of
God. Thus, if the Protestants wished to maintain the notion of grace,
they were obliged to exhibit man as absolutely passive in the work of
regeneration, and as devoid of all powers acted on by grace. It was
far otherwise in the Catholic system, which they were unwilling to
probe. When we endeavour to trace the cause, which led the Reformers to
the adoption of such a view, we must search for it in another quarter.
They confounded, as it appears to us, what was objective, and subjec
tive, in the raatter of justification. In relation to the former, raan is
completely and entirely passive ; but, not so in respect to the latter.
Fallen man cannot be justified, unless he confess before God, and to
himself, that he is utterly incapable of discovering within him any
means capable of reconciling hira, sinner as he is, with his God. He
must, with the raost heartfelt confession of his own nothingness, with
perfect huraility, give himself up to God, — resign himself to His aU-
gracious disposal, acknowledging that he can only receive, and thus, is
merely passive.
In this way, only, doth man fall back into the natural relation of the
creature to the Creator. But, should he wish to present to God any
thing, — be they works, or aught else, — in order thereby to exhibit the
Almighty as his debtor, and to deraand His grace, as his wages, and in
this manner to display his activity, — he would then be raising himself
to an equality with God, and, ifl may so speak, be placing himself on
the same footing with the Deity, and by such arrogance, would throw
himself out of the relative sphere of the creature to the Creator. But,

180 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
when man rests on the merits of Christ alone, and knows nothing of
his own merits, he is then passive, and inactive, letting God alone work.
But, when man coincides with these operations of God, he then becomes
hiraself active, and co-operates with God ; and the free acknowledgment,
that in the sense above-mentioned, he can be in the relation only of a
passive recipient, forms the very highest activil)', whereof he is capable.
Now, the Reforraers did not accurately distinguish between these two
things, and, in the excess of a pious zeal, rejected all exertion, all
agency, in every sense of the word, on the part of raan. The CathoUc
recognizes the necessity of a completely passive demeanour, since he
rejects all merits that could earn the redemption ; but he insists on the
necessity likewise of an active demeanour, since he is convinced, that
it is only by his free and faithful co-operation, that he can receive and
appropriate to hiraself the workings of God. When man possesses the
first, he gives the glory to God ; and, when he declares the second, he
gives thanks to God for his ability to render glory to Him ; and this,
without freedom, he were unable to do.*

* The Reforraers, Luther, Melancthon, and others, and, after them, all modem
Protestant theologians, reproach the Cliurch with admitting the opinion of '* meritum
de congruo ;" that is to say, an opinion that it is to bc expected of God (congruum
esse,) that upon a heathen who should make the best and raost serious use of his
natural faculties. He would bestow His grace, and adrait hira into His divine king-
dora. This would be the adraission of a quasi-mcrit, and consequently Pelagian.
The Council of Trent knows nothing of such scholastic distinctions, that is to say,
distinctions which were current in many schools, and therefore takes no notice of
the above-mentioned meritum de congruo. Those schoolmen, who adopted this
opinion, appealed particularly to the centurion Cornelius, in the Acts of the Apos
tles, t. A. 22-35 ; they might have also pointed to the fact, that so raany Platonists
became converts to Christianity, while no ancient document states the conversion of
any Epicurean. We should be very desirous to hear an explanation of this phenome
non from an orthodox Lutheran. Such a man would undoubtedly pronounce as
heretical one of the finest portions of Neander's Church History, — the one wherein
he points out those elements favourable to Christianity, or preparatory to it, in the
*' Religious and philosophical systems of antiquity." See more particularly vol, i,
part i. p. 31, According to the orthodox Protestantisra, no philosophy of history is
possible. In fine, this Protestantisra should be raade to observe, that it is one thing
to assert that God will certainly have regard to the sincere seeking and desire of a
heathen, and another thing to raaintain that all should believe that Divme grace is
due to hira, on account of this his seeking and desire.
Moreover, the Gerraan Reformers reproached the theology of that day with teach
ing, that by his own powers raan was enabled to love God above aU things. But
whoever has only the most superficial acquaintance with the theology of the Middle
Age, must be astounded when he hears this ; and that when the respected professor
Hahn lately referred to this subject, m his Dogmatic Theology, he should not have
expressed his astonishment, would afford no favourable idea of his historical acquire-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. ISl

§ xu. — Doctrine of the Calvinists on the relation of grace to freedora, and human
co-operation, — Predestination.
The doctrine of the Calvinists, respecting original sin, which, accord
ing to them, commits fearful ravages on the human raind, without,
however, eradicating the faculties of faith and will, extends its influence
to the matter in question. They necessarily teach, that grace first
determines, and, consequently, goes before, all the truly pious endea
vours of man ; so that on this subject we raeet with a gratifying general
uniformity between all the Confessions. On account of their milder
and sounder view of original sin, the Calvinists are enabled, moreover,
to uphold the doctrine of the active co-operation of man with God ;*
and herein they again coincide with the Catholics, but oppose the
Lutherans. By this power of co-operation, however, the Calvinists
ments, did we not know the object he had in view. There were, doubtless, some
obscure individuals, destitute of all consideration, who taught soraething of the like;
amd to these we may apply the following passage from the intellectual Pallavicini,
though it is directed against a degenerate scholasticism in general : — " Si vitium
ahquorum accusat, reminisci debuorat (Sarpi) in omnibus disciplinis, ac potissimura in
nobilisslmis, adedquc raaxirae arduis, tolerandos esse professorum plerosque vitiis
laborantes : plurirais concedi, ut in illis ingenia exerceant, quo doctrinae praestantia
in panels eflloresoat.,..Nuni datum reipublicae est, ut in sua quisque arte prsEcellat :
vel ipsa natura, quaconque solcrtia humana major, vltiosos partus, abortus, monstra
praepedire non valet. Unicum superest reraediura, ut videlicet eos artifices adhibeas,
quos communis existiraatio comprobat. Id usu venit scholasticae theologia. Disci-
plinanim omnium pr^stantissiraa simulque difEcillima ea eat : ejus possessionem sibi
multi arrogant, pauei obtinent : hoc constanter admiratur hominum eonsensio : alii
processfi temporis, qua neglecti, qua ignoti jacent, qua etiara derisi." — Hist. Concil.
Trid. lib. vii, c. 14, p. 253.
* Calvin Instit. lib. ii. c, 3, n. 6. " Sed erunt forte, qui concedent, a bono suopte
ingenio aversara, sola Dei virtute converti (voluntatera :) sit tamen ut prsparata suas
deinde in agendo partes habeat." (Calvin here combats Peter Lombard.)...." Ego
autem  contendo, quod et pravam nostram voluntatem corrigat Dominus, vel potius
aboleat, et a seipso bonam subraittat. Quatenus a gratia prasvenitur, in eo ut pedis-
Bequam appelles, tibi permitto, sed quia reformata opus est domini." Hereby Calvin
appears to establish the distinction between the Catholic view and hisown, in thispoint,
naraely, that God alone in the first place heals the will, without any co-operation on
the part of man (how this is to come about, let hira tmderstand who can ;) and that
next the will (which is the natural faculty,) co-operates : whereas the Catholic teaches
that the human will must labour with God at its own improvement. But the differ
ence between Calvin and Luther is this : that according to the latter, nothing of the
old man is any longer fit for an active co-operation. — Confess. Helvet. i. c. ix. p. 21 :
" Duo observanda esse docemus ; primum, regenerator in boni electione et operatione,
non tamtum agere passive, sed active. Aguntur enim a Deo, ut agant ipsi, quod
agant. Recte enim Augustinus adducit illud, quod Deus dicitur noster adjutor.
Nequit enim adjuvari, nisi is, qui aliquid agit."

182 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
mean not to affirm, that it is in the power of man to receive, or to re
ject, fhe action of God. Where Divine grace knocks, the door must
be opened ; il works quite invincibly, and those, who enter not into life,
are never touched by it. Here we immediately come to the doctrine
of Predestination.
By the side of many very shaUow and steril conceptions, there were
ever agitated, in the bosom of the Catholic Church, the most manifold,
profound, and speculative theories on divine predestination, and its re
lation to human freedom. To philosophical talent and acuteness, as
weU as to the iraagination, a wide, and (according to the favourite term
of speculation, in every age) a very enticing field is here opened, which
constantly invites the hand of cultivation. The Church, however, has
deemed it her duty to set certain limitations to this spirit. For God
can be represented in such relations to man, as to make the latter
entirely disappear ; or man, again, may be conceived in such a posi
tion, relatively fo God, as to subvert the notion of the Alraighty, as
the dispenser of grace. Accprding to the first view, God appears act
ing with a cruel caprice, which cannot bc conceived by man ; according
to the second, so ruled by the caprice of man, that He ceases to be
He who is, and through whom all goodness springs. Accordingly,
the Catholic Church alike rejects an overruling of God on the part of
man, to irapart sanctifying and saving grace ; and an overruling of
man on the part of God, to compel t'he former to become this or that.
On the contrary, she teaches, in the former case, as is well known,
that divine grace is unmerited ; in tho latter, that it is offered to all
men, their condemnation depending on the free rejection of redeeming
aid.* The Lutheran formularies emancipated them.selves, in this respect,
from the authority of Luther ; and, in accordance with the Catholics,
taught, not, indeed, as we before observed (§ xi.,) without detriment to
the internal consistency of their system, that Chrisi died for all men,
that he caUeth all sinners to himself, and earnestly willeth that all men
should come to hira, and receive his proffered aid.f

* Concil. Trident, Sess. vi. e. 2. " Hunc proposuit Deus propitiatorera per fidem in
sanguine ipsius pro peccatis nostris, sed etiam pro totius mundi." C. iu. : " Ille pro
omnibus mortuus est." Can. xvii. : " Si quis justificationis gratiam non nisi praedes.
tinatis ad vitam conlingere dixerit ; rehquos vero omnes, qui vocantur, vocari quidem,
sed gratiam non accipere, utpote divina potestate praedestinatus ad malum ; anathe-
ma sit," Pope Innocent X,, in his constitution against Jansenius, rejected the pro-
position, (n. v. :) " Semipelagianum est dicere, Christum pro omnibus omnino ho
minibus mortuum esse, aut sanguinem fudisse." — Hardin. Concil., tom. xi. foi. 143.
t Solid. Declar. xi, de aeterna Dei prsedestinat. § 28, p. 765. " Si igitur eeteinam

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 183
It is otherwise with Calvin. He assures us, indeed, that he will
move cautiously between two shoals, one consisting in the temerity of
the believer, to scrutinize the unfathomable mysteries of God, — the
second, consisting in the studious avoidance of the subject of predesti-
nation, — speaking of it as a dangerous sandbank.* He finds, for his
own part, a great practical interest in this doctrine. The sweet fruits
(suavissimus fructus,) which he discovered in the dogma of absolute
predestination, and which tended to confirm him in his opinion, are
thus noted by him. In the first place, men can have no firm and
deep conviction of the truth, that it is only God's mercy which hath
insured huraan salvation, unless the believer be assured, that not all are
destined for happiness ; nay, that God grants to one, what He refuseth
to another. In the second place, ignorance in this respect, obscures
the glory of God, — plucks humility up by the roots (ipsam humilitatis
radicem evellit,) — renders a sense of internal gratitude towards God
impossible, and disturbs the quiet of conscience in the pious ; for the
consciousness that, in respect to sins, no difference exists between
him and the reprobate, and that faith alone establishes the difference,
comprises a source of the purest consolation, f
Calvin has left a warning example to those, who, from any subjec
tive practical motives, think they are obliged to adopt any new or
strange doctrine ; an example that shows it to be the exclusive duty of
the theologian to seek out with humility what the doctrine of the
Church prescribes, for the promotion and excitement of religious and

electionem ad salutem utiliter considerare voluerimus, firmissirae et constanter iUud
retuiendura est, quod non tantum praedicatio pasnitentiae, verum etiam promissio
Evangelii revera sit universalis, hoc est, quod ad cranes homraes pertineat." Here
follow raany Scripture texts. § 29, p. 766 : " Et hane vocationem Dei, quae per ver"
bum Evangelii nobis offertur, non existiraemus simulatam et fucatam : sed certo sta
tuamus, Deum nobis per eam vocationem voluntatem suam revelare : quod videlicet
in iis, quos ad eum modum vocat, per verbura efficax esse veht, ut illuminentur, con
vertantur, et salventur." § 38, p. 769 : " Quod autem verbura Dei contemnitur, non
est in causa Dei vel praescientia vel prK'destinatio, sed perversa hominis voluntas."
* Calvm. Instit. hb. iii. c. 21, foi. 336.
t L. c, e. 21, § 2, foi. 336 ; c. 24, § 17, foi, 390 : "Nempe tutius piorum con-
scientias acquiescent, dum intelligunt, nullam esse peccatorum differentiam, modo
adsit fides." Calvin (de aeterna Dei praidest. opusc. p. 883,) goes still further: " In-
primis rogatos velim lectores, . . . non esse, ut quibusdam falso videttur, argutam
hanc vel sptnosam speculationem, quae absque fructu ingenia fatiget : sed disputa-
tionem solidara et ad pietatis usum maxime accommodatam : nempe, quae et fidem
probe aedificet, et nos ad hurailitatem erudiat, et in admirationem extoUat immensae
¦erga nos Dei bonitatis, et ad hanc celebrandam excitet," etc.

184 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
moral feelings ; since the truth and objectivity of the Church doctrine
imparts, Ukewise, to all the practical precepts it sanctions, the charac
ter of truth and objectivity. For the reasons above stated, — that is to
say, in order to call forth a deep Christian piety, Calvin lays down the
following notion of predestination : — " We call predestination that eter
nal decree of God, whereby He hath determined what the fate of every
man should be. For not to the sarae destiny are all created : for, to
some is allotted eternal Ufe; to others, eternal damnation. According
as a man is raade for one end or for the other, we call him predestined
to Ufe, or to death."'* The sarae idea the Reforraer again expresses in
the following way ; " We assert that, by an eternal and unchangeable
decree, God hath deterrained whom he shall one day permit to have a
share in eternal felicity, and whom he shall doom to destruction. In
respect to the elect, this decree is founded in His unraerited mercy,
without any regard to human worthiness ; but those, whom He deliv
ers up to damnation, are, by a just and irreprehensible judgment,
excluded from all access to eternal life."t
It is scarcely credible to what truly blasphemous evasions Calvin
resorts, in order to irapart to his doctrine an air of solidity, and to se
cure it against objections. As faith was considered by Calvin a gift
of the Divine raercy, and yet, as he was unable to deny, that raany are
represented in the Gospel to be believers, in whom Christ found no
earnestness, and no perseverance, and whora consequently he did not
recognize to be the elect, Calvin asserts, that God intentionally pro
duced within them an apparent faith; that He insinuated himself into
the souls of the reprobate, in order to render them more inexcusable.:!:

* Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. c. 21, n. 5, p. 337. " Praedestinationem vocamus aeternum
Dei decretum, quo apud se constitutum habuit, quid de unoquoque homine fieri vel.
let. Non enim pari conditione creantur omnes: sed aliis vita setema, aliis daranatio
aeterna praeordinatur. Itaque prout in alterutrura finem quisque conditus est, ita vel ad
vitaira, vel ad mortem praedestinatum diciraus."
t L. c. n. 7, p. 339. " Quos vero damnation! addicit, his justo quidera et irrepre-
hensibili, sed incoraprehensibili judicio vitae aditum prscludi." And how did Calvin
treat those who opposed such a doctrine ? His work, De aternd Dei pradestinationc,
is directed against Albertus Pighius, a very intellectual and learned divine; as also
his treatise, De libero arbitrio. In the latter work Pighius is treated with sufficient
decency, but in the former we read as follows : " Albertus Pighius Campensis, homo
phrenetica plane audacia praeditus. . . . Paulo post librum editum, moritur Pighius.
Ergo ne cani mortuo insultarem, ad alias lucubrationes me converti. ... In Pighio
nunc et Georgio Siculo, beUuarum par non male comparatum," etc.
X Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. c 2, u. 11, p. 194. " Etsi in fidem non illuminantur, nee
Evangehi efiieaeiam vere sentiunt, nisi qui praeordinati sunt ad salutem ; experientia
tamen ostendit reprobos interdum simih fere sensu atque electos affici, ut ne suo qui-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 185
Instead of acknowledging, in the above-stated facts, the readiness of
the Almighty to confer His grace on all, who only wish it, he explains
them by the supposition of intentional deceit, which he lays to the
charge of the Almighty ! Equally strange is the reason assigned for
the doctrine of predestination, — that God wishes to manifest His mer-
cy towards the elect, and His justice towards the condemned ; as if
the two divine qualities were severed one from the other; and were
mutuaUy ignorant of each other's existence ! God will be at once just
and merciful to aU without exception, — not just merely towards these,
and merciful only towards those, as the prejudiced judges of this world
are wont to be I We raust also bear in mind, that the notion of jus
tice, considered in itself, cannot even be upheld, if no fault exists ; and
no fault can be charged on the reprobate, if, without possessing the use
of freedom, they are condemned ; nay, have been condemned from all
eternity I Equally baseless would be the' notion of mercy, as it has
necessarily for its subject sinners, who, by the free determination of
their own will, and not by extraneous compulsion, have transgressed
fhe divine moral law, in order then again to receive pardon : for in
this case, the whole process would be a mere absurd farce.
It was, moreover, only by the greatest efforts of Calvin and his dis
ciples, particularly Beza, that this doctrine was enabled to pervert the
sound understanding of Christians. Bern especiaUy resisted for a long
time, tUl the consensus Tigurinorum was brought about. The Gallic
Confession immediately adopted this doctrine,* and the Belgic like-
wise.f That the Synod of Dort should sanction Calvin's doctrine of
predestination, was to be expected.:}: However, other Reforraed cora
munities had, frora their very origin, much softened the doctrines of

dem judicio quicquara ab electis differant.Q iare nihil absurd! est, qu^d coelestium
donorum gustus ab Apostolo, et temporalis fides a Christo illis adseribitur ; non quod
vim spiritualis gratiae solide percipiant, ac certum fidei lumen ; sed quia Dominus, ut
magis convictos et inexcusabiles reddat, se insinnat in eorum mentes, quatenus sine
adoptionis spirittl gustari potest ejus bonitas," p, 195. ** Commune cum illis (filiis
Dei,) fidei prineipium habere videntur, sub integumento hypocriseos."
* Confess. Gallic, e. xii, p. 115.
t Confess. Belg. c. xvi. p. 189. " Credimus, posteaquara tota Adam progenies sic
in perditionem et exitium, prirai hominis culpa, prscipitata fuit, Deura se talera de-
monstrasse, qualis est; nirairum misericordem et justum; — misericordem quidem, eos
ab hac perditione hberando et servando, quos aetemo, et immutabili suo consilio, pro
gratuita sua bonitate in Jesu Christo Domino nostro elegit et selegit, absque uUo ope-
rum coram respectu: justum vero, rehquos in lapstl et perditione, in quam sese prse-
cipitaverant, relinquendo."
X Synod. Dordrac. c. i. art, vi. seq. p. 303, seq.

186 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Calvin. Among these we may notice the Articles of the Anglican
Church,* while the Catechism of the Palatinate maintains sUence upon
the subject, and the Confession of the Marches positively declares
against the decree of absolute predestination. f
§ XIII. — Of the Catholic notion of justification.
The want of a deeper acquaintance with the usages of antiquity,
particularly of a vivid insight into the spirit of its language, gave the
outward occasion at least to a confusion in the notion attached to jus
tification in Christ Jesus, and served strongly to confirm the obstacle
which existed in the interior of minds, and prevented the entire appre
ciation, and coraprehensive understanding, of this practical and funda
mental doctrine of Christianity.
The ancients are wont to put the forra in which the inward essence
outwardly manifests and reveals itself, for the inward spirit itself, be
cause the latter, concealed in its form, is thus brought out. Hence,
when in the Old Testament the justification of a man through and
before God is represented in the form of a human and judicial act, and
consequently of a mere outward acquittal aud release, it is the grossest
error, and a proof of entire ignorance of the ways of thinking, and
modes of speech, among ancient nations, not to connect such expres
sions with the idea of an inward deliverance and discharge from evU.
How much in the Protestant Church the style of the ancient world
was misunderstood, we may perhaps most clearly discern from a pas
sage in Gerhard, where he says, the whole act of justification is de
scribed only by expressions borrowed frora judicial usage. For exam
ple : "judgment," Psalm cxliii.; "judge," John v. 27 ; "tribunal,"
Rom. xiv. 10; "accused," Rora. iii. 19 ; "accuser," John v. 45 ;
"witness," Rora. ii. lo -, "handwriting," Col. ii. 14; "advocate," 1
John ii. 1 ; " acquittal," Psalm xxxii. 1 ; etc.* Even the multitude
of these, and similar expressions, should have inspired a certain caution,
and have encouraged the idea, that they must have in part at least a
figurative signification. Rarely, even in the Catholic Church, was

* Confess. Anglic, art. xvu. p. 132.
t The Scotch Confession (Art- viii. p. 141) speaks a language extremely mild,
such as a Catholic might employ. The Declaration of Thom (Art. xviii. p. 423,) is
doubtful. Confess. March. Art. xv. p. 383. The Hungarian Confession slurs veiy
well over the matter, p. 252.
X Gerhard, loci, theolog. Ed. Cotta, tom. iii. p. 6.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 187
the right view unfolded with perfect scientific exactness, and brought
back by means of an accurate philology to its first principles.*
But though the true seuse of the ancients might not be explained
with the clearest scientific evidence, yet it was adhered to in life. The
¦Church being connected by her origin with tbe close of the ancient
world, the knowledge of the old modes of speech passed to her by a
living and immediate contact, although this knowledge did not rise
through the medium of reflection fo abstract science. If St. Augus
tine says with reason, that the Old is but the New Testament still
veiled, and the New the Old Testament unveiled, the true sense of the
latter must evidently be better known to the Church than to the syna
gogue itself The former imparted to the sense of the Old Testament,
in the matter before us, a more appropriate form, — and this is the case
with all the religious ideas, which the Church and the synagogue have
in comraon, — in order that the unshackled spirit may show itself purer,
and more transparent, and that the form may correspond to the matter.

* Bossuet (Exposition de la doctrine de I'Eglise Cathol. c. vi.) expresses himself
thus briefly, according to the usual interpretation : " Corarae I'Ecriture nous expli-
que la remission de p^ch^s, tantbt, en disantque Dieu Icscouvre, et tantdt en disant,
qu'il les 6te et qu'il les efface par la grace du Saint Esprit, qui nous fait nouvelles
creatures ; nous croyons qu'il faut joindre ensemble ces expressions, pour former I'id^e
parfaite de la justification du p^cheur." From the want of a deeper knowledge of
the Oriental languages, spring so many strange and half explanations of scriptural
passages, which were adduced by the Protestants against the Catholics, and vice versa.
One exaraple may serve for many. Calvin, in his Instit. iii. 11, appealed to Rom. iv.
8, where from Psalm xxxi. the following passages are taken : " Blessed is he, whose
transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered." " Blessed is the man, unto whom
the Lord imputeth not iniquity." Now Calvin observes: "A coraplete definition of
justification is either here given, or it is not : if it be coraplete, then justification con
sists raerely in the forgiveness of sins, which is sufficiently explained by the words,
' cover and not irapute.' To justify, raeans accordingly, to declare any one free from
punishment, in despite of yet existing sin. But if by the mere covering and remis
sion of guilt and sin, the notion of justification is not completed, how can it be said
that he is blessed, whose sins are covered ? Bellarmine now answers (De Justifica
tione, 1. 11, o. 9,) it is said: " Beati iramaculati in via, qui ambulant in lege Domini ;''
and in Matthew, c. v. " Blessed are the poor in spu-it, the meek, the merciful, the
clean of heart," &e. ; and he asks, " If the description of the just man be complete,
why is no mention made of the covering, and of mere forgiveness ? If it be but an
incomplete description, how are those called Blessed, who are only imperfectly just ?"
Then he adds: " Potest igitur ad omnes ejusmodi quaestiones responderi, non poni in
his locis integram definitionem justificationis, aut beatitudinis ; sed explicari solum
aliquid, quod pertinet ad justificationem aut beatitudinem acquirendam :" — an excel
lent refutation of Calvin, without, however, bemg quite satisfactory in a scientific
joint of iview.

188 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
It is worthy of remark, that the Protestants conceive justification to be
a thing chiefly external, and the Church to be a thing chiefly internal ;
so that, in either respect, they are unable to bring about a permeation
.of the inward and the outward. The one, however, determines tho
other ; for, as fhey consider not justification to be internal, the Church,
according to their system, could not become external. When justifica
tion is not the inraost property of man, it is then too weak to possess
the power to produce a complete effect, and to throw out the invisible
into the visible, and consequently to make the inward Church simul
taneously and indubitably an outward one. Hence that painful oscil
lation between the invisible and the visible Church, because justifica
tion was not conceived to be an internal thing.
The Council of Trent describes justification to be an exaltation from
the state of sinfulness to that of grace, and of adoption of the children
of God ; that is to say, an annihilation of the union of the will with the
sinful Adam (a removal of original sin, and of every other sin com
mitted before justification,) and the contraction of fellowship with Christ,
the Holy and the Just One, — a state which is, in a negative sense, that
of reraission of sin, and in a positive sense, that of sanctification.* The
Council further represents justification as a renewal of the inward man,
by means whereof we becorae really just,"!" as inherent (inhmrens) in
the believer, and as a restoration of the priraeval state of huraanity. On
this account, the same synod observes, that, by the act of justification.
Faith, Hope, and Charity, are infused into the heart of man ; and that
it is only in this way he is truly united with Christ, and becoraeth a
living member of his body.:): In other words, justification is considered
to be sanctification and forgiveness of sins, as the latter is involved in

* Concil. Trid. Sess. vi, u, 5, " Quibus verbis justificationis impii descriptio in-
sinuatur, ut sit translatio ab eo statd, in quo homo naseitur fihus primi Ada, in sta
tum gratis et adoptionis filiorum Dei per secundum Adam Jesurn Christum, salvato
rem nostrum."
t L. i;. c. vii, "Quae (justificatio) non est sola peccatorum remissio, sed et
sanctificatio et renovatio interioris hominis per voluntariam susceptionem gratiae et
donorum : unde homo ex injusto fit Justus," etc.
t L. c. c. vii. " Quamquam nemo possit esse Justus, nisi cui merita passionis
Domini nostri Jesu Christi communicantur ; id tamen in hac impii justificatione fit,
dum ejusdem sanctissimae passionis merito per Spiritum Sanctum charitas Dei dif
funditur in cordibus eorum, qui justificantur, atque ipsis inhaeret : unde in ipsa justifi
catione cum remissione peccatorum haec omnia simul infusa accipit per Jesum Chris
tum, cui inseritur, per fidem, spem et charitatem. Nam fides, nisi ad eam spes acce
dat et charitas, neque unit perfecte cum Christo, neque corporis ejus vivum membrum
efficit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS 189
the former, and the former in the latter : it is considered an infusion of
the love of God into our hearts, through the Holy Spirit ; and *the in
terior state of the justified raan is regarded as holy feeling, — as a sanc
tified incUnation of the will, — as habitual pleasure and joy in the Divine
law, — as a decided and active disposition to ftdfil the sarae in all the oc
currences of life, — in short, as a way of feeling, which is in itself accepta-
ble and well-pleasing to God. When God declares man to be just and
weU-pleasing to Him, he really is so.*
The Scriptural word Grace hath several significations ; but not rarely
corresponding to it is the Gerraan expression, "gnddige, wohlwollende,
huldvolle Gesinnung," — a gracious, benevolent, condescending feeling,
towards any one : this signification is the basis of all the others ; nay,
it is, if we will, the only one. But if the question be as to the appli
cation of Divine grace towards men, especially sinners, then this feel
ing is by no means a mere quiescent one, but the eondescending will
becomes at once an act ; is life, and engenders life ; so that the grace
of God, extended spiritually to the dead, calleth them back to life : the
grace of God is sanctifying.
As little can it be disputed, that the words, "justify," " rechtferfigen,"
" (Tixaioi/ii," "justifieare," signify also to acquit. This signification
is used when we speak of just or inr(ocent men, who have been acquitted
by their judges, of the charges brought against them ; who, after in-

* It may be useful to lay before the reader some descriptions of justification, to en
able him, amid the variety of expression, to recognize the unity of idea. Thom. Aq.
Prima Sec. q. cxiii. art. i. et art. vi. : " Justificatio importat transrautationem de
statu injustitiae ad statum justitiae praedictiE." But justice he had described as " rec
titudinem quandam ordinis in ipsa interiori dispositione hominis, prout supremum
hominis subditur Deo, et inferiores vires animae subduntur supremae, se. rationi."
Bellarm. de justificatione, lib. ii. c. vi. " Justificatio sine dubio motus quidam est de
peocato ad justitiara, et nomen accipit a termino, ad quera ducit, ut omnes alii simi
les motus, illuminatio, calefaetio, et caeteri : non igitur potest intelligi vera justifica
tio, nisi ahqua praeter remissionem peccati justitia acquiratur. Quemadmodum nee
vera erit illuminatio, nee vera calefaetio, si tenebris fugatis vel fiigore depulso, nulla
lux, nuUusque calor in subjecto corpore subsequatur." St. Augustine says (de Spiritd
et lit. c. 17 :) " Ibi [among the Jews] lex extrinsecus posita est qua injusti tcrreren-
tur, hie [in Christianity] intrinsecus data est, qua justificarentur." On this observes
Bellarmine : " Quo loco dicit (¦Augustmus,^ hominem justifieari per legem scriptam
in cordibus, quae, ut ipse ibidem expllcat, nihil est ahud, nisi charitas Dei diffusa in
cordibus nostris per Spiritum Sanctum, qui datus est nobis." lib li. c. vii. Bellarmine
continues : " Itaque per justitiam, qua justificamur, intelligitur fides et charitas, quae
est ipsa facultas bene operandi " Pallavicini says (lib viii. c. 4, p. 259,; "Consense-
runt omnes [at Trent] de nominissignificatione, justificationem, scilicet, esse transit-
nm a statd inimici ad statum amici, filiique Dei adoptivi."

190 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
quiry instituted, had been pronounced to be what they are — guiltless.
This sense, in the matter under consideration, is inadmissible, because
the question is not about just and innocent men, who have been wickedly
brought before the judicial tribunal, but about men reaUy and truly
guUtj', and unrighteous. Here we see the real signification of the
Greek word above adduced, and of the corresponding Hebrew and La
tin words, namehs " to raake just." The absolving and acquitting
¦word — the word which forgives sin — is a power truly eraancipating,
dissolving the bonds of evil, and extirpating sin ; so that, in the room
of darkness, Ught is admitted : death gives way before Ufe, and despair
fields to hope. Hence the forgiveness of sins for Christ's sake, is un
doubtedly a remission of the guilt and the punishment, which he hath
taken and borne upon himself; but it is likcu-i.sc the transfusion of his
spirit to us, so that we enter into a full vital comraunion with the
second Adara, in like manner as we had with the first.
There can be no doubt, that the transition frora the life of the flesh
to fhe Ufe of the spirit, as above described, cannot ordinarily be sudden ;
that, on the contrary, the substitution of tho latter for the former must
be represented as the final terra of many preliminary stages in the his
tory of the internal man.* The act of justification, indeed, fills up only
one portion of time ; for tbe communication of a vital principle cannot
be considered other than as consummated in a single moraent. f How
ever, the development of the sarae raay be subjected to a succession of
periods. Susceptibility for the act of Divine justification is dependent
on a series of prelimiiiary, rautually qualifying emotions, in the interior
man. From the period wherein our faculties of discernment have clung
with undoubting firmness to revealed truths, the struggling soul moves
on through fear and hope, through grief and intuitive love, through
struggle and victory, up to that happy moraent, where all its better en
ergies, hitherto dissipated, unite under the impulse of a higher power, for
obtaining a decisive conquest ; where, by tho fuU infusion of the Holy
Spirit, the union with Christ is consummated, and we belong wholly to
hira, and he again joyfully recognizes himself in us. In other vvords;
in order that man may be completely adopted by God in the place of a

• Bellarmin. de justif. lib. i, c. 13. " Quos enim diligit (Deus,) primum vocat ad
fidem, tunc spem et timorem et dilectionem inchoatam inspirat, postrerao justificat, et
perfeetam charitatem infundit."
t Dun Scotus (1. iv. Sent. dist. i. p. 8) says, justification is momentary : " Quia
non est successio in inductione alieujus formae, nisi penes partes mobiles, vel penes
partes ipsius formsB." Compare^ray work. New Investigations (in German,) second
edition, p. 206.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 191
child^ or be justified. He requires on the part of man, a gradually prepara
tory susceptibility. Hence we may clearly see how singular is the ob
jection urged by Protestants, that the acts preparatory to the great act
of justification, indicate a Pelagian tendency in the whole Catholic sys-
tem.* Because, according to our doctrine, so much must be endured
and wrought, so much must be consummated in the spirit, ere the one
great divine act can ensue, they think we must needs beUeve, that, by
that preliminary spiritual action and suffering, the fulness of God's grace
is merited. It is, however, far otherwise. The history of regeneration
forms one great whole, most intimately united in all its parts, so that the
third and fourth grade cannot be made, till the first and the second have
been passed.
As divine grace can alone impart the power for the execution of the
first step, — and it is so with all the others, as, accordingly, all parts of the
great whole are determined by higher aid, and consequently are a work
of Divine favour, — it follows, that what holds good of the parts, must
hold good of the whole. Without human exertion, indeed, the first mo-
tion of our spirit cannot be made, precisely because it raust move itself.
It is so with the second and third motion. In other words, without human
agency, God can produce in man no faith, no fear, no germ of love, no
hope, no repentance, and, therefore, not the real justification deterrained
by them. But does it follow, that because the Catholic believes this, he
must also believe, that God communicates, on ihis account, his further
manifestations of grace, because man had not refused his co-operation to
the earlier ones ? The notion of a necessary prelirainary condition to a
thing, is here confounded with the cause of that thing itself.
In order, however, to complete the Catholic theory of justification, we
must, according to the Council of Trent, subjoin two observations. In
the first place, the Catholic Church does not dispute, that even in the
justified raan, notwithstanding that original sin, together with all actual
sin, has been forgiven him, and has been obliterated frora his soul, there
still subsists a perverse sensuality (concupiscentia). Yet it is taught that
this in itself is no sin, and that, if it occurs in Holy Writ under this de
nomination, it is only because it appears as a consequence of sin, and
leads again to real sin, when the wUI hearkens to its suggestions. The
Council saith : " God hateth nought in the regenerated, because nothing

• Cheranit. Exam. Concil. Trid. part i. p. 281 ; Gerhard loc. tora vii p. 221 . (loc,
xvii, c, 3, sect, v,) That to him, who has been prepared by faith and fear, by hope
and contrition, God doth ^through baptism) impart the sanctifying grace, the best
schoolmen term, not without reason, a meritum de congruo, but not a meritum de
condigno.

192 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
is damnable in those who have been truly buried with Christ in baptism,
who walk not according to the flesh, but, putting off the old man, put on
the new, created after God, and are become innocent, immaculate, pure,
and pleasing unto God, heirs indeed of God, and co-heirs with Christ, so
that nothing hindereth their entrance into heaven. That, however, con
cupiscence, or the stiraulus to sin, remains in the ba[3fized, the holy
CouncU avows and acknowledges ; but as this stimulus is left for our
trial, it is unable to injure those who will not consent, but who resist
victoriously by the grace of Christ : for he is not crowned except he
strive lawfully."*
As the CathoUc Church deduces original sin, and with it all evil in
the world, in the last degree, from the abuse of free-wiU, it cannot find
any further traces of sin in man, so soon as his spirit has been averted
from the creature, and hath turned fo God ; so soon as his will hath
been again healed, and his inraost feelings been sanctified. By the in-
born evU, and by that habit of sin which hath grown out of it, and hath
becorae more or less inveterate, more or less confirmed, a mechanical
readiness to incline towards sin hath been engendered in the body and
the inferior faculties of the soul. The new bent of the will, therefore,
cannot immediately draw into its orbit the movements of the soul and
the body. But since, to those regenerated in spirit, such emotions are
alien, and even an abomination ; since the spirit and the flesh are com
pletely severed one from the other ; since they are involved in a de
cisive, and, for the forraer, a victorious struggle ; so raost certainly a
carnal eraotion in conflict with the wiU, yet mastered by it, cannot con
taminate it, and therefore not convict it of sin. If the will give not in
to the desires of the flesh, or the desires of the flesh reach not the will ;
if, accordingly, there be no consent, then there is no sin.f Thus evil,
and (in the strict sense of the word) the sinfulness in concupiscence, is
reraoved, as it is driven back frora fhe inward to the outward man, in
whom it survives as the consequence and the chastisement of sin, and

* L. c, Sess. V. decret. de peccato originali.
t Bellarmin. de amiss, grat, et statft peccati, lib. v. c, 5, tom, iv, p. 278, " Tota
controversia est, utrura corruptio nature acpraesertim concupiscentiaperse ct ex na
tura sua qualis etiara iu baptizatis ac justificatis est, sit proprie peccatum originis. Id
enim adversarii contendunt, cathollci autem negant ; quippe qui sanata voluntate per
gratiam justificantem docent reliquos morbos non solum non constituere homines reos,
sed neque posse constituere, cum non habeant veram peccati rationem. Addit Thom
as Aquinas in sola aversione mentis a Deo consistere proprie et formahter peccatum
originis, in rebelUone autem partis inferioris, qui fuit effectus rebellionis mentis a Deo,
non consistere peccatum, nisi materiahter."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 193
withal as a temptation, which may conduce either to the raore exalted
glorification of the soul, or to its relapse into the deepest fall. In the
forraer case, it suraraons us to struggle and to victory, and to the con-
firraation and expansion of virtue ; in the latter, it can easily surprise
the inattentive, and draw him into its toils, or penetrate into his inmost
&oul. But that gap which, in consequence of regeneration, is established
between the interior, noW sanctified, man, and the outward man, is by
no means a fixed, imrautable separation. On the contrary, in the be
liever, faithfully co-operating with sanctifying grace, it is in a state of
constant decrease, and gradual declension ; for the continued exercise
of virtue, and the ever more and more powerful developraent of the di
vine principle of life thereby occasioned, restore the harmony of all
the parts of man in his neW course, with a constant, though not always
perceptible, increase (although, without the extraordinary interposition
of a higher power, that harmony in this life is never perfect ;)* so that
hian's inferior faculties learn to move in progressive unison with the
sanctified spirit, and haVe a share in its glorification, as they had before
inoved in accord with the unholy spirit, and participated in its disso
nance. However, the regenerated man looks anxiously fbr deliverance
frora the body, not in order to be then only freed from any sinful incli
nation of the will, but to be delivered frora trial, and the fear of trial.
The second observation v/hich we have to raake, is, that, according
to the doctrine of the Catholic Church, the just man can never hold
himself quite free from the sp-called venial sins, and transgresses in di
vers ways, and therefore it is not without reason that he daily, in the
Lord's prayer, prays for forgiveness of sins. As the will of the regene
rated, however, is not thereby alienated frora God, and His holy law
which he loves ; and as such transgressions proceed more from the in-

* The Council of Vienna (in the lib. v. Clement, tit, de haeret.) has pronounced
against the Beguards what Pope Innocent XI. repeated against Michael Molinos.
He condemned, in bis bull, the following propositions: "No. 55. Per hanc viam in
temam pervenitur ad purgandas et distinguendas omnes animas passiones, ita quod
nihil amplius sentitur, nihil, nihil. No. 56. Duae leges et duae cupiditates, anima una
et amoris proprii altera, tamdiu perdurant, quamdiu perdurat amor proprius, unde
quando purgatus est et raortuus, ut fit per viam intemam, non adsunt amplius du®
illae leges, nee aliquid sentitur amphus," A doctrine of this kind is ever connected
with the other, that at this grade of the spiritual life a fall is no longer possible.
Hence the following propositions of the Quietists are rejected : — " No, 61. Anima
quum ad raortera mysticam pervenit, non potest amplius velle aliud, quam quod Deus
vult, quia non habet amplius voluntatem, et Deus eara ilU abstulit." No. 63. " Per
viara intemam pervenitur ad statum continuum, immobilem in pace imperturbabih."
Compare my work. New Investigations, (in German,) second edition, p. 211.
13

194 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
firmity of the new man, than from any remnant of perverseness in
the will, sins of this nature occasion no interruption in the newly
established relations with God ; and internal justification, therefore,
according to Bossuet's expression, appears not untrue, though it bo not
perfect. But this infirmity requires us in every instance to observe
constant self-watchfulness, and to practise uninterrupted prayer for ob
taining Divine grace, and increase of sanctification.*
§ xiv.— Doctrine of the Protestants on justification and sanctification.
The notions which the Protestants form of justification, is thus briefly
defined in the Formulary of Concord: "The word 'justification' sig-
nifies, the declaring any one just, the acquitting hira of sins, and the
eternal chastisements of sin, on account of the justice of Christ, which
is by God imputed to faith ;"f and it expressly says, our justice is not
ofus.\ With these declarations Calvin perfectly coincides.^ Justifi.
cation, in the Protestant sense, is a judicial act of God, whereby the
believing sinner is delivered from the punishments of sin, but not from
sin itself: while Catholics teach that, on one hand, the remission of sin,
the debt as well as the penalty, and on the other hand, positive sancti
fication, follow.* in a like way, through the divine act of justification.
The great difference between the Confessions consists, accordingly, in
this, — that, according to the Catholic doctrine, the justice of Christ, in
the act of justification, is immediately appropriated by tho believer,
becoming part of his inward self, and changing his whole moral ex-
istence ; while, according to the Protestant system, justice reraains in
Christ, passes not into the inward life of the believer, and remains in a
purely outward relation to him ; covering his injustfte, not only past.

* Concil. Trid. Sess. vi. can. 11. "Si quis hominem semel justificatura dixerit
amplius peccare non posse, neque gratiam araittcre, atque ideo eum, qui labitur et
peccat, nunquam vere fuisse justificatum, aut contra, posse in totam vitam peccata
omnia, etiam venialia vitare nisi ex speciali Dei privilegio. . . . anathema sit."
t Sohd. declar. iii. de fid. justif. § 11, p. 655. " Vocabulum justificationis in hoc
negotio significal, justum pranuntia're, a peccatis et aeterais peccatorum euppliciis ab-
solvcre propter justitiara Christi, quae a Deo fidei iraputatur."
X L. c. § 48, p. 664. " Cum igitur in ecclesiis nostris apud theologos Augustanaai
Confessionis extra eontroversiam positum sit, totam justitiam nostram extra nos ease
. . . quajrendara, earaque in solo Doraino nostro Jesu Christo consistere," etc,
§ Calvin, Instit. lib, ni. u. 11, § 2, foi. 260. " Ita nos justificationem simpliciter
interpretamur acceptionem, qua nos Decs in receptos pro justis habet. Eam in pec
catorum remissione ac justitia Christi imputatione positam esse dicimus." ^ 3 : " Ut
pro justis in Christo censeamur, qui in nobis non sumus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 195
but still outstanding, since by justification the will is not healed. We
therefore may say, — according to Catholic principles, Christ, by justifi.
cation, stamps inwardly and outwardly his Hving impress on the be
liever ; so that the latter, though a feeble and imperfect, becoraeth yet
a real, copy of the type. On the other hand, according to the Protes
tant doctrine, Christ casts on the believer his shadow only, under which
his continued sinfulness is merely not observed by God. Hence the
explicit remark of the Forraulary of Concord, that the faithful, on ac-
count of the obedience of Christ, are looked upon as just, although by
virtue of corrupt nature they be truly sinners, and reraain such even
«nto death.*
These avowals prove of themselves, that the Protestants have adopt
ed those notions of grace and justification, which we pointed out above
'(§ XIII.,) as one-sided and erroneous. But the opposition between the
Confessions, in this matter, derives a stronger illustration from consider
ing the following points, which show the wide practical consequences
of this opposition. Concupiscence, Which, as Catholics avow, still re
mains after justification, the mere incitement to sin, is represented by
Protestants as sin in itself, and indeed as the yet subsisting original sin;
while the distinction between the mere feeling of that incitement to
sin and the consent to the same, is rejected by them as unessential, nay,
as untrue. It is precisely on this ground that they rest the assertion,
that justification consists in the mere declaration of the remission of
sin, not in the purification from sin itself, because original sin stiU sub
sists, and adheres even to the will. In like manner it is asserted, that
between venial and mortal sin there is no internal and essential differ
ence ; for (so the Protestants teach,) all sins, in themselves, whatever
be their nature, accuse man in a like degree before the tribunal of God :
aU merit (eternal) death. Faith in the raerits of Christ, according to
them, constitutes the only decisive distinction between sinners in the
eyes of God. When man believes, and so long as he believes, all his
sins, so they teach, are mere venial sins ; as on the other hand, without
this faith none of his sins can be pardoned ; for, in reality, unbelief is
(the only sin.
These most astounding maxims involve in themselves the foUowinof
consequences. If the justified man, considered in himself, be as much
a sinner and as damnable as the unjust man, then no internal and
essential difference, as to moral being, is recognized between the con-

? Solid, declar. iii. de fid. justif. i 15, p. 657. "Per fidem propter obedientiam
Christi justi pronunciantur et reputantur, etiamsi ratione corruptee natura: suae adhuo
sint, maneantque peccatores, dum mortale hoc corpus circumferunt."

196 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
verted and the unconverted ; the scriptural antitheses of the old and
the new man, of the old and the new Ufe, of the new creation, of the
first birth, and of regeneration, lose not only their point, but in a great
degree, their moral signification (§ 29 ;) the notion of penance, whereby
the transition from the one state to the other is brought about, must be
conceived in a one-sided, nay, totally mistaken sense (§ 33 ;) and the
impressive language of Holy Writ, respecting the deliverance from sin
wrought through Christ, and the mortification (eradication) of sin in
beUevers (Rom. vi. viu. 1-41 is then nothing more than unraeaning
bombast, nay, the occasion of the most deplorable and ridiculous self-
delusion. But the ulterior consequences of the doctrine, that, in those
who believe in the merits of Christ, all distinction between venial and
mortal sins is effaced, wUl in a subsequent part of this work (§ xvi.) be
made fully manifest. Here we shaU cite sorae passages that will show,
to what subversion of morality a system leads, that will make no essen
tial distinction between the feeUng of the incitement to sin, and the
wilful consent to the same. As the former, as long as we Uve, is una
voidable, so the latter is represented to be simultaneous with it ; and
from this point of view of raoral worthiness, the deed is made to be
not more punishable than the most involuntary sensual enticement to
the sarae. Thus Melancthon appeals to the testimony of every Chris.
tian conscience, which saith to each one, that even the Christian has
nothing less in his power, than his own heart, whose entire emotions
are unclean.* Hence, the same Melancthon proposes to Catholics the
question : Do not the saints seek their own interest ? and he is really
of opinion, that the saint, the man truly justified before God, remains
necessarily enslaved to vain glory, to avarice, and the like.f Luther
speaks of wicked lust, avarice, anger, immodesty, adding a significant
et cetera, which are aU to be found in the just man.| Calvin, too,
• Melancth. loc. theolog. p. 18. " Christianus agnoscet, nihil minus in potestate
sua esse, quam cor suum," etc. Melancthon uses the word " cor " instead of " vo
luntas," because, according to him, raan has really no will, but merely impulses and
desires, t L. e. p. 138, " Annon sua etiam quaerunt sancti ? Annon in Sanctis amor est
vitae, gloriae, securitatis, tranquillitatis, rerum f" Let the reader observe the singular
identification of " amor gloriae" and " securitatis, tranquillitatis," as if the latter
were in itself as much as the fonnor, which, a few lines lower, is further explained by
the word x£»oif(i|i(t. But when Melancthon says, the Parisienses (the doctors of Sor
bonne, as representatives of Catholic theology) did not look to the affectus internes,
but directed their view to mere outward observances, so ior this assertion he may
answer at the tribunal of God.
t Interpretation of the Epistle to the Galatians. Wittenberg, 1556. Parti, p.
202, b.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 197
makes us acquainted with saints of this sort.* A singular saint, for
sooth, who seeks his own interest, and not Christ's glory ! Equally
strange is the combination of ideas, when we are required to conceive
an immodest or avaricious saint ; for, according fo the laws of logic,
the predicate destroys the subject. Yet, what is the meaning of the
words, when men speak of the covetousness, the avarice, the choler,
and immodesty, of saints ? Do they mean thereby a stimulus inserted
in the flesh, which incites them indeed to works of the flesh, but at last
wearies itself out in unsuccessful efforts ? Then we cannot understand
how such idle, unsuccessful temptations can be denominated covetous
ness, avarice, choler, and immodesty. But if we imagine this stimulus
to be victorious over the wUl, or its impulse to be consummated into an
outward act, how can the conquered be caUed saints and just ones I
Rora. viii. 1-9, 13. Such a confusion of language hath its ground in
the confusion of essentially different ideas ; and we raust marvel much,
when the identifying of what is most distinct, nay, most opposite in
notion and in language, fails to produce in life also a corresponding
identification. Having spoken thus far of the Protestant system of justification, it
remains for us to notice their view of sanctification ; for it would be
in the highest degree unjust, if we did not show, that, according to the
Lutheran system, the renovation of sinful man, the moral change, —
in a word, sanctification, — must attach to the confiding reception of
the declaration of the forgiveness of sin. Man, conscious of so gracious,
so unraerited a remission of sin, raust, in thankful return for so great a
benefit, earnestly strive to improve, and to observe, with ever greater
fideUty, the comraandments of God. In the justified man, according
to the same system, original sin by the communication of the Holy
Spirit is weakened, though not extirpated ; and, in proportion as it is
weakened, sanctification increases. Calvin, approximating to the
Catholic view, goes even so far as to confess, that, as Christ cannot be
divided, man in communion with Him must partake at once of justifi
cation and sanctification. Thus, whosoever is received by God into
His grace, possesses thereby the spirit of the Sonship, through whose
power the transformation into the likeness of God ensues. f Pleasing

* Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. o. 3, ^ 10, foi. 213. Yet his language is much milder.
t Calvin. Instit lib. iii. c. 11, ^6. Corapare Calvin. Antldot, in Concil, Trid.
opusc. p. 702. " Neque tamen interea negandum est qua ratione (juxta quorumdara
opiuionem,) per solam quidem fidem coram Deo justificatur ; sed tamen ila, ut absque
operibus salutem aeternam consequi impossibile sit." Thus, with justification with
out works, salvation without works is promised.

198 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
as it is to witness this iraprovement in doctrine, and closely as it is
connected with Calvin's representation of original sin, and his descrip
tion of the process of regeneration ; yet an essential difference will
ever be found between the two systems, Catholic and Protestant, in
cluding, under the latter, tbe Calvinistic view. For since a mere weak
ening, not an extirpation, of original sin is admitted, no essential moral
difference, but a mere gradual one, can then be maintained between
the old and the new man : but this is as much opposed to the doctrine
of the Catholic Church, as it is to the dignity of Christianity, to the
notion of a new principal of hfe communicated by it, which in conse
quence supersedes the old one, and to the most explicit declarations of
Scripture. If the influence of Christ over man were merely confined
to this, that the latter was a somewhat morally better, not quite a mo
rally different, man from the heathen, then, in a strict sense, it were
impossible to speak of sanctification ; for both the Heathen and the
Christian would, in their inward life, be like, and differ only in their
degree of discipUne. The Catholic Church, above all things, insists
on a radical internal change. Moreover the difference consists in this,
that with the Protestant the external relation to Christ is by far the
most iraportant thing ; so that at this point of his spiritual life he can
calraly sit down, and, without advancing a step further, be assured of
eternal fehcity ; since, by what the Reforraers call justification, his sins
have been once forgiven, and, at the same time, the gates of heaven
opened to hiin ;* while the Catholic can obtain the forgiveness of his
sins only when he abandons thera, and in his view the justified man, —
the raan acceptable to God, — is identical in every respect with the
sanctified. Even with Calvirr, forgiveness of sins is quite abstractedly
the only ground for hope of salvation ; and if he at length has pene
tration to perceive, that justification and sanctification cannot be sepa
rated in the interior Ufe, he yet divides thera in his theory, and deduces
from one and the same thing different effects ; since he says, that it is
only by the declaration of God remitting sins, that righteousness is

* Calvin (Instit. lib. iii, c, 11, ^ 15) first attacks Peter Lombard, whose doctrine
he thus states: " Primum, inquit, mors Christi nos justificat, dum per eam excitctur
charitas in cordibus nostris, qua justi efficiraur : deinde quod per earadera extinctum
est peccatum." . . . He then turns against Augustine : " Ac ne Augustini quidem
sententia recipienda est, Tametsi enim egregie hominera omni justitiae laude spoliat
.... gratiam tamen ad justificationem refert, qua in vitae novitatcm per spiritum
regeneramur." Hereupon he says: " Scriptura autem, cum de fidei justitia loquitur,
longe alio nos ducit." At last he concludes (^ 21 ;) " Ut talis justitia imo verbo ap-
pelari queat peccatorum remissio."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 199
acquired, and not by any sanctifying power, which, together with the
consciousness of such a reraission, has been iraparted. Hence it fol
lows, that even a rainiraum of real iraproveraent, — without which, ac
cording to Calvin, the certainty of being favoured with grace cannot
take place, — would entirely suffice for salvation.
To this stateraent of doctrines it will be well to subjoin some reraarks,
directed towards a deeper scientific appreciation of the Lutheran sys
tem. The point to which we would here particularly direct attention,
is the fact how well the doctrine of original sin couples with that of
justification ; how well the one prepares the way for the other ! The
former was so deeply engraven in the essence of man, that the latter
cannot extend beyond his surface. If original sin had been represented
as so destructive to man, in order thereby to exalt the power of Chris
tianity, so that it could be said, " Behold, though original sin had sunk
so deep into the inraost core of human existence, yet Christianity sinks
stUl more deeply ; it penetrates into the lowest depths of the soul, and
works healingly, and creates anew ; if the power of the evil principle
be great, that of the good principle is still greater ;" then this mistaken
view of original sin ought to have been entirely excused as a theoretical
error. But now it is taught, its ravages are so frightful, that they
remain inthe will, even of the regenerated : the disease under which we
labour is so malignant, that we cannot be radicaUy cured of it; and,
as we cannot, so we need not be. Hence Christ, our righteousness, is
out of us : the unrighteousness in the old 'Adam is within us ; the
righteousness in the new Adara out of us.
Moreover, the essence of original sin, according to Luther's ex
pression, recurs very evidently here. If Catholics teach, that it is only in
the case where the solicitation to sin, proceeding frora the flesh, is with
fuU consciousness entertained, and consented to by the will, that the
real character of sin appears, so the Lutherans and Calvinists, with
unexampled obstinacy, assert, that that solicitation, even when repelled
with decided resistance, is in itself sinful. Let us weigh this doctrine
weU, and inquire, whether evil be not then considered as soraething
existing apart, independent of the will, and extraneous to it, and be not
regarded as an essence? What else can be raeant, when it is said,
something evil in itself remains in raan, and is yet evU, even when the
wiU resists and overcomes it 1 Here the sinfulness, certainly, lies no
longer in a perverted bent of the wdl, because the wdl, in this instance,
cannot be perverted ; and yet sin, that is to say, original sin, is still in
man. This is strikingly corroborated by the assertion, that we can be
then only liberated from sin, when we have put off our dear " corpus-

5200 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
culum.""* This assuredly is to conceive sin as soraething very sub
stantial !
And yet it is uncommonly difficult to conceive, how Luther should
have regarded sin as really something, which, in the strict sense of the
word, was an evU essence. Perhaps the following considerations may
enable us to understand Luther better than he understood himself.
Two facts above all are very remarkable. In the first place, it is as
serted of God, that He conceals from His eye the sins of believers, or
regards these as just, though they be not so. Now, it is very difficult
to imagine, how God can view anything other than as it is in itself;
or how a really unjust man can be accepted as just by an omniscient
Deity. If we would do justice to Divine omniscience, no alternative
remains but to suppose, that what is looked upon by man as sin, is
really none in the eyes of God, and is a mere consequence of human
finiteness; and in this way we can comprehend the security, which
is felt in the faith in a mere outward justification. That something
of this sort lies concealed in the back-ground of the minds of those who
adopt this view of justification, is strongly confirmed by the second
fact, to which we must now draw attention. The act of justification,
and the whole work of regeneration, are represented as the doing of
God alone. f Now, it must afford ample raatter for astonishraent, that
God, who is here the exclusive agent, should not entirely pervade His
own work, and extirpate the very roots of sin, and exert His unshackled
might in all its splendour. Man, whose conduct is entirely passive
during this process of justification, could yet be entirely transformed.
Wherefore does not this change occur ? We are compelled to recur to
the sarae thought which we expressed above, though in a somewhat
altered form ; to wit, — that sin is an essential condition in the original
constitution of man, and, being thus necessary, is therefore not im
puted to us by God. For the observation of Calvin, — who seems to
have felt the revolting nature of the theory, that God is the exclusive
agent in regeneration, without being withal the thorough agent, — the
observation of Calvin, that this defective influence was grounded in the
motive of God, to be able to suramon before His tribunal men at every
* Solid Declar. de fid. justif. § 7, p. 686. " Dum hoc raortalc corpusculura cir
cumferunt, vetus Adam in ipsa natura omnibus illius interioribus et exterioribus viri
bus inhaeret."
t Solid. Declar. ii. de lib. arbit. fj 44, p, 645, " Tantum boni, et taradiu bonum
operatur. quantum et quamdiu a Spirits Dei impellitur," Far other is the belief of
the Catholic, who knows that the Divine Spirit ever urges man on, but that man will
rtften not let himself be so urged, and by his own fault, wiU not correspond to the di
vine impulse.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 201
moraent of their Uves, cannot seriously satisfy any one.* Calvin
should have called to his aid his absolute necessity of all occurrences,
as an explanation ready at hand. This necessity of sinning, in the
present stage of human existence, is, then, the true ground of this
theory, and of the possibility of that profound tranquillity in a state of
continued sinfulness,— though such never entered into the minds of the
Reformers. At least, no other speculative notion of the Protestant
account of original sin, considered in connexion with the doctrine of
justification, can be established.
Luther, accordingly, did not express himself weU, when he said,
originalsin is a part of man's essence ; — he should have said, sin cleaves
necessarily to t'he essence of man. Thus did the dogmatic decisions of
Luther and Calvin against human freedom meet the vengeance due to
them : and though they had so rauch enlarged on the raagnitude of
sin, yet, in consequence of the relation to man, wherein they placed
the Deity, they were at last compelled, in despite of themselves, to
deny the very existence of sin. What they taught as to the origin of
evil, manifests itself again in "this matter ; and, even in the Lutheran
system, the consequences of that doctrine remained, though the doc
trine itself the Lutherans rejected. It is far otherwise, as we have
above said, in the Catholic Church. Because she clings so firmly, and
with such a bleeding heart, to tbe truth, that it is only in freedom that
the ultimate cause of sin is to be sought for ; — for this very reason, she
can, she must, likewise maintain a real redemption from sin.

ON JUSTIFYING FAITH.
5 XV. — Catholic view of this subject.
The doctrine of justifying faith experienced the same fate as all the
other fundamental doctrines of Christianity. For fifteen hundred
years, Christians had lived in and by that faith, had formed many in
tellectual conceptions upon it, and had laid down the same in numerous
writings, but had withal felt much deeper things than could be compre
hended in notions, or defined by words. Yet, in default of an erro-

* Calvm. Instit, lib. iii. c. ii. § 11, foi 169. " Nam hoc secundum (Reformation-
em in vitae novitatem) sic inchoat Deus in electis suis, totoque vitiE curriculo paulla-
tim, et interdum lente in eo progreditur, ut semper obnoxu sint ad ejus tribunal mortis
judicio." Here progress in good is made to depend on God alone, and the cause
of retrogression in the path of virtue deliberately referred to the Deity.

202 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
neous view of that faith decisively put forth, and asserted by many,
men were as far from arriving at a truly sifting point, and at the high
est degree of evidence upon the matter, as, before Arius. upon the
doctrine of Christ's divinity, and before Pelagius, upon that of Grace.
Hence it happened, that, in the same way as in tho above-named
articles of faith, much that was obscure, rauch that was self-contra
dictory, was found araong Christian writers before the Nicene CouncU
and the African and the Gallic Synods, so it proved in the various ex
positions of justifying faith, prior to the general Council of Trent; and
it becarae the great and earnest, as well as astonishing task of its
asserabled Fathers, to define the pure truth, and separate it from the
dross of error." As Arius and Pelagius, men widely different in
character frora Luther, and far his inferiors, did not draw their opinions
from their own fancy, but only embraced with warmth, and developed
to the fullest extent, obscure conceptions here and there current ; so
Luther merely adhered to some opinions that had previously been
started, as we learn from that celebrated Confession delivered by him
before the breaking out of the Reformation. In opposition to his
teaching, the Church e.xalted now to the highest degree of certainty,
what, from her origin, had been taught perpetually and universally,
established this in the forra of a dogma, and separated it from raere
individual opinions.
Some of the theologians assembled at Trent applied themselves,
especially, to determine the nature of the opposition which St. Paul
establishes between non-justifying works and justifying faith. The
bishops of Agatha and Lanciano, showed, at great length, that Paul
merely disputes the justifying power of those works, which precede
faith, and, accordingly, spring not out of it.f In conforraity with this
opinion, the bishop Cornelius Mussus observed, that the apostle denies
merely the value of the exterior part of the works ; for instance, Abra
ham was not acceptable to God, merely because he offered up his son
in sacrifice, or performed other like actions, but he became so by the
inward exercise of faith and other virtues, connected with a sanctified
course of will proceeding from faith, and manifesting itself actively in
good works.:]: Very rightly was it said, that Paul had not in view the
works of a man sanctified in Christ, and excluded these from consi
deration, when he denied to works, in opposition to faith, the power of

* Pallavic. IJist. Cone. Trid. lib. viil. c. 4, n. 18, p. 262. " Ingens omnes inces.
serat cura explicandi effatum apostoh, hominera justifieari per fidera."
t Pallavic. 1. c. n. 13, p. 261. i PaUavic. 1. c. n. 14, p. 261.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 208
rendering us acceptable to God. In other words, — they observed, that
Paul opposed to the old, unsatisfactory, legal order of things, the new
way of salvation pointed out by God, and attributed only to the living
adherence fo the same, (itiVt/s,) the power of making us pleasing unto
the Deity.
These definitions were, however, of a raore negative kind ; the fol
lowing are more po.sitive in their nature. That faith in Christ justifies,
observes another theologian, signifies as much, as that faith is the
necessary root, from which all spiritual actions, agreeable to God, spring
forth ; so that consummate righteousness is not conferred by faith, im
mediately and in itself, but only in its ulterior development. And
Claudius Jajus added, with as much brevity as truth, — through faith is
the grace given to us, not to be absolutely acceptable to God, but to
enable us to become so ; and this observation Bertonus iUustrated, by
remarking that Paul did not say, that man is justified by faith, but
through faith ; for our righteousness is not faith itself, but in the latter
is the power given to us to acquire the same. (John i. 12.)* An ex
pression of Bernard Diaz is also worthy of mention. This theologian
observed, that the justifying power is on this account ascribed to faith,
— because it raises us from our native lowliness, (our earthward views,)
and consists in certain moveraents, which transport us to a grade of
spiritual Ufe, exalted above natural existence ; so that we may be con
sidered by God as having entered on the way to acquire His approval
(by attachment to Christ. )f
All these definitions express, only in various ways, one and the same
thing, which the Council of Trent approves, when it says : " Faith is
the beginning of all salvation, — the basis and the root of aU justification :
for, without it, it is impossible to please God, and to attain to His adop
tion.":]: Thus is faith the beginning of salvation ; but yet not a begin-

* Ibid. n. 3, p. 260.
t L. c. n. 16, p. 262. " Ideo dici hominem per fidem justifieari, quod haec ex hu
militate nativa nos attollit, motusque quosdam super conditionem nature nobis impri-
mit, efEcitque ut a Deo respiciamur ecu iter justitiss jam ingressi."
X Concil. Trid. Sess. vi. c. viii. " Quomodo intelligitur, impium per fidem, et
gratis justifieari. Cum vero apostolus dicit, justifieari hominem per fidem, et gratis ;
ea verba in eo sensu intelligenda sunt, quem perpetuus ecclesiae CatholicfE consensus
tenuit, et expressit ; ut scilicet per fidem ideo justifieari dicamur, quia fides est hu-
manas salutis mitium, fundamentum et radix omnis justificationis : sine qua irapossi.
bile est placere Deo, et ad filiorum ejus consortium pervenire : gratis autem justifieari
ideo dicamur, quia nihil eorum, quae justificationem praecedunt, sive fides, sive opera,
ipsam justificationis gratiam promeretur. Si enim gratia est, jam non ex operibus :
alioquin, ut idem apostolus inquit, gratia non est gratia."

204 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
ning which, during this period of life, can be again abandoned, after
important progress hath been made ; for it is likewise the permanent
ground-work, whereon the whole structure of salvation is erected ; yet
IS it not a raere substratum, standing in no immediate organic connexion
with the superincumbent parts ; for it is the root of justification. To
its power and activity is attributed the justifying grace, the new vital
, principle, transforming man from an eneray, into a friend of God ; di
vine love, in a word ; (fides impetrat justificationem, say the school
men,) although faith does not raerit even this grace. A real definition
of faith, however, the Council of Trent has not given : such a one is
found in the Roman catechism, when it says : " The word ' faith' signi
fies not so rauch the act of thinking, or opining, but it has the sense of
a firm obligation (contracted in virtue of a free act of submission,)
whereby the mind decisively and permanently assents to the raysteries
revealed by God."* CathoUcs consider faith as the re-union with God
in Christ, especially by raeans of the faculties of knowledge, illumina
ted and confirmed by grace, wilh which the excitement of various feel
ings is more or less connected. It is, in their estimation, a divine light,
whereby raan discerns, as well as recognizes, the decrees of God, a nd
comprehends not only what God is to man, but also what man should
be to God.
As justification now, in the Catholic sense, consists in a total change
of the whole inward man, we can understand why the Catholic Church
should so urgently insist, that faith alone doth not justify before God ;
that it is rather only the first .subjective, indispensable condition to be
justified ; the root from which God's approval raust spring ; the first
title, whereon we can establish our claim of divine filiation. But if
faith passes from the understanding, and the feelings, excited through
the understanding, to the will ; if it pervades, vivifies, and fructifies the
will, through the new vital principle iraparted to the latter, and engen
ders, in this way, the new man created after God ; or (to make use of
the expression of Seripandus at the CouncU of Treiit,)f if love is en
kindled out of faith, as fire out of brimstone, then, only after faith and
love doth regeneration or justification ensue.

« Catechism. Cone. Trid, p, 17. " Igitur credendi vox hoc loco putare, existi-
mare, opinari, non significat, sed ut docent sacrae literae, certissimae aissenslonis vim
habet, qua mens Deo sua mysteria aperient! firme constanterque assenlitur 
Deus enim, qui dixit, de tenebris luraen splendescere, ipse illuxit in cordibus nostris,
ut non sit nobis opertura Evangeliura. sicut iis, qui pereunt."
t Pallav, hist, Concil. Trid. lib. viii c. 9, u. 6, p. 270. " Quemadraodura a sul-
phure ignis emicat, ita per eam (fidem,) in nobis charitatem extemplo succendi.
Quae praeceptorum observationem et salutem secum trahit."

BETWEEilJ CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 203
Hence, theschools of the middle age recognized, Ukewise, afaith, where
of they said, that it alone justified ; it is known by the designation of the
fides formata, under which the schoolmen understood a faith, that had
love in itself I'S its soul, its vivifying, its plastic principle (forma ;) ahd
on this account it was called_^des charitate formata, animata, fides -Ijiva,
vivida. This is that higher faith, which brings man into a real vital
coraraunion with Christ, fills him with an infinite devotion to God, with
the strongest confidence in Him, with the deepest humility and inmost
love towards Him ; liberates him frora sin, afld causes aU creatures to
be viewed and loved in God.
We shall take the liberty of quoting sohie passages, extolling this
faith, frora writings composed prior, as weU as subsequent, to the Re
forraation. Thomas Aquinas, in answer to the question, whether We
were delivered from sin through the sufferings Of Christ, says : " Through
faith we appropriate to ourselves the sufferings of Christ, so that we
become partakers of the fruits of the same. (Romans, iii. 25.) But
the faith, through which we are cleansed from sin, is not the unUving
faith (fides informis,) which can co-exist wilh sin, but the faith living
through love (fides formata ;) so that the sufferings of Christ, not only
by means of the understanding, but by means of feeling, become appro
priated by us. In this way are sins forgiven us through the power of
Christ's passion."*
Cardinal Nicholas, of Cusa, in one of his most intellectual writings, —
that on religious peace, wherein he lays down principles for the union
of all religions in one, observes: "Faith alone justifies;" but then he
adds, "it must be full-formed faith (fides formata), for without works it
is dead."f More fully he explains his meaning, in one of his exhorta
tions, to the following effect ::j: " It is love, the vivifying principle (amor
• Thom. Aquin. Surama. tot. theol. p. iii, quaest. xhv. art. i. edit. Thomae a Vio.
Lugd. 1580, vol, iii, p, 2 !3, " Fides, autem, per quam a peccato mundatur, non est
fides Informis, quae potest esse etiam cum peccato, sed est fides formata per charita
tem, ut sic passio Chnsti nobis applicetur, non solum quantum ad intellectum, sed
etiam quantum ad affectum. Et per hunc etiam modum peccata dimittimtur ex vir
tute passionis Christi." Cf. q. cxiii. art. iv. " Motus fidei non est perfeetus, nisi sit
charitate informatus, unde simul in justificatione impii cum motd fidei est etiam
motus charitalis ; movetur autem liberum arbitrium in Deum ad hoc, quod ei se sub-
jiciat, unde et concurrit actus timoris filialiset actus humilitatis," etc.
t Nicol Cusan. de pace fidei Dial. op. edit. Basil, p 876. "Vis igitur, Deura in
Christo nobis benedietionem repromisisse vitae (Bternae ?^Sic volo. Quapropter
oportet credere Deo prout Abraham credidit, ut sic credens justificetur cum fideli
Abraham, ad assequendam repromissionern in uno semine Abrahae Christo Jesu, quae
tepromissio est divina benedictio, omne bonum in se comphcans. — Vis igitur, quod
sola fide^illa justificet ad perceptionem aeternae vitae ?....Oportet autem, quod fides
sit formata, nam sine operibus est mortua."
X Nicol. Cusan. Excitat. lib. iv. opp. edit. Bas. 1565, p. 461. Confer. Pet. Lom-

206 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
qui est formal,) which consummates faith and confidence ; which seizes,
upholds, and transforms the soul. From Christ redemption was desired,
and he answered. Faith and confidence secure what is loved and
wished for. For nothing is anxiously desired, save what we love ; if
thus the Redeemer be loved, he then redeems : love consequently re
deems, for it is the love of the Redeemer. In love, accordingly, is the
beloved object ; hence, too, the beloved Redeemer is in love. For God
is love ; and he who abideth in love, abideth in God, and God in him.
It is the consummate faith, or the consummate confidence, which we
call the faith vivified by love (fides charitate formata,) whereof the Sa
viour saith, that it maketh us well-pleasing unto Cud. Thus he who
knoweth Christ, and doth not approach him ; or he who goeth towards
him, but doth not enter into fellowship with him ; or he who goeth to
wards hira, and entereth into sorae fellowship with him, but doth not
embrace him, and knit the ties of the closest fellowship with him, hath
no part in rederaption."
To the words of this theologian, we shall subjoin a pnss.i^e from
Bellarraine, who flourished nearly about the sarae length of tirae after
the rise of Luther, as Nicholas of Cusa did before him. On that pas
sage of Galatians v. 6 : " For in Jesus Christ, neither circuracision
availeth any thing, nor uncircuracision ; but faith which worketh by
charity," he observes, in order that there may be no occasion for errors,
the same apostle (St. Paul) declares what sort of faith he calls the jus
tifying one, when he says : in Jesus Christ, neither circumcision avail
eth any thing, nor uncircumcision, that is to say, neither the law given
to the Jews, nor the works of the Heathens, can render men acceptable
before God, but only faith ; yet not every faith, but solely that " which
worketh by charity," to wit, the faith which is moved, shaped (forma-
tur,) and vivified by charity. If love accordingly be the vivifying
principle (forma) of faith ; then, say the Catholics with reason, faith
without love is dead (informis ;) with love it is living (formata.)*
To this, we may add the explanations which a celebrated Catholic
exegetist, at the comraenceraent of the seventeenth century, has given
on the 22d verse of the third chapter of Romans. After the apostle
has said, that, by the works of the law, no one is justified before God,

baird, hb. iii. dist. 23, u. 1, edit. 1616, p. 136, " Credere Deum est credendo amare,
credendo in eum ire, credendo ei adh^rere, et ejus membris incorporari ; per hane
fidem justificatur impius, ut deinde ipsa fides incipiat per dilectionem operari ; fides
ergo, quara daemones et falsi Christiani habent, qualitas mentis est, sed informis;
^uia sine charitate est "
• Bellarm. de justif, Ub, ii. c. 4, opp. tom, iv. p. 709.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 207
he adds, a new path of salvation without the law has been now opened
by God : to wit, through faith in Christ ; so that all believers may be-
corae just. On the word " believers " Cornelius k Lapide now ob
serves : " Those are meant, who are not contented with a mere naked,
erapty faith, such as the demons possess ; but those, who, like friends,
have a faith matured by love (fides charitate formata,) who believe in
Christ in such a way, as to fulfil his commandments, who possess an
hurable, living and obedient faith ; in short, who believe not merely
.theoretically, but practically, (qui eredunt non speculative, sed practice
Christo.")* This view presents itself so naturally to the unprejudiced
inquirer, that Heinroth, for example, probably without having ever read
a Catholic theologian, observed in his Pisteodicea: " Faith isthe basis,
but love is the principle, of a righteous life."f

^ XVI, — Lutheran and Calvinistic view of faith.
As we now proceed to unfold the Protestant view of faith, it wUl be
desirable in the first place, in order to throw the clearest light on this
obscure point, to make our readers acquainted with the position where
in Luther and his followers placed theraselves in relation to the Catho
lic doctrine we have just been stating. Above all, we must observe,
that they combated the distinction between the two species of faith, of
which we spoke in the preceding section, not to maintain one of the
two as alone true, and alone worthy of the name, but to reject both.
Had they only represented as inadequate that faith which Catholics
denote as insufficient for justification, to wit, the dead faith, their con
duct would have been at once intelligible and laudable : but they dis
puted its very existence, clearly and frequently, as it is attested by
Holy Writ.J The cause of this fact must be sought for in the opinion,
that faith is the result of the exclusive working of the Divinity in

* Cornelii a Lap. Comm. in omnes divi Pauli ep. Edit. Antverp, 1705, p. 57.
t Heinroth Pisteodicea, Leipzig, 1826, p, 459. We have much pleasure in mak
ing raention, on this occasion, of a layraan, who has given a very intellectual com
mentary on the epistle to the Romans (William Beneke, Brief an die Romer, Heidel.
burg, 1831.) Let the reader compare pp. 64, 74, 145, 241. We are at a loss, how
ever, to understand how he could find in the epistle to the Romans, the doctrine of the
pre-cxistence of souls.
X Luther, Commentary (in German) on the Epistle to Galatians, loc. cit p. 70.
" Therefore, faith is not such an otiosa qualitas, that is to say, such an useless, lazy,
dead thing, that it can lie concealed in the heart, even of a mortal sinner, just like
useless chafi', or as a dead fly, during winter-time, sticks in some chink, till the dear
sua comes and rouses it, and warms it into life."

20S EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
man, — an opinion which appeared incompatible with the other, that it
could show itself dead and ineffectual ; whereas the Catholic doctrine
explains the want of a progressive movement of faith, bot pervading
and transforming the whole man by the resistance, which human free
dora, everywhere co-operating, or refusing its co-operation, offers. To
what surprising interpretations of Scripture the Protestant view leads,
in so far as it disputes the distinction between the two aforesaid species
of faith, we have already shown in the Twelfth Section, when we had
occasion to speak of the Calvinistic theory of predestination.
But even the notion " of the faith, which worketh by charity," de
scribed by Catholics as the one alone justifying, is rejected by Protes
tants. When, in tho year 1541, deputies of Catholics and Lutherans
assembled at Ratisbon, in order to bring about, if possible, a reconcUia
tion of parties, they agreed on the following exposition of the article
on Faith : "It is a settled and sound doctrine, that sinful raan is justi
fied by Uving and active faitl^ ; for by it are we rendered agreeable and
well-pleasing unto God for Christ's sake."* Luther pronounced con-
deranation on this article in these words : " It is a wretched, botched
note."t We will now take the liberty of bringing before our readers the follow
ing passages frora Luther's Comraontary on the Epistle fo the Gala
tians. " Our papists, and sophists," says he, " have taught the like, to
wit, that we should believe in Christ, and that faith was the ground
work of salvation ; but, nevertheless, that this faith could not justify a
man, unless it were the fides formata; that is to say, unless it first
received its right forra from charity. Now this is not the truth, but
an idle, fictitious Ulusion, and a false, deceitful, misrepresentation of

* " Firma igitur est et sana doctrina per fidem vIvam et efficacem justifieari homi
nera peccatorem; nam per illam Deo grati et accepti sumus."
t How Plank endeavours to excuse this dissatisfaction on the part of Luther, the
reader may see in his History of the Protestant System of Doctrine, vol. iii, part ii,
p. 91. That very raany modern Protestant theologians, even such as are by no
means Rationalists, — as, for exaraple, the sagacious Menken, should reject Luther's
theory, is by no means astonishing. But is worthy of notice, that the untenable na
ture of this theory is manifest to many Lutheran divines, in proportion as they uncon
sciously ascribe to Luther and his followers the Catholic doctrine. Thus, Dr.
Augustus Hahn, professor in Leipzic, in a letter to Bretschneider, entitled Stale of
Christianity in our time, writes as follows : " Thus Melancthon, in his Apology (art.
3,) rectifies the Catholic notion of justification through good works, as he shows the
Gospel has perfected the Old Testament doctrine respecting the free grace of God
in Christ towards all, who with sincere contrition manifest a living faith, working by
charity," etc. (p. 64.) In fact, the trae notion of Lutheran orthodoxy often totally
escapes those who, above all things, wish to be orthodox.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 209
the Gospel. On this account, what the senseless sophists have taught
respecting the fides formata, that is to say, the faith, which should
receive its true form and shape from charity, is mere idle talk. For
that faith alone justifies, which apprehends Christ by the word of Scrip
ture, and which adorns or decorates itself with Him, and not the faith,
which embraces in itself charity. For if faith is to be certain and
constant, it should apprehend nought else, cling to nought else, save the
¦one Christ. For, in the anguish of the conscience, it hath no other
stay, but this precious pearl. Therefore, should the law affright a man,
and the weight of sin oppress him, as much as they are able, he can,
nevertheless, when he hath apprehended Christ by faith, ever boast that
he is yet just and pious. But how cometh this to [ ass ? And by
what is he rendered so just ? By that noble treasure and pearl, which
is called Jesus Christ, whom by faith he hath made his own."*
In the same work of the Reformer, we read on the same subject as
follows : " But if a man hears, that he is to believe in Christ, and yet
that such faith is of no avail, and profiteth him nothing, unless charity
be added thereto, which giveth force to faith, and renders it capable of
justifying a man, then it must needs corae to pass, that a raan will
iramediately fall away from the faith, despair, and think, if this be so,
that faith without charity doth not justify ; then it is undoubtedly use
less, and nothing worth, and c'narity alone can justify : for if faith hath
not charity by its side, which imparteth to it' the right form, which
constitutes it in such a manner, that it can justify, then is it nought -,
but if it be nought, how can it then justify ?
'j(The adversaries, in support of this their pernicious and poisonous
doctrine, adduce the text from the thirteenth chapter of the First Epistle
to the Corinthians : ' If I spake with the tongues of men and of angels,
and if I should prophesy, and should know all mysteries, and all know-
ledge ; and if 1 should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains,
and have not charity, I am nothing.' This text the papists regard as
their wall of iron. But the dull, stupid asses can neither understand
nor perceive anything in the writings of St, Paul, and therefore, with
this their false interpretation, they have not only done violence to the
words of St. Paul, but they have moreover denied Christ, and set all
his blessings aside. Therefore we raust beware of this doctrine, and
regard it as a very diabolical and hellish poison ; and conclude with St.
Paul, that we be justified by faith only, and not ' per fidem formatem
'charitate.' "f

• Luther's Works, part i. p. 47, c. 6, ed. Wittenberg.
t L, u. p. 70. The Reformers often recur to ihia fides formata in a tone of great
14

210 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
What, now, is justifying faith in the Protestant sense ? Man believes,
when he trusts that he has been rccaived by Gcd into grace, and that,
for Christ's sake, who, by his death, has offered up atoaemont for our
sins, he receives forgiveness of the same.* Melancthon expresses him
self still more clearly, when he says, " Faith is the unconditional acqui
escence in the Divine mercy, without regard to our good or evil
works."f By these definitions is the essence of that faith, which the
Reformers require, by no means made clear ; we must more accurately
point out the manner wherein faith exhibits the property of justification.
Negatively this is explained by tbe express observation, that it is not
the love connected with faith, or faith, in as far as it n>anifests its
activity in works, which possesses the power of justifying.:]: Positively
this is explained by the declaration, that it is tbe instrument and the
mean, which lays hold of the grace (the compassion) of God, and the
promised merits of Christ.^^
If this more accurate explanation should not yet place in the fuUest
light tbe nature of the Protestant idea of faith, this will be most cer
tainly effected, by considering the comparison, which Calvin, on a
indignation. Thus, Luther in a disputation, says, (Opp, Jen. torn. i. foi. 538, Thes.
iv. :) "Docent (sophistae; neque infusura Spiritu Sancto fidem justificark nisi charit
tate sit formata." Melancthon, loci, theol. p. 85 : " Fingunt ^vulgus sophistarum)
aliam fidem formatam', id est, charitate conjunctam ; aliam informera, id est, quic
sit etiam in impiis carentibus charitate.'' Calvin. Instit. lib iii, c 4, n 8, p, 195 '.
" Primt) refutanda est, quie ra scholis volitat nugatoria fidei formalse et informis dis-
tinctio," etc,
* Confess. Aug. art. iv. foi. 13. " Item decent, quod homines non possint justifi
eari coram Deo propriis viribus, meritis, aut operibus, sed gratis justificcntur propter
Christum per fidera, cum eredunt se in gratiam recipi, et peccata remitti propter
Christura, qui sua inorte pro nostris peccatis satisfeelt."
t Melancthon loc theol. p. 93. " Habes, in quara partem fidei nomen usurpet
scriptura, nerape pro eo, quod est Sdere gratuita Dei raisericordia, sine uUo operum
nostrorum, sive bonorura sive malorum, respectu : quia de Christi plenitudine omnes
accipimus." Most coraplete is the definition which Calvin gives : Instit. lib. iii. c.
2, (j 7, foi. 195. " Justa fidei definitio nobis constabit, si dicamus esse divinae erga
nos benevolentite firraam eertamque cognitionera, quae, gratuitae in Christo promis-
sionis veritate fundata, per Spiritura Sanctum et revelatur mentibus nostris, et cor
dibus obsignatur."
X Apol. iv. de justif. § 2G, p. 76. " Sola fide in Christum, non propter dilectionem
aut opera consequimur remissionem peccatorum, etsi dilectio sequitur fidera "
§ Solid. Declar. iii. de fide just. § 36, p. 662 : " Fides enim tantum eam ob causam
justificat, et inde vim illam liabet, quod gratiam Dei et meritum Christi in promis-
aione evangelii tanquam raediura et instrumentum apprehendit et amplectitur." $ 23,
p. 659 : " Et quidera neque contritio, neque dilectio, neque ulla alia virtus, sola fides
est illud instrumentum, quo gratiam Dei, meritum Christi, et remissionem peccato^
rum apprehendere et accipere possumus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 211
Certain occasion, employed for this object. Osiander, a preacfier in
Nnremberg and afterwards in Konigsberg, one of the raost celebrated
of Luther's foUowers at the commencement of the Reformation, had
taken the liberty to put forth a peculiar theory of justification, which,
if we duly elucidate his obscure phraseology, and the want of precision
in his ideas, was quite Catholic, — a circumstance which was often
urged as a matter of reproach against him. He taught, araong other
things, that the justifying power lies not in faith considered in itself,
but only inasrauch as it essentially erabraces Christ ; that is to say,
according to Catholic language, inasmuch as, by the real comraunica
tion of Christ's righteousness, it places man in a real communion with
him. To this Calvin replies : " Doubtless he is of opinion, that faitli
by no means justifies through its intrinsic energy ; for, as it is always
weak and imperfect, it could produce only a defective justification.
Faith is only the mean (organ) through which Christ is offered up to
God. Thus it blesses man in the same way as an earthen vessel, in
which a treasure is found, raakes a man happy, although it possess in
itself no worth."* Thus is justifying faith regarded, not as a raorally
renovating and vital principle, flowing frora the spirit of Christ ; but as
standing in the sarae relation to Christ, as the earthen vessel to the
treasure. In the sarae way as the two become not one, — the vessel
reraains earthen, the treasure golden, — so the believer is not inwardly
united with Christ by justifying faith : they stand merely in an out
ward relation one to the other. Christ is pure ; man, on the other
hand, although he believes in a way agreeable to God, is inwardly im
pure. Christ is offered up by man to God through faith, the sacrificial
vessel, without man himself being a victim acceptable to God through
Christ ; and as such being just, and, in consequence thereof, obtaining
eternal felicity. The belief in an extraneous righteousness, described
* Calvin. Instit. lib iii. u. 11, § 7, foi. 262. " Quod objicit, vim justificandi non
inesse fidei ex se ipsa, sed quatenus Christum recipit, libenter adraitto, nam si per se,
vel intrinseca, ut loquuntur, virtute justificaret fides, ut est semper debilis et imper
fecta, non etficeret hoc, nisi ex parte : sic manea esset justitia, quiE frustulura salutis
nobis conferret  Neque taraen interea tortuosas hujus sophistae figuras admitto, quum
dicit fidem esse Christura : quasi vero oUa fictilis sit thesaurus, quod in ea reconditum
sit aurura. Neque enim diversa ratio est, quia fides etiamsi nullius per se dignitatis
sit vel pretii, nos justificat, Christum afferendo, sicut olla pecuniis rcferta hominem
locupletat  Jam expeditas est quoque nodus, quomodo intelligi debeat vocabulum
fidei, ubi de justificatione agitur." Cfr. Apolog. iv, de justif ^ 18, p, 71. "Etrur-
sus quoties uos de fide loquiraur, intelligi volumus objectum, sciheet misericordiam
promissara. Nam fides non ideo justificat aut salvat, quia ipsa sit opus per se dignum,
sed tantum quia accipit misericordiam promissam." Cf. Chemnit. Exam. Cone,
Trid, part i, p, 294.

212 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
in the Fourteenth Section, required this notion of faith (justitia crtra
nos.) A pecuUar conception, Ukewise, of the appropriation of the
merits and obedience of Christ, must accordingly be formed. Now,
this was precisely called appropriation of obedience, whereby it is not
appropriated by us, not made our own in an inward Uving manner, so
that we raay becorae obedient like unto the Redeemer. It is the same
with this new raode of appropriation, as if any one were fo purchase a
very learned book, and instead of stamping its contents deeply on his
mind, and in this way appropriating it, so that he might become a
livin"- book, should hold himself very learned, the learned book was his
(outward) property !
Now, the rejection of the above-stated second Catholic view of faith,
becomes perfectly intelligible. Moreover, Calvin, as it appears, bor
rowed the simile in question from Luther's writings, in which it fre
quently occurs, though not so fully carried out.*
After these explanations, we can understand the purport of passages,
like the following, from Luther's writings : '' Now thou seest how rich
is the Christian or the baptized man ; for, though he will, be cannot
lose his salvation, hoirevcr great his sins may be, unless he refuse to be
lieve. No sin can damn hira, but unbelief alone. When faith in the
Divine proraise given in baptism returns, or is not effaced, then all else
will be made to vanish in a raoment through faith, or rather the veracity
of God ; for He cannot belie Hiraself, if thou confess Ilim, and acqui
esce faithfully in His promises. But contrition and confession of sins,
and even satisfaction, and all those efforts invented by man, will quick
ly leave thee, and make thee unhappier, if thou forgettest this Divine
veracity, and busiest thyself about those things. Vanity of vanities,
and vexation of spirit, is all which we strive for, beyond faith in God's
fideUty. "f In this passage it is asserted, that, by the side of faith, the

* Luther's Commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, part i. p. 70, cd. Witten
berg (in German.) " The reason wherefore faith justifies, is, that it apprehends and
brings to itself the costly noble pearl, to wit, Jesus Christ."
f Luther de captiv. Bab. tora. ii. foi. 264. " Ita vides, quam dives sit homo Chris
tianus, etiam volens non potest perdere salutem suam quantiscunque peccatis, nisi ntc
lii credere. Nulla enim peccata cum possunt damnarc, nisi sola incredulitas... . Ca;-
tera omnia, si redeat vel stct fides in promissionem divinam baptizato factam, m mo
mento absorbentur per eandera fidera," etc. Here we may appropriately insert the
following celebrated passage from a letter of Luther to Melancthon, although from
the evident excitement of mind (so we would willingly believe) under which the au
thor writes, peculiar stress ought not to be laid upon it ; but it will still ever remain a
characteristic monument in the history of rehgious opinions. " Sin lustily," writes
Luther, " but be yet more lusty in faith, and rejoice in Christ, who is the conqueror

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 213
greatest sins can stiU be coraraitted ; but this certainly is not the faith
which St. Paul recoraraends to us, although Luther is ever appealing
to fhe authority of this apostle. But it is that earthen vessel of Calvin,
on whose surface, indeed, Christ as the Lamb of God is found, but with
out the spirit of the Redeemer livingly pervading the whole man, de
stroying sin, and truly engendering a new life within us. Who, that
had ever reflected on the Pauline notion of faith, could have ever taken
pleasure to defend the thesis, " that if in faith an adultery could be
committed, it were no sin."* Even in Melancthon, we find similar
passages, of which we shall cite only one : " Whatever thou mayest
do, whether thou eatest, drinkest, workest with the hand, teachest, I
may add, shouldst thou even sin therewith, look not to thy works ; weigh
the promise of God ; confide in it, and doubt not that thou hast no
longer a Judge in heaven, but only a Father, who cherisheth thee in
His heart, as a parent doth his child. "I In other words, suppose thou
shouldest be a drunkard, or a glutton, let not thy hair turn gray ; only
forget not that God is a kind elder, who learned to forgive much sooner
than thou didst learn to sin.
However, we have pointed out only one side of fhe Lutheran princi
ple of faith, namely, that whereby it works justification. There is
of sin, of death, and of the world. Sin we must, so long as we reraain here. It
sufiices, that, through the riches of the glory of God, we know the Larab which ta
keth away the sins of the world : from Him no sin will sever us, though a million
times in a day we should fornicate or commit murder." Epist, Dr, M. Lutheria Joh.
Aurifabro coll. tom. i. Jena, 1556, 4, p. 545, b. Luther says to hisfriend : —
" Si gratiae praedicator es, gratiam non fictara sed veram praedica ; si vera gratia
est, verum non fictura peccatum ferto, Deus non facit salvos ficte peccatores.
" Esto peccator et pecca forliter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo, qui victor
est peccati, mortis et mundi: peccandum est, quamdiu hie sumus. Vita haec non
est habitatio justitiae ; sed expectamus, ait Petrus, ccelos novos et terrara novam, in
quibus justitia habitat.
" Sufficit quod agnoviraus, per divitias gloriae Dei, agnum qui tollit peccata mundi :
ab hoc non avellet nos peccatum, etiamsi millies, millies uno die fornicemur aut oc-
cidamus. Putas tara parvum esse pretium et redemptionem pro peccatis nostris fac
tam in tanto ac tali agno ?" The letter was written from the Wartburg, and bears
the date of the year 1521.
* Luther disput. tom. i. p. 523. " Si in fide fieri posset adulterium, peccatum non
esset." t Melancthon loc. p. 92. " Qualiacunque sint opera, comedere, bibere, laborare
manfl, docere, addo etiam, ut sint palam peccata," etc. I candidly avow, I could
as soon imagine the co-existence of day and night, as conceive a raan holding the
Pauline wia-TK (faith) with the sentiments and conduct described by Melancthon.
And what should prevent us from representing to ourselves such a man as unchaste,
choleric, &c., if the qualities stated in the text be compatible with faith ? In what
respect is gula raorally difierent from libido ?

'214 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
another, whereby it becomes the source of love and of good works.
Luther, in raany places, describes this in nearly the same terms as the
CathciUcs depict the divine love of the regenerated. In this class of the
Reformer's writings, are included those on Christian freedom nnd on
good works ; and who knows not the briUiant description of faith in
his preface to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans 1 " Faith," says he,
" is a divine work within us, which changes us, makes us be born again
out of God, destroys the old Adam, and transforms us, as it were, into
other men, in heart, in feeling, and in every faculty, and coraraunicates
to us the Holy Spirit. This faith is soraething living and efficacious ;
so that it is irapossible that it should not always work good. Faith
doth not first ask, whether good works are to be done ; but, before it
inquires about the matter, it hath already wrought many good works,
and is ever busied in working." Here, in the most amiable contradic
tion with the Lutheran theory of justification, a renovation and entire
transformation of the whole inward raan is taught. Faith appears as
the blossora, springing out of the union of all the powers constituting
the interior raan, as an expression of their corabined workings ; whUe
a strong testimony is rendered to the power of the Saviour over sin
and death. In his commentary, likewise, on the epistle to the Gala
tians, Luther calls faith " the righteous heart, the thoroughly good will,
and the new-created understanding, or reason." Here also Luther
means to say, that faith is an effect of all the spiritual powers of raan,
when they are purified and glorified by the Divine Spirit.*

APPRECIATION OF THE THEORETIC ANU PRACTICAL GROUNnS, WHICH
THE PROTESTANTS ALLEGE FOR THEIR VIEW OF FAITH.
§ XVII. — Appreciation of the theoretic groimds.
But why, now, do the Reformers so much insist on the distinction of
two principles in one and the same faith ; to one whereof is reserved
the power of working justification, to the other, that of evincing itself
in charity and good works, and in unfolding the fulness of all virtues?
Luther and his friends conceived they had very weighty theoretical and

* Commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, part i. p. 1 43 ; German edition of
Wittenberg. Passages similar to those cited in the text often occur.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 215
practical reasons for this separation. The theoretical reasons will first
engage our attention. It is very usual with Luther and his friends to
boast of faith, as the instrument embracing the mercy of God in Christ,
as not only the first and original, but also the only pure ordinance of
God in man, unmixed, and consequently untroubled, with any huraan
aUoy ; whereas faith, when it manifests itself in love, and in the whole
course of feelings to which it should give rise, on one hand, doth not
appear itself, but rather, if we may so speak, as the fruit of itself, and
on the other hand penetrates and pervades the huraan and the sinful
eleraent, and consequently no longer exhibits its pristine purity.* Now
it is the exclusive act of God, according to them, which maketh men
agreeable to Him ; it is consequently the instrumental faith only, not
the faith working by charity, that justifieth before God, and therefore
the distinction in question must be regarded as well-founded, nay, as
absolutely necessary.
The naive simplicity of these theoretic errors, which are entirely
based on the doctrine of God's exclusive operation in the work of sal-
vation, is too evident fo need any special comment. Luther in one
word wished to say : in us God believes — in us God confides in himself
— and as everywhere He can rejoice only in His own works, so He
rejoiceth solely in ihis His exclusive act. Evident as this is, yet, on
account of the importance of the matter, and for the sake of elucidat
ing the notions respecting it, it behoves us not to pass it over with too
much haste. The Lutherans describe the entire spiritual life of regen
erated man as the act of God. Is it not therefore extremely singular,
and, according to their theoretical doctrines, utterly inconceivable, that
they should not likewise say, God in Christ Jesus loveth in us, and
should not attribute to the Creator as lively a joy in this His work, as
that whereby he believeth in us ? If the one, as well as the other, be
His wor'f, if both have been obtained for us through the merits of
Christ, what imaginable cause is there, why God should look down
graciously upon us, inasmuch as He excites within us faith in the
Redeemer ; but cannot love us, inasmuch as he produces within us
love for Christ? The doubt that in love soraething huraan, and
therefore, as they say, something meagre and insufficient, exists, the
pecuUar theory of Protestants cannot allege ; for what is weak and
sinful in love, that is to say, what is not love itself, they will not deno
minate God's work, but only love itself. The exotic and impure
• Luther de captiv. Babyl. opp. tom. ii. p. 284. " Opus est enim omnium operum
excellentissimum et arduissimum, quo solo, etiamsi cseteris omnibus carere cogeris,
servaberis. Est enim opus Dei, non hominis, sicut Paulus docet ; caetera nobiscum
et per nos operatur, hoc unicum in nobis et sine nobis operatur."

216 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
elements in this love God could always separate, and, as to that which
should be proved to be his own work, graciously accept, and even as
graciously as anything else, which He hath ordained. A very peculiar
reason raust have induced the Lutherans to adopt this view; for
although, as they conceive, frith is the exclusive work of God, yet it
still frequently trembles, becomes now and then, even according to the
symbolical books (for example, the Apology.) extremely weak, is
scarcely able at tiraes to cling to the staff" of Divine Providence, and
forgets itself even so far as to doubt the existence of God. And as
regards Luther himself, he was often unable to put off the doubt, whe
ther he had conceived justifying filth in a very believing spirit, and
dispelled awakening scruples, not by the power of faith, but after a very
huraan fashion, to wit, by resolving in such moments to inveigh instan
taneously and energetically against the papacy, and in this way to set
aside disgust by pleasure.* Now this dismay, and this doubting in
divine truths and divine promises, are most assuredly no gracious work
of God ; but in both we recognize the huraan alloy, and (in the sense
of the Reformers,) we must say : " In us God believes ; it is man, on
the contrary, who trembles, and who doubts. In despite of this pertur
bation of the divine element within us, God doth not yet cense to look
down graciously upon the seed He hath sown in man." Why should
the Deity, then, on account of the human alloy intermingled with
charity, be induced to cast no friendly eye upon it, and not graciously
to recognize that portion of it, which is His own work ?
* Some passages of this kind we must here lay before the reader. Luther, in his
Table-talk (p. 166, ed. Jena, 1603,) says : " I once believed all that the Pope and
the raonks told mc. But now what Christ sailh, who cannot lie, this I cannot put
too strong a faith in. But this is a wearisome subject ; we must defer it to another
day." P. 167 : " The spirit is mdeed willing, but the flesh is weak, saith Christ,
when he speaks of himself. St. Paul also saith : The spirit will give itself up to
God, and trust in Hira and obey ; but reason, flesh and blood resist, and will not and
cannot upward rise. Therefore raust our Lord God bear with us ; the glimmering
wick he will not put out ; the faithful have only the first-fruits of the spirit, not the
full perfection, and the ten commandments. One person asked, wherefore doth not
God impart to us full knowledge ? Dr. Martin replied : If any one could indeed be-
Jieve, then for very joy he would be able neither to eat, nor drink, nor do aught else.
As at Dr. Martin's table the text from the prophet Hosea, Hac dicit Dominus, was
stmg, he said to Dr. Jonas, ' As little as you believe that this singing is good, so little
do I firmly believe that theology is true. I love my wife, I love her more dearly than
myself — that is most sure — I raean to say, I would rather die than that she or the lit
tle ones should die. I love Christ very dearly, who with His blood hath redeemed
me from the power and tyranny of the devil : but my faith ought in justice to be
greater and more ardent than it is ; ah ! Lord ! enter not into judgment with thy ser.
vant,' " &c.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 217
Love, then, is an efiect of faith, and consequently not the first of the
divine workings within us ; for as it is only faith which with God's aid
brings forth charity, and certainly not any unbelief ingrafted on faith,
love raust in consequence be as divine as faith ; because it is the pure,
though (as the Lutherans assert) the later, production of a divine prin
ciple. For whatever would be defective in charity, would be, as we
remarked above, not charity itself, but only the effect of a deficiency
in faith ; or, to express ourselves more accurately, (for a deficiency,
that is to say, the absence of being can do nothing,) a smaller degree
of charity presupposes a small degree of faith ; though the former, be
it even subsequent in its origin, is as divine as the latter. A flame is
not less fire than a spark, though the spark precedes the flame ; it is the
same with a little flame, though it were only the effect of a little spark,
and both in the sarae way would be coraprised in the notion of a Uttle
fire. Whithersoever we turn our inquiring glance, we can discover no
thing which should have brought charity into such discredit, that it
were only by faith, and not by love, we can be acceptable to God.
Holy writ is not in the slightest degree chargeable with the evil repute
into which love is fallen. Let us compare only John xiv. 21, 23, and
1 Cor. viii. 3. If the Saviour saith in the forraer place, " He^^who
loveth me, shaU be loved of my Father, and I will love hira, and will
manifest myself to hira ;" so we raay be aUowed to put the question,
what distinction can exist " between receiving any one into his grace,"
" assuring any one of his good-wUl," (declaring hira just,) and " loving
any one ?" It is also useful attentively to consider, who it is, accord
ing to this passage, whom the Father and the Son love ; — him, it saith,
" who loveth Christ." Thus, it would be Faith, in so far as it loves,
and is active in love, wherein consists the righteousness that availeth
before God, and whereby we becorae well-pleasing unto Hira.
To speak out plainly our own opinion, it appears to us, that, in the
Protestant mode of distinguishing between the instrumental faith, and
the faith working by charity, there has been always wanting a clear
ness of conception. This wUl be proved most evidently, if we take the
pains of inquiring, what is this faith considered in itself, and what, on
the other hand, it ought to be, according to Protestants ; this faith, as
we should preraise, being always understood, in the Protestant sense,
of confidence in the Saviour, as the Forgiver of sins. The discussion,
which we have just concluded, leads us to a certain result. Let us
once raore place ourselves in the Protestant point of view, which looks
on charity as an effect, or a fruit of faith. If charity stands really in
this relation to faith, it is necessarily comprised in it, for, otherwise,

218 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
it could not proceed from it ; it would be, therefore, most certainly
only another form of Faith's existence, or faith in another shape, and
would deterraine its essence in such a degree, that it could not be con
ceived without it, and could only be, through it, what it is. It would,
therefore, be no error fo assert, that love were the essence of faith, and
so in a higher, more developed, and more distinct manner ; it would be
the essence of the latter, because it is the latter which is manifested in
it, as the cause in its effect, the reason in its consequence, the root in
the tree. Love would be faith, even in a more consummate form, be
cause faith onl}', after a gradual growth, hath become love. Faith,
in so far as it erabraces Christ, and the forgiveness of sins in hira, is,
consequently, love itself, although (as, untU more accurate definitions
be given, we are willing, for argument's sake, to concede,) it be at first
only love in its infancy. Love is thus, without doubt, the organ,
which rests with confidence in Christ, and the efficacious faith is the
instrumental one, only, as we said, in a raore mature and a more con
firmed shape.
The truth of what has been stated, and, consequently, the due rela
tion in which faith stands to charity, may, in various ways, be made
evident. The first is as follows : — To the abstract idea of God, as a
Being infinitely just, corresponds tbe sentiraent of fear. If, on the
other hand, God be conceived as the aU loving, merciful and forgiving
Father, this is raost assuredly possible only by a kindred sentiment in
our souls, corresponding to the Divine love, that is to say, by a love
germinating within us. It is awakening love only that can embrace
the loving, pardoning, compassionate God, and surrender itself up en-
tirely to Hira, as even the Redeemer saith, " He who loveth me, shall
be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself io
him." Thus it would not be faith (confidence) which would be the
first in the order of time, and love in the next place, but faith would be
an effect of love, which, after she had engendered faith as confidence,
supported by this her own self-begotten help-raate, would come for
ward raore vigorously and efficaciously. This, at least. Holy Writ
teaches very clearly. Compare Romans v. 5, with viii. 15, 16. — The
second mode, wherein what we have said may be made evident, is as
foUows : Confidence in the Redeemer (for this, we repeat it again,
the Reformers denominate faith,) necessarUy pre-supposes a secret, hid
den desire, — a longing after Hira. For our whole being, having re
ceived the irapulse frora God, forces and urges to apply to ourselves
what is offered through the mediation of Christ ; and our deepest ne
cessities, whereof we have attained the consciousness through His
Spirit, are satisfied only in Him. But what is now this longing, this

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 219
desire, other than love ? Assuredly, this aspiring of our whole being to-
wards Christ, this effort to repose in Him, to be united with Hira, to
find in Him only our salvation, is nought else than love. It follows, then,
that love, even according to this view of things, constitutes the founda
tion and internal condition of confidence — nay, its very essence ; for,
in every internal consequence, the essence is again manifested.*
It was only a very singular confusion of the manner wherein the Gos
pel is announced to us, with the interior, living acceptance of the same
in our own souls, that could ever have given rise to a different opinion.
The Redeemer, doubtless, announces himself to us from without (Jus.
titia nostra extra nos,) as Him, for the sake of whose merits, the for
giveness of sins is offered to us, with the view of restoring us to com
munion with God. But when we have once clearly apprehended and
recognized this righteousness, which is without, then first awakes within
us the feeling kindred to divinity ; we find ourselves to be beings de
signed and created for God ; we feel ourselves attracted towards Him
(this is the first germ of love ;) we find, even in our sins, no further ob
stacle -, we pass them by, and move consoled onwards toward God in
Christ (this is confidence in the latter;) and, by the progressive de
velopment of such feelings,- we at last disengage ourselves from the
world, and Uve entirely in God (Justitia intra nos, inhcerens, infusa.)
Thus the recognition of the truths revealed in Christ, and especially of the
forgiveness of sins in him, (this is faith, in the ordinary Catholic sense,)

* Cardinal Sadolet (ad Principes Germ, oratio, Opp ed. Ver. mdccxxxviii. tom.
ii. p. 359-60) observes with great truth: " Illud praeterea docto homine indignum,
quod, cura istam ipsam fidem, in qua una haeretis, a Spiritd Sancto nobis conceditis
dari, non videtis eam in amore et charitate esse datam. Quid enim ahud Spiritus
Sanctus est, quam amor ? Quod etiara ut praetereatur, eum fidem esse fiduciam
affirmatis, qua certo confidimus nostra nobis peccata a Deo per Christura fuisse ignota,
spem, quamvis imprudentes, in hac fiducia inseritis : non enim sine spe potest esse
fiducia. Quod si spera, profecto etiam amorem ; sic enim confidimus nostra peccata
nobis condonari, ut non modo id speremus, sed etiara amando optandoque expecte-
mus, ut ita sit : quoniam oranis ratio spei et fiduciae, quacimque versetur in re, araore
rei illius innixa est, quam nos esse adeptos aut adepturos confidimus, Ita in fide
veri spes et charitas sic implicita est, ut nullura eorum ab ahis possit divelli." S.
Ambrose admu-ably observes (Exposit. Evang. Luc. viii. :) " Ex fide charitas, ex
charitate spes et rursus in se sancto quodam circuitu refunduntur." Fiducia is the
corroborata spes. as defined by the schoolmen. Bellarmin. de justif. lib. i. c. 13:
" Quarta dispositio (ad justificationem) dilectio est. Statim enim ac incipit ahquis
sperare ab alio beneficium, incipit etiam eundem diligere ut benefaotorem, atque
auctorem omnis boni, quod sperat  Porro dilectionem aliquam priorem esse re.
missione peccatorum, vel tempore, si sit dilectio imperfecta, vel certe natura, si sit
perfecta et ex toto corde, atque ad eam dieponere," etc.

220 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
is, undoubtedly, the priraary thing preceding all others — the ground
work and the root of justification (radix et fundamentum justifica!ioni.s ;)
so that, from this sort of faith, love eraanates. But, if faith be taken
in the sense of confidence (fiducia,) then it is far frora the truth to assort,
that it is only followed by love, and, still raore, that, separated from
love, or conceived without it, it is capable of justifying. This confi
dence is itself only one phase in the history of love. Accordingly, our
sins are not, in the first place, forgiven us ; so that, in consequence of
this consciousness, we love, but because we confiJingly love, and lov
ingly confide, they are forgiven. In our interior life, forgiveness of
sins and sanctification are simultaneous ; or, as St. Thomas .\.quinas
excellently expresses it,* " the infusion of grace, and the remission of
sin, like tbe illumination of any space, and the dispersion of darkness,
are one and the same thing." But, according to the Apology, and the
Forraulary of Concord, it is Faith exclusively alone, wherein the appro
priation of the merits of Christ and justification consist ; and, conse--
quently, neither charit)' nor any other virtue,f that is to say, no holy
feelings on the part of men, have any share in this work. Accordingly,
faith or confidence in Christ, in so far as it justifies, is something quite
distinct frora every holy sentiraent, especially charity, which is the one
expressly named. Whether this doctrine can be in any way justified
— whether it offer any sense whatever — the discussion in which we
have just been engaged may suffice to show.
§ xviii. — Appreciation of the practical grounds.
Let tis now endeavour to coraprehend the raeaning of those practical
reasons, which the Protestants allege in their cause. These reasons
are the following : —
1. The first is, that in this way only "troubled consciences" can
receive a powerful and adequate solace. For, so say the Protestants, if
instruraental faith, which clings to Christ alone, who hath offered up
satisfaction for us, possess the power of justifying, hearts, sorely grieved
on account of their sins, wUl then enjoy a steady interior peace. But
this they never can attain to, if only the faith, which is manifested in
love, — faith evidenced in holiness of sentiment, — be considered as the

•^ Prim. sec. 9, q. cxiii. art. vi. " Idem est gratiae infusio et culpae remissio, sicut
idem est illuminatio et tenebrarum expulsio."
+ Sohd. Declar. iii. de fide justif ^ 23, p. 659. "Neque contritio, neque dilectio,
neque ulla alia virtus est illud instrumentum, quo gratiam Dei, meritum Christi, et
remissionem peccatorum apprehendere et accipere possumus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 221
test of the children of God ; for who is conscious of possessing the true
love of God, and holiness of feeling 1
2. In the second place, the Protestants contend, that, if the instru
mental faith be regarded as the one conferring justification, every i hing is
then referred to the divine mercy in Christ, and all glory rendered to
the Redeemer. But so soon as faith, inasmuch as it comprises a circle
of holy feelings, is to earn for us the approbation of heaven, then the
glory, due to the Saviour alone, is divided between him and us, or rather
withdrawn from hirn. In a word, by this way only can the merits pf
Christ, in their entire magnitude, be gratefully acknowledged.'''
3. The reason, first assigned, offers us, in fact, a very beautiful, and
very pleasing motive, and we see at once the sentiraent which it is in
tended to cherish in the breast of men. This sentiment is humility,
which, with an honest self-denial, refers all good to God, as its primary
source, and ascribes nothing good to man, as such : and humility, there
fore, raust be regarded in fact as the motive of the third ground for
this distinction between the two kinds of faith, f

* Apolog. iv. de dilect. et implet. leg. § 48, p. 90. " De magnti re disputamus,
de honore Christi, et unde petant hons raentes certam et firmam consolationera."
Calvin Instit- lib. iii. c 1, § 13, p. 273 : " Atque omnino quidem duo hie spectanda
sunt, nempe ut Domino illibata constet et veluti sarta tecta sua gloria, conscrcntiis
vero nostris coram ipsius judicio plaeida quies ac Serena tranquillitas." De necessi
tate reformandae ecclesia opusc. p. 429 : " Neque inter opera et Christum dimidiat,
sed in sohdum Christo adscribit (Paulus,) quod coram Deo justi censemur. Duo hie
in quaestionera veniunt : utrura inter nos et Deura dividenda sit salutis nostras gloria,"
etc. Compare Cheranit. Exara. Concil. Trid. part. i. p. i96, and in other passages.
t Luther adv, Erasmum, Roterod, Opp. tom. iii. p. 176, b. " Duss res exigunt talia
prasdicari. Prima est hurailiatio nostrae superbiae et cognitio gratiae Dei, altera ipsa
fides Christiana. Primum, Deus certo promisit humiliatis, id est deploratis et despe-
ratis, gratiam suam. Humiliari vero penitus non potest homo, donee, sciat, prorsus
extra suas vires, consilia, studia, voluntatem, opera, omnino ex alterius arbitrio, con.
silio, voluntate, ope^ suam pendere salutem, nerape Dei sohus. Siquidem, quamdiu
persuasus fuerit, sese vel tantulum posse, pro salute suS,, raanet in fiducia sui, nee de
se penitus desperat, ideo non humiliatur coram Deo, sed locum, tempus, opus aliquod
sibi prae sumit, vel sperat, vel optat saltera, quo tandera perveniat ad salutem. Qui
vero nihil dubitat, totum in voluntate Dei' pendere, is prorsus de se desperat, nihil
digit, sed exspectat opcrantem Deura is proximus est gratiae, ut salvus fiat. Itaque
propter electos ista volgantur, ut isto raodo hurailiati et in nlhilum redacti, salvi fiant :
caeteri resistunt hurailiationi huic, imo damnant doceri hanc desperationem sui ; ali
quid vel modieulum sibi relinqui volunt, quod possint : hi occulte manent superbi et
gratiae Dei adversarii. Haec est, inquara, una ratio, ut pii promissionem gratiae hu-
railitati cognoscant, invocent, et aocipiant." Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. c. 12, § 6, p, 272 :
" Hactenus perniciosam hypocrisin docuerunt, qui haec duo simul junxere, humihter
sentiendum, et justitiam nostram aliquo loco habendam,"

22-2 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
®t us now examine the intrinsic worth of the first reason. It is cef'
tainly a great task for the true Church to administer solid consolation
to consciences sorely troubled and deeply agitated on account of their
sins. But the solace so extended should be no false one ; and that such
an epithet must attach to the Protestant consolation, we have already,
on account of the distinction between the instrumental and the efficacious
faith, full and just cause to apprehend. And why so? Let us hear the
following dialogue betwixt Luther and a heart seeking consolation :—
" Thou sayest, I have done no good work ; I ara for this too weak and
fraU. Such a treasure thou wilt not acquire by thy works; but thou
shouldst hear the joyous raessage, which the Holy Ghost proclaims to
thee, through the mouth of the prophet, for he saith to thee, — Be
joyous, thou barren, that barest not ; that is to say, that art not
active in charity. As if he would say, why art thou anxious and
art so troubled ? for thou hast no cause to be anxious and to be
troubled. — But I am barren, and lonely, and bear no children. — Although
thou buildest not on the righteousness of the law, nor bearest children,
Uke Hagar, it matters not ; thy righteousness is far higher and better,
to wit, Christ, who is able to defend thee against the terrors and the ,
curses of the law ; for he became an anathema for thee, that he might
redeem thee from the anathema of the law."*
What an utterly false and dangerous application of the twenty-
seventh verse of Galatians, chapter iv.! Is not this replacing one part
of faith by the other ? And distinguishing the efficacious from the
instrumental faith, in order that not merely in the defective condition,
but in the utter absence, of the forraer, the latter raight be made to
represent it ? Here we find no solace, but the encouragement of a false
security ; and the doctrine, that it is only the faith working by charity
which justifies, is reproached with being unable to rise above the low
level of a mere legal justice ! And what contradictions, too, we find
here ! Above, as we have seen, Luther terraed faith the thoroughly
good-wUl, and here we find faith destitute of all will. Above, faith
was described as an eternal, active principle, and here it appears before
us as indolence itself! Above, it was a fresh living power, which doth
'* Luther's Commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, p. 258. It is self-evident
that the soul in question is not one which is in a state of anxiety, because, ou account
of the relations wherein it is placed, it cannot perform the works it would desire, nor
confer happuiess on its fellow. creatures. In this case the solace administered would
have been of a very diiFerent kind, and could not have been brought in connexion
with the passage relative to Hagar. It should then only have been said, the charity,
wherewith this soul is aniraated, sufiiceth ; for love is the fulfilment of the law. But
this it was precisely, which Luther did not wish to assert.

BEtWEEN CATHOLICS AS'D PROTESf ANTS. 32g
tiot first ask, whether and what it should do ; but, before the question
is put, is already prepared i here it appears a thing that can only sigh
and lament, and can never make progress, and which still, however,
reraains the true faith ! Should the distinction accordingly between
the active and the instruraental faith be raeant undoubtedly to express
the idea, that faith justifies, yet not in so rauch as it is active, still it
would convey the sense, that it justifies, even when it is not active I
Let us attentively consider once more some passages previously cited
frora Luther's writings (see § xvi. ;)-^passages) which only now perhaps
will be completely understood. Let us especially weigh t^e words ;
" But if a raan heareth, that he should believe in Christ, and yet that
this belief availeth him nothing, nor is of use, unless love be added
thereto, which imparts vigour to faith, and renders it capable of justify
ing man ; then without doubt he wUl faU away from faith, despair, and
think that, if it be really so, iha.t faith without love doth not justify, then
is it undoubtedly profitless and nothing worth." Luther's already
cited description of the riches, which flow to us from baptism, is well
worthy of our repeated attention. All these passages furnish so many
evidences of the opinion which we have advanced, respecting the real
practical importance of the here alleged distinction between the two
forms of one and the same faith. It is not to be denied, that, according
to Luther, the form of faith efficacious to holiness cannot appear, with
out the other, which consists in the solacing apprehension of Christ's
merits. But the latter can exist without the forraer, and indeed, in
such a way, that, according to Luther's opinion, the faith in the for..
giveness of sins through Christ would lose all value and all importance,
if such were not the case.
This now is not the doctrine of St. Paul, who consoles us in a very
different manner. Corapare Romans v. 1-6, vui. 1-16 ; Galatians v.
6-2-2. In the Holy Spirit let us cry out, "Abba, dear Father! But
the fruits of the Spirit are charity, joj', peace, patience, benignity,
goodness, longanimity, mUdness, faith, modesty, continency, chastity."
Peace and joy in the Holy Spirit are accordingly not to be gained
without love and all other holy sentiments. And this the soul, whose
scruples are silenced by Luther, clearly proves. Because it possessed
no loving, gentle, and meek faith, therefore joy and peace were not its
portion, and never would it obtain these alone, unless it were seduced
into a culpable levity, or sought its satisfaction in carnal pleasures. The
nature of that consolation, which the Catholic Church administers, we
shall later have occasion more accurately to define.
2. Let us now proceed to the appreciation of the second of the prac
tical grounds, which, in the opinion of the Reformers, so strongly enforce

224 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
their view of faith, as to render it not only laudable, but even com«
manded by the spirit of Christianity to such an extent, that they char
acterize the opposite opinion as absolutely wicked. It would have been,
in truth, a noble struggle between the different confessions, if they had
striven in an enlightened manner to surpass each other in the glorifica
tion of Hira, whora they mutually revere as the source of all salvation.
But the sovereign rule, according to which judgraent should begivenin
this strife, is this : when we praise the hoUest, let there be nothing
unholy ! Let us first endeavour clearly to apprehend the raeaning of
the Reforraers' assertion ! They think the doctrine of Catholics, that
only the sanctified is the justified raan, only the lover of God is the
beloved of God, has nothing above the level of vulgar and every-day
raaxiras ; for to love him, who loves us, is not rare even araong men.
Thus if we would be agreeable to God, only in so far as the power of
Christ really transforras us, puts aside sin, and makes us in fact worihy
of becoraing children of God, this is not a sufficient honour for the Re
deemer ; the conception of Christ and the value of his sufferings b-'foro
God are not estimated sufficiently high. But if the merit of the suffer
ings of the Son of God be so c.valtod, that its power can introduce us
into heaven, without its costing hira, or ourselves, any effort for our
preparatory purification, then what he hath achieved for us, and what
he is able to achieve with his Father, appears in all its lustre.* The
Reforraers conceived that the case was nearly the same, as if a gentle
man were to testify his favour to a friend, by letting him introduce
guests in their soiled travelling clothes, without giving them on that
account a less gracious welcome. But here the question is not about
forms of decorum and ceremonial frivolity ; — it is about that inward
adornment, that nuptial garment, which, under pain of removal from
the banquet, according to the sentence of the Lord of grace, who is
also the Holy One, ought not to be wanting. Even the gentleraan, in
the case referred to, would suppose that the guests introduced to him in
the manner described, would entertain the sarae kindly feelings towards
himself, as the friend under whose auspices they were admitted. Hav
ing thus formed clear notions of the mode, which the confessions deem
raost fitting for showing forth the glory of the Redeemer, it can no

* Chemnit. Exara. Cone. Trid. part i. p. 265. " Videt enim pins lector, remis
sionem peccatorum, adoptionem, ipsam denique salutem et vitam aetemam adimi et
detrahi satisfaction! et obedientiae Christi, et transferri in nostras virtutes, Christo vero
mediatori hoc tantum relinquitur, quod propter ipsius meritum accipiamus charitatem
 Exinainlta est fides, et abolita promissio, si haereditas e.x lege, cujus summa
est chairitas."

BETWEEN CA-niOLtCS AND PROTESTANTS, 225
longer be a matter of doubt, which of them renders the tribute most
Worthy of that Redeemer. And now let us inquire into the misunder^
standings, that have led to a condemnation of the Catholic doctrine.
It is scarcely possible, perhaps, fo conceive any objection less cogent
-against the peculiar doctrines of the Catholic Church, than the asser
tion that it considers the reconciliation of raan with God, partly as the
Work of Christ, portZy as the work of man, or what is the same, that it
•divides between the Saviour and the believer th^ glory of bringing the
latter back to God ; and this forsooth, because Catholics represent the
faith animated by love as agreeable to God ! If the doctrine of Catho
lics were this, that the holy sentiraents required of the Christian were
•obtained independently of Christ, and, in this independence, were ac
ceptable to 'God ; or even that Christ supplied only those virtues, where
in we were de'ficient ; then the above objection wotild doubtless be well
founded. But as the Church express!)' teaches, that the entire spiritual
life of the faithful, in so far as it is agreeable to God, flows absolutely
from the source which is called Christ, how can there be here any ques
tion of a div'ision of glory, or a thankless conduct towards the Redeem-
•er, and of a want of pious feeling ! Undoubtedly, the Church urgently
¦demands of every ono, to appropriate in a complete and vivid raanner
the power proffered in the Redeemer ; undoubtedly, she teaches, that
it is only by this living appropriation, by stamping Christ on our souls,
we can become pleasing unto God ; namely, when all our feelings, all
our thoughts, and will, are filled with His vital breath. But to call this
a dividing of glory with Christ, is tantamount to asserting, that a raan,
exposed to danger of death from hunger, divides the honour of his deliv-
erance with hira, who benevolently offers hira food and drink ; because
-the unhappy man makes use of the strengthening nurture, and by that
participation appropriates it to his own substance, and does not merefy
content himself with turning up a look of hope and confidence towards
his benefactor. With this case, in fact, may be aptly compared the
-theory of Protestants in respect to the relation of the believer to Christ.
But whoever is entangled in this error, will perish in his sins, like the
starving man whom he would fake for his model, while he fancies he
is rendering glory to the Saviour alone. He will be comprised in the
number of those, who exclaim, "Lord, Lord,'^ (be thou alone praised!)
•but who "do not the wUl of the heavenly Father."
But this whole error is here based on a confusion of the objective
'consummation of the atonement with its subjective appropriation (see
§ xi. ;)* and the love which must first germinate from faith in the
» The Council ai Trent disting«ishes five causes of justification, the sense where-
15

226 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
grace and the love of God in Christ, though in a living faith it has already
ripened into blossom and fruit, is so understood, a? if God remitted us

of Sarpi should have fathomed before he presumed to express a censure. " Hujus
justificationis causae sunt finalis quidem gloria Dei et Christi, ac vita letema : efft.
ciens vero misericors Deus, qui gratuito abltrit ; meritoria autem' dilectissimus tlni-
genitus suus, Dominus noster Jesus Christus, qui, cum essemus inlraici, projtfer
nimiam caritatera, qua dilexit nos, sua sanctissimftl passione in ligno crucis nobis jns.
tificati-mem meruit et pro nobis Deo patri satlsfecit : instrumentalis item, sacraihon-
tum baptismi :  demum \inicaformalis causa est justitia Dei ; non quft ipse Justus
est, sed qn^ nos juslos facit i qua videlicet ab eo donati, renovamur spiritu mentis
nostrae, et non modo reputamur, sed vere justi nominamur et sumus, justitiam in
nobis recipientes."  Sess. vi. c. viii. It is the justificationis causa formalis,vihich
gives so much offence to tho Protestants. The causa fomlalis is, in tho technical
language of the mediaeval schools, ihe dans esse in aliquo, dans aciualitaie>n ; and
accordingly, here il is that whereby the righteousness, which God desireth of us, be
comes real within us, forming (forma) the vivifying principle within us. The Coun.
cjl says, the righteousness becomes living and is formed within ns, through the im-
pression of God's holy will (justitia Dei) upon our souls. This doctrine tlie Protes-
tants take quite abstractedly, just as if it signified : " the sanctified will is what is
acceptable to God in us," without attending to what iraraediately before was said
respecting the causa finalis, effieiens, and meritoria, to wit, that it is only the
mercy of God a/,d the merits of Christ which are the source, whence flow the release
of the human v/ill frora sin and its sanctification, and on this account it is said, God
stamps his will upon us, nos justos facit Deus. Luther says, the causa formalis jus
tificationis is the instrumental faith (Commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, loc.
cit p. 70 ;) and in his system he is right, for, according to it, raan is already com.
pletely righteous and regenerated, so soon as he possesses that faith — so soon as he
apprehends Christ — the extraneous righteousness. But the Catholic denies that by
this theory the scriptural, or even scientific, notion of a living appropriation is real..
ized ; and he is equally far from conceding, that by upholding this notion the Catho
lic Church withholds the glory due to Christ, the Lord, or, in other Words, falls to
recognize in its full' extent the power of the atonement.
Calvin (in Antidot. in Concil. Trid. opusc. p. 704) expresses himself, with great
naivete : " Porro quam frivola sit et nugatoria causarum partitio ., ..supersedco
dicere " He is also perfectly right in avoiding all clear scientific definitions on this
matter: for the very existence and maintenance of the whole Protestant system of
doctrine is connected with this point.
Chemnit. Exam. Concil. part i. p. 266. " Sed Andradlus hanc Chnsti mediatoris
justitiam fide nobis imputatam blasphcmat esse eoramentitiam, adumbratam et ficti-
tiara. Nullura autem habent aliud argumentura, nisi (!) quod opponunt absurdita^
tem ex physica et ethica : absurdum scilicet esse (sicut Osius inquit) dicere alieujus
rei formara esse, quae ii oi rei non insit, ut si dicam, parielera esse album albcdine, qua?
vestl mea; iahaereat, non parieti : vel Ciceronera esse forte m fortitudine, quae non ipsi,
Bcd Achillis animo inhiEreat. Quid vero haec argumenta aliud ostendunt quam Pon.
tificios in doctrma justificationis, relicta evangelii luce, qua;rcrc sententiam, qua;
conformis et consentanea sit philosophicis opinionibus, aut cert-e legalibus sententiio
de justitia? Evangelium vero pronuntiat esse sapientiam in mysterio absconditam,
quam nemo prmcipum hujus sfeeuli eognovk. Ideo eum habeamus sententiae nostrae

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 227
our sins on account of our love, whereas it is His voluntary gift. A
misunderstanding of Scripture has had great share in producing this
in scriptura certa et firma fundamenta (?), non est curandum, etiamsi incurrat in ab.
. turditatem philosophicam."
Here it is openly avowed, that the Protestant theory of appropriation of the merits
of Christ, cannot stand the test of scientific investigation. And such is the fact; for,
as was said above, we are to appropriate to ourselves the obedience of Christ without
his becoming our own true and inmost property ; He is to become subjective, with
out becoming so ; and this is, in truth, a philosophic absurdity. In the same way,
no philosophic notion of Protestant faith can be formed, because it is to be an organ
of appropriation without appropriating ! To the same confusion of ideas we may
aiscribe charges like the following : " Sed hoe dicunt esse totum meritum Christi,
quod propter illud misericordia Dei infundat nobis novam qualitatem justitiae iuhas-
rentis, quae est caritas, ut ilia justificemur ; hoc est, ut non propter Christi obedien.
tiam, sed propter nostram charitatem, absulvamur coram judicio Dei, adoptemur in
filios,". ..Chemnit. lib. i p 263. Here again we find the divine and the huraan, the
objective atonement and the subjective appropriation confounded with each other.
¦When Chemnitius, in a tone of lament, proceeds to observe, " Ut ita raisericordia
Dei tantum sit causa effieiens, et obedientia Christi tantum sit raeritoria causa," we
can only express our astonishment ; for what more can they be in themselves ?
Chemnitius desires the obedience of Christ should be also the causa formalis, that is
tosay, should become our own, without ourselves being obliged to be obedient : it is
to become subjective without becommg subjective ! ! In a word, the theory of Chem
nitius is what we have already coraraented on in the text ; to wit that the merits of
Christ stand forth in a far raore glorious light, when we not merely beheve they work
out our forgiveness, in so far as they work out at the same time our improvement,
but when we also assume, that for the sake of these merits sin is forgiven us, even
when we reform not our conduct, but merely beheve. Chemnitius (p. 263-4) cen
sures Catholics for denying forgiveness of sins on account of Christ's satisfaction, be
cause they make the same tantamount to a real extirpation of sin, and the implant
ing of charity in the roora of the old debt of sin. But Catholics teach that through
faith in the divine mercy ui Jesus Christ, and all connected therewith, love for God is
awakened in our souls, and thereby the aiFection for sin effaced. But is this to deny
the objective forgiveness of sins, or is it not rather to appropriate the same to our
selves ? Is it not to protest against a notion of appropriation, which is none at all ?
Calvin, especially, entertained the singular opinion, that Catholics believed justifica
tion to consist, partly in the forgiveness of sins, partly in the spiritual regeneration.
Antidot. m Cone. "Trid. opusc. p. 704 : " Sed quid facis istis bestiis (the Catholics)
 Nam justitiae partem operibus hinc eunstare colligunt, quod nemo absque spiritil
regenerationis per Christum Deo concilietur," and so on : " Ac si partim remissione,
partim spirituali rogeneratione justi essemus." Calvin having already taught, that
by mstrumental faith, and apart from all newness of life, raan becomes righteous,
must needs further teach, that by forgiveness of sins alone is raan justified. But al
though under righteousness Catholics include newness of life, it by no means follows
that they hold justification to consist, partly in this newness of life, and partly in the
forgiveness of sins ; for out of faith is unfolded the entire new life, and the latter is
ever determined by the former. Thus, in the righteous man, faith and the inner new-
bom life form an inseparable unity (fides formata,) as in God do forgiveness of sins
and sanctification.

228 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
error. In the Bible, God is represented as loving raen before they love
Hira (see 1 John iv. 10;) that is to say, as loving them without their
love ; whereas the Catholic Church teaches that he only, who loves
God, is beloved of God, Hereby the free, unmerited, grace of God iti
Christ seems totally rejected, as if only through our love, the love of
God deserved to be acquired. What is to be said in reply to this ? In
answering this question, we connect with the first epistle of John iv. 10,
numerous other passages which appear to contradict it ; — passages
wherein it is expressly said, that God loves only those who love Him.
In the verse referred to, the love of God embracing the huraan race
(rot y-ea-iiot) in the Redeeraer, is announced, and at the same time the
eternal raystery is unveiled, that God, through his Son, proffers for
giveness to all. But this universal, eternal love of God is realized in
the individual, only at the raoraent wherein he do-operates with the love
of God revealed in the Redeeraer, and, full of faith, stnmps it on his
heart and his will ; so that, as this specific individual, he is, in effect,
beloved of God at the moment only when the love hath becorae mu
tual. (John xiv. 2I-'-'3.) Hence both forms of speech in Holy Writ
are equally true ; hence the truth of the Catholic doctrine, which, in
the article of justification, wherein this personal appropriation of Ood's
unmerited grace is the question al i.s.suc, necessarily adheres to the words
of tho Scriptural text last referred to.
3. Let us now turn to the relation which fhe distinction in question
bears to huraility. Tho principal virtue of the Pauline faith is, doubt
less, humility — the unconditional resignation to God in Christ, self-re
nunciation on the part of man, and his deep conviction of possessing no
sentiraent agreeable to God, without Christ ; and it is not to be denied,
that a perception of this truth raainly influenced the Reformers in their
definition of failh. But as they asserted thaf it was not tho intrinsic
worth of faith — that is to say, it was not a circle of closely connected
virtues involved in faith, such as huraility, love, self-denial, and the
rest, which stamped on it the character of justification, a method was
found of dispensing with humility even in huraility itself, and, in order
to evince a true humility, it was taught, that it was not huraility in
faith which rendered us acceptable to God ! It is indeed a sign of true
humility, to be ignorant of itself, and to conceal itself from its own
view ; but never hath a truly humble man taught, that humUity doth
not render us agreeable to the Deity. Were there any other means
of awakening in our souls a heart-felt, vivid, persevering sense of the
virtue of huraility, than faith in the merits of the Redeemer, by the
acknowledgment of which alone man is compeUed to go out of him
self, to renounce, without reserve, his own self-produced virtue, in order

BETWEEN' CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 229
to live entirely in and by God ; we should not then even stand in need
of the raerits of the Redeemer. So rauch is humUity the cardinal
point, on which everything hinges, which must be called forth before
everything else, because in this negative, all positive is comprised.
And this is not to make us acceptable to God, because, forsooth, no
virtue can make us so ! And it is precisely in fhe avowal, that it is
not humility, but faith only which possesses this property, that true
humUity is to consist ! Here the Reforraers were evidently mi.sled by
the most vague, the most confused, yet withal honourable, feelings. Of
the truly positive principle in the negative character of humility, they
had no clear conception. Still less did they pause to reflect, that it is
one thing to lay down the doctrine, that a man can be thoroughly
good, and another to hold oneself as personally good. The latter would
be the destruction of all religious life, while the former is its essential
condition. The inextricable contradiction, in which this doctrine involved the
Protestants, is well worthy of notice. According to their teaching,
humiUty, like every other virtue, can be rightly found, only where it is
most urgently inculcated, that the believer needs it not to render him
self acceptable to God. And yet it is taught at the same time, that
on tliat account the Christian needs it not, as a holy sentiment, to obtain
the favour of the Deity, because, like every other virtue, it appears al
ways impure in man, that is to say, ahvays marred by self-complacency and
arrogance. Hence, if it were exacted as necessary to justification, man
would never become just in the eyes of God. Thus, forsooth, true hurail
ity is to be engendered by a systera of faith which establishes, that there
is no true huraUity even in the new-born ; and true humility can acquire
a solid foundation only by the doctrine of its impossibility, or at least
its non-existence in this system. Either the doctrine, that there is no
true humility, is right, — and then such a doctrine can never produce
true humility, because otherwise the doctrine itself would be false ; —
or, there is such a thing as true humility, and then the doctrine is
false. Akin to this contradiction, or, rather, identical with it, though only in
another form, is the following. In studying the writings of the Re
formers, the thought has often involuntarily occurred to us, that they
entertained the opinion that it was soraething extreraely dangerous to
be really good ; nay, that the principle of sanctity, so soon as it was on
the point of acquiring complete dominion over a man, contained the
germ of its own destruction, as such a man must needs becorae arro
gant, fall into vain-glory, liken himself to the Eternal, and contend
with him for divine sovereignty. Hence the security of believers

230 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
seemed to require, that they should ever keep within themselves a good
germ of evil, because in this state we are better off ! Accordingly the
matter was so handled, as if real goodness were incompatible wilh hu
mility, and as if it were in evU only, that this virtue flourished ; where
as it was not considered, that wickedness was in itself the contrary of
true huraUity, and utterly excluded it. In the following passage, re
plete with wonderful naivete, the irapression which, as we just said, the
reading of the Reformers' writings has produced on our mind, has beon
recorded in felicitous language by Luther himself. " Doctor Jonas
said to Dr. Martin Luther at supper-time : he had that day in his lec
ture been comraenting on that sentence of Paul in 2 Timothy iv.
' Reposita est mihi corona justitiae ;' ' there is laid up for me a crown
of justice;' ' Oh! how gloriously doth St. Paul speak of his death! I
cannot believe it !' Whereupon Dr. Martin replied, ' I do not believe
St. Paul was able to have so strong a faith on this matter as he asserts.
In truth, I cannot, alas ! believe so firmly as I preach, talk, and write,
and as other people think I believe. And it would not be quite
GOOD FOR us TO DO ALL THAT GoD COMMANDS, FOR Hn WOULD
THEREBY BE DEPRIVED OF HiS DIVINITY, AND WOULD BECOME A
LIAR, AND COULD NOT REMAIN TRUE. The authority of St. Paul,
too, would be overturned, for he says in Romans : ' God hath con
cluded all things under sin, in order that He might have mercy on all
men.' "* § XIX. — Survey of the differences in the doctrine of faith.
We wiU now endeavour, briefly, to state the points of agreement and
of divergence in the article of faith. They areas foUows : —
1 . If " Faith" be taken in an objective sense, that is to say, as an estab
lishraent instituted by God, in Jesus Christ, in opposition to Mosaism, or
any human and arbitrary systera of religion, and the modes of thinking,
feeling, and acting, which such prescribe, then the Catholic can with
out restriction assert : it is by faith alone, man is able to acquire God's
favour ; there is no other narae given fo men whereby they may be
saved, save Christ Jesus alone. And it is only through the mercy of
God, we say this narae is given ; consequenfly without any merit on
the part of mankind in general, or of individual man in particular.
2. The divergence coraraences only when the objective must be
come subjective, — when the question regards the conditions under
which that institution of salvation is to conduce towards our personal

See Luther's Table-talk, p. 166, (in German :) Jena, 1603.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 231
salvation. But here, also, each confession teaches, that man should
adhere to Christ, and enter into a spiritual connexion with him, in
order to partake of the blessings proffered through and in him. But
fhe Catholic says, if this adherence be a mere connexion of ideas — an
empty union of feeling or phantasy with Christ — a mere theoretic faith
in him — a mere recognition of Christian truths, in opposition to works
wrought in the vital communion of the vnll with Christ, as well as to the
love engendered by faith, and to aU other virtues ; then this faith is in
itself by no means sufficient to render men acceptable to God, or to
justify. But if faith, on the other hand, be understood as a new divine
sentiraent, regulating the whole man — as fhe new living spirit (fides
form,ata ;) then to this cdone, even according to the Catholic systera, is
the power given to raake us the children of God, and heirs of eternal
happiness ; for, in this sense, faith alone embraces every thing.* But
let it be observed, that, by the Catholic Church, sacred charity is re
garded as the substantial forra of faith, which alone justifies, not as a
consequence, as a fruit in expectancy, but which, perhaps, may never
come forth. Lave must already vivify faith, before the Catholic
Church will say, that through it man is really pleasing unto God.
Faith in love, and ktve in faith, justify ; they form here an inseparable
unity.'l' This justifying faith is not merely negative, but positive,
* We should here observe, that, at the commencement of the Reforraation, the
proposition, "that faith alone justifies," often bore the sense, "that even the sacra
ments are tmnecessary " On which account, at several religious conferences, the Ca
tholics, under the article of faith, insisted on the necessity of the sacraments as means
of j\istification. Of these external raeans of grace we are not here speaking, where
we have to treat merely of the internal acts agreeable to God, the spiritual state of the
«oul, and its outward manifestations in moral conduct.
t A very comprehensive view of this subject has been taken by Cardinal Sadoletus,
bishop of Carpentras, in his letter to the Genevains. (Epp u xvii. n. 25, Opp. ed.
Veron. 1738, tom. ii. p. 176.) '• Assequimur bonum hoc nostrae perpetuae universae-
que salutis, fide in Deum sola et in Jesum Christum. Cum dico fide soil, non ita
intelligo, quemadmodum isti novarum rerum repertores intelligunt, ut seclusa chari
tate et cateris Christiana mentis officiis, solam in Deum credulitatera et fiduciara
illam, qua persuasus sum in Christi cruce et sanguine mea mihi delicta omnia esse
ignota : est hoc quidem etiam nobis necessarium, primus hie nobis patet ad Deum
introitus; sed is tamen non est satis Mentem enim praeterea afferamus oportet pie
tatis plenam erga summum Deum, cupidamque efficiendi quaecunque illi grata sint :
in quo praecipue virtus Spiritfts Sancti inest. Quae mens etiamsi interdum ad exte-
riora opera non progreditur, ipsa tamen ex sese ad bene operandum jam intus parata
«st, promtumqne gerrt studium, ut Deo in cunctis rebus obsequatur : qui verus divinae
juatitae in nobis est habitus." After citing several scriptural texts, Sadoletus
<;ontinues : " Certe fides, quae in Deum nostra per Jesum Christum est, non so.
lum ut confidamus indhristo, sed bene in illo operantes, operarive instituentes, ut
•confidamus, imperat nobis ac praeseribit. Est enmi aniplum ac plenum vocabulum

232 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
withal ; not merely a confidence, that, for Christ's sake, the forgive
ness of sins will be obtained, but a sanctified feeling, in itself agreeable
to God. Charity is, undoubtedly, according to CathoUc doctrine, a
fruit of faith. But faith justifies, only when it has already brougU forth
ihis fruit. Faith is also, in our view, a vivifying principle ; but it ob
tains for us the favour of God, onlyi when il has already unfolded its
vivifying power.*
3. The justifying subjective faith, in the Protestant sense, is de
scribed, not raerely as a recognition of the New Testament Revela
tion, "I" but as an assurance of the Divine Grace in Christ Jesus, as con
fidence in tho naerits of the Redeemer, by the power whereof sins are
forgiven. And this confidence is held up as being able, abstractedly
and entirely of itself, to win for its possessor the favour and friendship
of the Alraight)'. This consciousness of the Divine favour must see
charity and good works in its train ; but as by their presence the latter
contribute nought towards justification, so by their absence they take
nothing from the state of Ihe justified. Here, accordingly, charity is
not regarded as the substantial form of the alone-justifying faith : man
is already justified, so soon as he confides in Christ ; the seed is sown

fides, nee solum in se credulitatera ct fiduciam continet : sed spcm etiam et studium
obcdiendi Deo, et illam, quie in Christo maxime pcrspicua nobis facta est, principem
et dominara Christianarura oraniura virtutum, charitatem."
" Sadoleti Epp. lib. xiii. u. 2 ; Gaspari Contareno Card. opp. ed, Veron. tom. ii,
p. 4,5. " De justificatione et justitia placet mihi vehementer tuarura rationum con-
textus et distinctio ex Aristotele sumpta. Sequitur enim certe charitas cursum ilium
antecedentera, quo ad justitiara pervenitur : non tamen sequitur cadera charitas (mea
quidem animo opinioneque) justitiam, sed eam ipsa constituit : vel potius charitas ipsa
est justitia. Habet enim formae vim charitas: forma autera est id, quod ipsa res.
Cura ergo acceditur, praeunte ilia praeparatlone ad justitiam, acceditur una et ad
charitatem : ad quara cura est perventum, tum justitia per ipsam charitatem consti-
tuitur. Justitiam voco, non vulgari, neque Aristotelico nomine, sed Christiano more
ac modo, eam quae omnes viriutes complexa continet : neque id humanis viribus, sed
instinctO influxOque divino," etc.
t On this matter, as in other articles, we find In Luther little permanent unifor
mity ; and this may bc accotmted for by the obscurity and confusion in the notion
which he commonly attached to justifying faith. Very often with him, "faith" is
belief in the truth of anything. Thus, in his commentary on the epistle to the Gala
tians floe. cit. p. 70,) he calls faith " a hidden, lofty, secret, incomprehensible know
ledge;" but immediately thereupon, " a true confidence and assurance of the heart."
Elsewhere, in the same work, he compares faith to dialectics, and hope to rhetoric ;
that is to say, faith floated before his mind as something theoretical, and not as any
thing practical. In his work, De servo arbitrio (lib. i. p. 177, b.,) faith is again de
scribed, in a long passage, as a firm persuasion ; and so also in the numerous passa
ges where he opposes it to the future intuition. In his book, De captivitate Baby-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 233
for heaven, and brings us thither, even when under unfavourable cir
curastances, as, for instance, the sluggishness of the will, and the like,
it bears absolutely no fruit. Thus the Protestant doctrine excludes
works wrought before, as well as after, conversion to Christ, and, raore
over, aU holy sentiments, when it attributes fo faith alone the power of
saving, — a doctrine which we raay say, in passing, has not even the
very slightest foundation in Scripture. Of swcA an opposition between
faith, charity, and works, Paul did not even once think, and James is
absolutely opposed to it. (See section xxn.)*
§ XX — On the assurance of justification and eternal fehcity.
The opinion, that the believer must be perfectly convinced of his jus-
tification before God, and of his future felicit)', is so closely connected
with the doctrine of faith, in the Protestant system,f that Melancthon
says of the schoolmen, who deny it, " We see clearly, from this alone,

lornica (Opp. tom. ii p. 979, b.,) he says : " Verbura Dei omniam primum est quod se
quitur fides, fidem charitas, charitas deinde facit omne bonum opus.". Here one act
on the part of raen is overlooked : the preaching of the truth is followed, first, by
knowledge and recognition of the truth, next, by confidence, and so on ; but which of
these acts is here denoted by fides ? Probably it includes at once knowledge and
confidence. Such indefiniteness in language is attended with very pernicious conse
quences, and, in later tiraes, was productive of an utter indliFerencc to the truth, just
as if the having confidence were alone suflScient, or as if " confidence" were intelli
gible without the firm conviction of the truth.
* After this investigation we shall be enabled to appreciate Gerhard's Loci Theolo.
gici ftom. vii p. 206, loc. xvii, c, iii. sect, v.) where he endeavours to base on tradi
tion the Protestant doctrine of faith. It is a compilation totally unworthy of a raan
like Gerhard, Every passage wherein any doctor of the Church asserts that faith in
Christ alone conducts to salvation, he alleges in favour of the Protestant theory,
without at all inquiring what sense the author attached to these words. He was
even so foolish as to make use of those passages wherein fathers of the Church (for
example, St. Irenaeus.) assert of the Catholic faith, in opposition to heretical systems
of doctrine, that it can alone insure salvation ! ! The perception that a father of the
Church, like Chrysostom, who held anything but the Protestant doctrine respecting
original sin, free-will, and its relation to grace, could not possibly have entertained
the Lutheran view of faith, it would be perhaps too much to expect from Gerhard ;
for any desire to investigate the internal cimnexion between different doctrines he did
not even feel.
t Apolog, iv. § 40, p. 83 " Non dlligimus, nisi certo statuant corda, quad donata
sit nobis remissio peccatorum." xii. De pcenitent. § 20, p. 157: " Hanc certitudi-
nora fidei nos docemus requiri in evangelio." Calvin. Instit. lib. iii. c. 2, § 16, foi.
197 : " In summa, vere fidelis non est, nisi qui solids persuasione Deum sibi propiti
um benevolumque patrera esse persuasus, deque ejus benignitate omnia sibi poUicetur:
nisi qui divinae erga se benevolentiae promissionibus fretus, indubitatam salutis expeo-
tationem praesumit."

234 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
how utterly devoid of intellect this species of men are.'"* The close
connexion of this position with the whole Protestant system is undenia
bly clear. We have before observed, that, from the doctrine of the total
extirpation of all seeds of good out of the human breast, one advantage
in regard to Christian life might be gained, — that man, so soon as he
perceived any little sparks of a higher life within him, might be weU
assured that God had begun His work of rederaption, which would be
as certainly consuraraated. (Chap. xi. § vi.) Secondly, that theory of
faith, according to which raen are to direct their view towards God's
mercy, and to turn it away frora their own moral state,f necessarily
involves the opinion we have advanced. Moreover, this assurance of
salvation presupposes absolute predestination, and the doctrine, that
God's grace works only in the elect ; for if a man can at any tirae repel
the grace once felt, then, by the very idea of this possibility, the sense
of certitude is at once shaken. Hence, it is only by the Calvinists that
this doctrine hath been carried out to its full extent ; while on the part
of the Lutherans, it betrays that original adherence to the principles of
predestination, which in other raatters also have left traces of their influ
ence, and the later rejection whereof, has so materially impaired the
internal harmony of their system.
Catholics, frora opposite reasons, believe not thaf a quite unerring
certitude of salvation can be acquired. J As they consider not fallen

* Melancth. loc. theolog. p. 1 16. " Ut vel. hoc solo loco satis appareat, nihil
fuisse spiritas in toto genere,"
t Melancth. loc, theolog. p. 92, says, in this respect : " Debebant enim non opera
sua, sed promissionem misericordiae Dei contemplari Quid est enim iniquius, quam
astimare voluntatem Dei ex operibus nostris, quam ille suo verbo nobis declaravit ?"
True, if man hath no freedom ; and hence it is by no means surprising, that Me.
lancthon requires us to be certain of our salvation (for the certitude of the forgiveness
of sins is, with the Reformers, tantamount to the certitude of salvation,) although the
believer be not assured of his perseverance in good. " Certissima sententia est, opor.
tore nos certissimos semper esse de remissione peccati, de benevolentia Dei erga nos,
qui justificat! sumus. Et norunt quide^ fide sancti, certissime se esse in gratia, sibi
condonata esse peccata. Non enim fallit Deus, qui poUicitua est, se condonaturum
peccata credentibus, tametsi inserti sint, an perseveraturi sint."
} Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. cap. ix. " Sicut nemo pius de Dei misericordia, de
Christi merito, de sacramentorum virtute etefficaci^ dubitare debet, sic quilibet, dum
se ipsum suamque propriam infirmitatem et indispositionem respicit, de sua gratis
formidare et timere potest, cum nullus scire valeat certitudine fidei, cui non potest
subesse falsum, se gratiam Dei esse consecutum." Cap. xii. " Nemo quoque,
quamdiu in hac mortalitate vivittu:, de arcano divinae praedestinationis mysterio usque
adeo prassumere debet, ut certo slatuat se omnino esse in numero praedestinatorum :
quasi verum esset, quod justificatus amplius peccare non possit, aut, si peccaverit,
certam sibi resipiscentiam promittere debeat. Nam, nisi ex speciaU revelatione, scu:i

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 235
man to be devoid of all moral and religious qualities and signs of life,
they are unable to discover a criterion, absolutely beyond the reach of
iUusion, whereby they can distinguish between the operations of grace,
and the effects of those feelings in man akin to the Deity, and uneradi-
cated by his fall.* But even if they were fortunate enough to possess
such a criterion, the confidence built thereon would be again damped,
by the remembrance of the doctrine of huraan and divine co-operatioh
in the second birth and its consuramation, and be reduced to a raore
modest tone. For, together with the deepest confidence in God's
mercy, Catholics are taught, by reason of those humiliating experi
ences, which we all make in the course of our lives, to entertain a
great distrust of human fidelity ; and an absolute predestination, that
would bid them overlook such scruples, is rejected by their Church, — ¦

non potest, quos Deus sibi elegerit." C. xiii. " Similiter de perseverantias munere,
de quo scriptum est, — Qui perseveravit usque in fimem, hie salvus ent : quod qui
dem aliunde haberi non potest, nisi ab eo, qui potens est eum, qui stat, statuere, ut
perseveranter stet, et eum, qui cadit, restituere. Nemo sibi certi aliquid absoluta
certitudine poUiceatur : tametsi in Dei auxilio firmissimam spera collocare, et repo-
nere omnes debent. Deus enim, nisi ipsi illius gratiae defuerint, sicut coepit opus
bonum, ita perficiet, operans velle et perficere. Verumtamen qui se existimant stare,
videant, ne cadant, et eum tiraore ac treraore salutera suam operentur. (Phil. ii. 12.)
 Formidare enim debent, scientes quod in spem gloriae, et nondum in gloriam
renati sunt, de pugna quae superest cura came, cum mundo, cum diabolo : in qua,
victores esse non possimt, nisi cum Dei gratia apostolo obtemperent, dieenti : Debi
tores sumus, non carpi, ut secundum camem vivamus ; si enim secundum camera
vixeritis, moriemini : si autem spiritu facta carnis mortificaveritis, vivetis."
* Melancthon (loc. theol. p. 121) says, " The fruits of the Holy Spirit testify that
he worketh in our breasts (quod in pectore nostro versetur;) every one, to wit, know
eth frora his own experience whether he hateth sin from the bottom of his heart."
This criterion sounds the more strange from the lips of Melancthon, because he at
the same time teaches, that even in the will of the regenerated, sin remains;
that is to say, it is not detested from the heart. Hereby, accordingly, confidence
would be placed in our own worthiness, whereas the Protestant doctrine of the solace
of faith is to be zealously upheld precisely because, if raan look to himself, despair
must take possession of his soul. The principles, which Melancthon here lays down
for discerning the state of grace, are those of the Catholic theologians of the Middle
Age, and suit only the Catholic point of vie w .
So speaks St. Thomas Aquinas, loo. cit. quaest. cxii. art. v. " Hoo modo aliquis.
cognoscere potest, se habere gratiam, in quantum scilicet percipit se delectari in Deo,
et contemnere res mundanas; et in quantum homo non est conscius peccati mortalis.
Secundum quem modum potest intelligi, quod habotur Apoc. 1 : ' Vincenti dabo
manna absconditum, quod nemo novit, nisi qui accipit,' quia sc. ille, qui accipit, per
quandam experientiam dulcedinis novit, quam non experitur ille qui non accipit.
Ista taraen cognitio imperfecta est. Unde apostolus dicit. i. ad Cor, iv. : ' Nihil
mihi conscius sum, sed non in hoc justificatus sumj' " etc.

236 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Thus the Catholic Christian, without a false security, yet full of conso
lation, calm, and entirely resigned to the divine mercy, awaits the day
on which God shall pronounce his final award.
The avowals of Calvin in this matter are very remarkable, as well as
the strenuous exertions he must have recouise to, in order to awaken in
the souls of his disciples the desired assurance. He observes, that no
temptation of Satan is more dangerous, than when he seduces believers
to doubt of the certainty of their salvation, and tempts them to seek the
same in evil ways. To this he subjoins the remark, that such tempta
tions are the more dangerous, because to none are ihe generality of men
more inclined than to these. Rarely do we find a man, whose soul is not
at tiraes disturbed by the thought, — " Nowhere is the source of thy sal
vation to be found, but in the Divine election ; but in what manner hath
this election been revealed to thee ?" This train of thought Calvin
concludes with a proposition drawn from his own experience : " When
once such doubts have become habitual in any one, then the unhappy
man is either constantly tortured with dreadful anxiety, or entirely de
prived of all consciousness."*'
By this rash endeavour to obtain the assurance of our future salva
tion, various kinds of superstition, as well as a distracting uncertainty,
were occasioned : so that the very contrary to Calvin's wishes occurred ;
and it soon became manifest, that the effects of an unnatural desire
were ever pernicious. With sin, and the combat against sin, came the
restlessness of the spirit ; the latter never capable of being stiUed, till
the former had ceased to exist,"]" Undoubtedly, according to the sen-
tence of the apostle, the spirit testifies to the spirit, that we are the chil
dren of God ;:(: but this testimony is of so delicate a nature, and must
• Lib. iii, c, 24, § 3, foi. 353  " Eoque exitialior est haec tentatio, quod ad nullam
aliam propensiores simus fere omnes... Quse si apud quempiam semel invaluit, aut
diris tormentis miserum perpetuo excruciat, aut reddit penitus attonltum."
t Calvin, loc. cit. u. 2, § 17, foi. 19S. " Nos certe dum fidem docemus esse cer
tam ac securara, non certitudinem aliquam imaginamur, quTi nulla tangatur dubita-
tione, nee securitatem, qus nulla solllcitudine impctatur ; quin potius dicimus, perpe
tuum esse fidelibus eertamen cura sua ipsorum diffidcniia." But by this sentence the
whole doctrine of assurance is given up. These striking contradictions are inherent
in the very effort to force artificially on the human consciousness somethuig in con
tradiction to that consciousness itself.
X Sarpi histoire du concile de Trente, traduite par Amelot de la Houssaie, Amst.
1699, p. 198. " Au coraraencement du ix. chapitre, oti Pon disait. que les peches ne
sont pas remis par la certitude qu'on a de la remission, le legat changea le mot de
certitude en ceux dejactanceetde confianceprdsomptueuseen vertudecette certitude
de la grace. Et a la fin du mSme chapitre, au lieu de dire, parceque personne ne peut
savoir certainement, qu'il ait re^u la grace de Dieu, le mot certainement fut chang^
en ceux-ci, de certitude de foi." This is further below explained, that faith is eter-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROtESTANtS. 237
be handled with such tender care, that the Christian, in the feeling of
his unworthiness and fraUty, approaches the subject only with timidity,
and scarcely ventures to take cognizance of it. It is a holy joy, which
would fain conceal itself from its own view, and reraain a mystery to
itself ; and the more exalted the Christian stands, the more humble is
he, and the less is he disposed, without an extraordinary revelation, to
vaunt of a certainly, which so little accords with the uncertainty an3
mutabiUty of all earthly things. The higher the duties which the Catho
lic Church imposes on man, the more obvious the reason wherefore she
WUl acknowledge no absolute certainty of salvation. And herein pre
cisely we must look for the motive of her teaching, that the beUever can
and must become worthy of salvation, while yet she denies the certainty
thereof; whereas the Protestants, who assert that man can in no wise
become worthy of heaven, exert their utmost endeavours to call forth
such a sense of security.
Moreover, in many other cases of spiritual life, it is the same as with
the point in question. The innocence that would become conscious of
itself, is usually lost by that very act ; and the reflection, whether the
act we are about to perform be reaUy pure, makes it not unfrequently
irapure. Hence the Saviour saith, " let not thy right hand know what
thy left doeth." Joyful, yet full of sorrow, calm, and without precipi
tancy, the true saints pursue their way-— they boast not on that account
of being in the number of the elect, but resign their fate to God. Ac
cording to the Protestant theory, every one should be asked what he
thought of himself, and he must in his own life be regarded as a saint.
The doubt of others as to the truth of his own declaration would invaU
date the doctrine of the symbohcal books. As if in irony of their own
doctrine, the Protestants would recognize no saints ! I think, that, in
the neighbourhood of any man, who would declare hiraself under all cir
curastances assured of his salvation, I should feel very uncomfortable,
and should probably have some difficulty to put away the thought, that
something like diabolical Influence was here at play.
But the truth, which even this Protestant doctrine darkly divinedj
must not be overlooked. It consists in the individualizing of evangeli
cal truths — in pointing to the necessity of the personal application of
thera, and of the relation of the Divine proraises to ourselves, so that

hally true and unchangeable itself, however believing man may change ; whereas, he
who by an inward feeling is convmced of his state of grace, cannot yet be sure wheth
er through sin he may not fall from that state : and therefore man in general cannot
be assured of his salvation, cum certitudine fidei, altliough he may with confiding
hope look forward to it.

238 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
We should not regard them as undefined, and as merely relative to
others.

OF GOOD WORKS,
^ XXl .-^Doctrine of Catholics respecting good works.
By good works the Catholic Church understands the whole moral
actions and sufferings of the man justified in Christ, or the fruits of
holy feeling and believing love. Of the observance of certain ecclesi
astical ceremonies, external rites, and the like, we have not here occa
sion to speak, as the following exposition will clearly show. As in the
man truly born again from the Spirit, the Catholic Church recognizes
a real liberation frora sin, a direction of the spirit and the will truly
sanctified and acceptable to God, it necessarily follows that she asserts
the possibUity and reality of truly good work.% and their consequent
meritoriousness. It is evident, too, that, in consequence of this doc
frine, she can and raust exact the fulfilment of the raoral law, as laid
down by the Apostle Paul, in Rom. viii. 3, 4.
Thus, we must especially observe, that it is only on works consura
mated in a real vital coraraunion with Chrisf, the Church bestows the
predicate " good ;" and, of a fulfilment of the law, she speaks only in
so far as the power to this effect hath been given in fellowship with
Christ. The Fathers of Trent express themselves in the following
manner :— " As a constant power flows from Christ, the Head, on the
justified, who are his merabers, • as from the vine to its branches, a
power, which precedes their good works, accompanies the same, and
follows thera,— -a power, without which, they can be in nowise agreea
ble to God, and meritorious ; so we are bound to believe, that the justi
fied are enabled, through works performed in God, to satisfy the divine
law, according to the condition of this present Ufe, and to merit eter
nal life, when they depart in a state of grace.""'
From this time we may, at the sarae tirae, clearly see, how far works are
caUed meritorious. When we presuppose, what must be here of course
taken for granted, the fundamental doctrine of all true religion, to wit,
that it was out of pure love itself that God conferred on us life, all our
faculties, and the destination for eternal happiness ; and that the agent
expressly acknowledges these truths ; then we may briefly describe
* Concil. Tndent, Sess. vi, c, 16.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 230
those works as meritorious, which our freedom (and without freedom
it were idle to talk of man's moral relations) hath wrought in the power
of Christ, Hence the holy fathers of Trent observe at the same time ;
" So great is the goodness of the Lord towards all men, that He con
siders his own gifts as their merits."* This is the idea which the
ancient Church attached to merit, and which is founded on Holy Writ.
Can heaven then be merited by believers ? Undoubtedly J they must
merit it, that is to say, become worthy of it, through Christ. Between
them and heaven there must be a homogeneity— an internal relation ;
that relation, which, by God's eternal ordinance and His express pro<
raises, exists between sanctity and beatitude ; terms which are not
only inseparable, but which stand also in the same relation to one an
other, as cause and effect.f The CathoUc Church, as she maintains
that the genuine Christian possesses in Christ an inward righteousness
* Even Calvin allows this to be the doctrine of Catholics, He says as follows
(Instit, lib iii. c. 1 1 , § 1 4 , p. 266 :) " Subtile effugiura se habere putant sophistae, qui
sibi ex scripturae depravatione et inanibus cavilhs ludos et delicias faciunt : nam ope.
ra (of these St. Paul saith that they do not justify) exponunt, quae literaliter tantum et
liberi arbitrii conatti extra Christi gratiam faciunt homines necdum regeniti, id vero
ad opera spiritualia speetare negant. (This is right.) Ita secundum eos, tam fide,
quam operibus justificatur homo, modo ne sint propria ipsius opera, sed dona Christi
et regenerationis fructus " However, the Catholic doth not say, man is justified ta-m
fide, quum operibus, as if both existed independently of each other.
t St. Thoraas Aquinas has expressed himself admirably on this raatter. He says
(loc. cit. quaest. cxiv. art. 1) that the notion of raerit is founded on tho notion of
justice, in the Hellenic and Roman sense of the Word. But absolute justice, strictly
speaking, exists only between absolute equals. To give back of our own as much
as we have received, or will receive, is to give according to raerit, and to act justly,
which absolutely presupposes the equality of both parties. In this sense there can be
no question of merit before God ; for we should be obliged to off'er to God what
is our own, not what we have received from him, whereupon he would repay us with
as much of his own. Hence, when in Holy Writ so much is said of a reward, which
the good receive in the next life ; or when it is said there will be a remuneration,
according to works, it is only a conditional merit and a conditional justice which is
meant. He says : " Manifestum est autein, quod inter Deura et hominem est maxi
ma inaequalitas, in infinitum enun distant; totum, quod est hominis bonum, est a
Deo, unde non potest hominis a Deo esse justitia secundum absolutam a?qualitatem(
sed secundum proportioncm quandam, in quantum scilicet uturque operatur se.
cundura raodura suum Modus autem et mensura humanae virtutis homini est
a Deo, et ideo ineritura hominis apud Deum esse non potest, nisi sectradura praesup-
positionera divinae ordinationis : ita scilicet ut id homo consequatur a Deo, per suam
operationem, quasi mercedem, ad quod Deus ci virtutem operandi deputavit. Sicut
etiam rest naturnles hoc consequuntur per proprios motus et operationes, ad quod a
Deo sunt ordinatae, diffjrenter tamen, ,^ quia creatura rationalis se ipsam movat ad
agendum per hberura arbitrium. Unde sua actio habet rationem menti ; quod non
est in aliis creaturis."

240 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
proper to himself, and deeply rooted in his being, cannot do other thail
teach that salvation is to be derived from this source. A heavcnij
seed having been sown in the soul of the just, it must bear its fruits for
heaven.* If Catholics teach, that the divine grace which precedes the first
beginnings of regeneration, cannot be merited, this is a far different
case ; and this remark should serve to place in the stronge.st light
our doctrine respecting good works. In the former instance, nature,
yea. faUen nature and grace stand opposed to one another 5 — -humanity,
thoroughly polluted with sin on one side, and the Deity on the other ;
but in the latter instance, this is by no means the case. Although the
greatest effort of nature cannot draw down to itself the supernatural
power (for this raust condescend.) in the regenerated, however, exist
qualities truly 'divine and supernatural, — 'a holy energy, which stamps
its irapress on the whole inward life of the believer, and contains, as in
a gjrm, the beatitude which still, however, retains a supernatural and
divine character. Thereby, however, the grace of beatitude doth not
cease to be a grace ; but it is already comprised in the grace of sanc
tification. If God gave the latter, then was the former, too, coniinu-
nicatcd. Hence also, tho Council observes, this doctrine can give no
occasion to self-confidence or to self-glory ; but " ho who glorieth, must
glory only in the Lord."
It is, moreover, scarcely necessary to observe, that it is not to works
considered abstractedly, but to works in connexion with tho feelings in

* St. Thomas, in answer to the questions, whether eternal life can be obtained
without grace ? und whether with grace wc become worthy of tho same ? says as foi.
lows : (Q. cxiv. art. 11.; " Non potest homo raereri absque gratia vitam aetemam pei'
pura naturalia, quia sciUcet meritum hominis dependel ex prinordinatione divlnft.
Actus autem cujuscunque rel non ordinatur divinitus ad aliquid exccdens propor
tioncm virtutis, quiB est prineipium actus : hoc cnim est ex institutione divina- provi
dentia;, ut nihil agat ultra suam virtutem. Vita autem aitcma est quoddara bonum
excedens proportioncm naturfe creatae • quia etiam exeedit cognitionera ct desiderium
ejus secundum illud i. ad Cor. 2 : nee oculus vidit, etc. Et inde est, quod nulla na
tura creata est sufficiens prineipium acttts meritoru vitae aeternae, nisi superaddatur
aliquid supernaturale donum, quod gratia dicitur. Si vero loquamur de horaine sub
peccato existente, additur cura hoc secunda ratio propter impedimentum peccati,"
etc. Art. III. ; •' Si loquamur de opere meritorio, secundum quod procedit ex gratia
Spiritus Sancti, sic est meritorium vitae astemae ex condigno. Sic enim valor merifi
attenditur secundum virtutem Spiritus Sancti, raoventis nos in vitam aetemam, se
cundum illud Joann. iv., fiet in eo fons aquaa salientis in vitam xtemam, etc 
Gratia Spiritus Sancti, quara in praesenti habcraus, etsi non sit aiqualis gloriae in actd,
est t: men aequalis in virtute : sicut et semen arbori, in quo est virtus ad totam arbo'
tem."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 241
which they have their source, that salvation is awarded ; it is promised
to works enly in so far as they are the expression and the blossom, the
consuramation and the proof, of feeling, or love in its outward and
active manifestation. By a raetonyray, the outward is put for the
inward thing, which constitutes with the forraer an indivisible whole —
a one act, and this, too, in consequence of a biblical mage cf speech.
It is, also, self-evident, that sanctified feelings, which remain unmani-
fested in deeds, because they fail of an outward occasion, or even of
the physical means, possess as much worth, as if they had been reveal
ed in works.* Lastly, it is taught, that the performance of good works
augments grace. Exercise in good, the faithful co-operation with grace,
renders the soul ever raore susceptible to its influence. The general
maxim, that the exercise of any faculty serves to strengthen it, holds
good in this case also ; and that he who doth not bury the talent he
liath received, but puts it out to interest, will receive still more, is the
promise of our Lord.
But doth not this doctrine proraote mere outward holiness ? Its ob-
ject is precisely to encourage holiness in deeds. Doth it not produce
self-righteousness 1 This should it do — namely, cause that we ourselves
becorae righteous. Yes, indeed, the Church requires works emanating
from the sanctified soul, and knows well how to appreciate the raere
exterior works. Nay, she urges us to become righteous in our own per-

t Jacob Sadolet, card, ad princip, Germanias oratio, loc, cit. p. 360. " Quomodo
igitur opera cum fide simul justificant, cum saepe absque operibus faciat sola fides
justiiiam, uti in latrone fecit, ut in aliis multis, quos cxhistoriis ecclesiasticis possumus
coUigere ? Nerape, quia habitus justitiae, quo ad bene operandum propensi efficiraur,
fidei ipsi ab initio statim propter araorera et charitatera est annexus ; ubi enira amor
Dei inest, qui in vera iUa fide protinus eluoet, simul ilia subito adest propensio animi
ct cogitatio, esse in actionibus rectis amori nostro in Deum, et Deo ipsi satisfacien
dum, admonenti noa illi et docenti, si diligamus eum, et mandata ejus serveraus.
Hinc intestinus jtJstitiae habitus, non conflatus ex actionibus et operibus nostris, sed
cura ipsa fide charitateque conjunctim divinitus nobis impressus, is ille ipse est, qui
justos nos facit. Et sane convenientius est, ut a justitia justi, quam a fide nomine-
raur. Taraetsi (ut dixi) oraniahiBC in unura connexa sunt et cohasrent. Hunc habi
tura praeclare exprimit Paulus divinis illis verbis, quibus ad Ephesios utitm:, sic scri-
bens : gratia servati estis per fidem, idque non ex vobis, Dei donum est ; non ex ope
ribus, ne quis glorietur, Dei enim ipsius sumus efFectio, aedificati in Christo Jesu ad
opera bona, quibus praeparavit Deus in illius ut ambulareraus. Ad Deum itaque per
Christura accedenti, statim ad recte faciendum prompta facilitas quaedam et voluntas
bona agnoscitur. Porro iste ipse habitus justitiae tunc absolute in nobis perfeetus est,
cura explicat sese, et exerit in sanctas actiones: exercitationemque continet justitias
eum ipsa exercendi voluntate conjunctam. Ipso autem fidei initio, aut si spatium
non est recti faciendi, licet totam perfectionem justitiae non tcneat, idem tamen nobis
potest ad salutem, quod absoluta plenaque justitia."
16

242 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
sons, distinguishing this very accurately from the conceit that we can
b3come righteous through ourselves ; but she calls on the Protestants to
learn this distinction, not to hold the one as synonymous with the other,
and, in consequence, to reject both alike.
i XXII. — Doctrine of the Protestants respecting good works.
Let us now turn to the exposition of the Protestant doctrine on good
works. Above aU, we raust describe what fhey are in theraselves,
according to the Lutheran and Calvinistic writings; next, what is their
merit, and whether and how far they be deeraed necessary. That
this whole article of doctrine must, in every respect, be only a further
developraent of the Protestant principles on justification and justifying
faith, is evident of itself ; for the view which the Protestants have form
ed of the latter, that it possesses no power of moral renovation, no
power for the expiation of sin, pervades their whole conception of Chris
tian works. In a word, the same relation which they, as we have be
fore shown, establish betwixt justifying faith and charity, recurs here,
applied to good works.
Luther, asserting the continuance and operation of original sin, even
in the will of the justified, maintained, immediately after the commence
ment of his Reforming career, that no works could possibly be pure
and. acrcplahlr. to the Deity ; and used the expression, that even tho best
work is a venial sin. This proposition was, as may bc supposed, con
demned in the papal censure of his opinions. But the Reformer went
a step further, and laid down the doctrine, that every so-called good
work, — that is to say, every act of a believer, — is, when considered in
itself, a mortal sin, though, by reason of faith, it is remitted to him.*
Melancthon not only expressed full concurrence in the doctrine of his
master, but carried it out to an extreme, by asserting, that all our works,
aU our endeavours, are nothing but sin ;"|" and Calvin, though in more
measured language, corroborated the assertions of both, J

* Luther, assert, omn. art. op. tom. ii. foi. 32.5, b. " Opus bonum optime factum
est veniale peccatum. Hie (articulus) manifcste sequitur ex priori, nisi quod ad
dendum sit, quod alibi copiosius dixl, — hoc veniale peccatum non natura sua, sed
misericordia Dei, tale esse  Omne opus justi daranabile est et peccatum mortale,
si judicio Dei judicetur." Cfr. Antilatom. (confut. Luth. rat. latom.) 1. c. foi. 406, b,
•407, seq.
tMelancth. loc. theolog. p. 108. " Quae vero opera justificationem consequuntur, ea,
tametsi a spiritd Dei, qui occupavit corda justificatorum, proficiscuntur, tamen quia
fiunt in came adhuc impuri, sunt et ipsa imraunda." P. 158 : "Nos docuimus, jus
tifieari sola fide  opera nostra, conatus nostros nihil nisi peccatum esse."
t Calvin. Instit. lib. ii, c. 8, ^ 59, lib. iii. c, 4, ^ 28. He says the same also in his

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 243
It may not be unworthy of our attention, and at any rate it wiU con-
<3uce to the elucidation of the subject before us, to examine, in a few
words, the course of argument pursued by Luther. He says : in the
saint two raen are to be distinguished, — a slave of sin, and a servant of
God ; the former is holy according to the flesh, the latter according to
the spirit. 'Accordingly, the person of the just man is in part holy, in
part sinful ; and the entire personality being thus divided between sin
and holiness, every good work partakes of the character of both,^-for
a holy and an unholy sentiment co-exist in the breast of the believer.*
Even Melancthon expressly affirms, that the believer, in despite of the
spirit of Christ working within him, is unable to exalt himself above this
dualism ; that two natures ever survive in him, the spirit and the flesh."]"
If we only recollect that by the word "flesh" is understood, not the
body merely, but the entire man, independent of the new powers ira
parted to hira through the Holy Ghost, there can no longer reraain, it
appears to us, any obscurity in this article. J
The spirit of Christ is too powerless to be able, like a purifying fire,
totally to cleanse the nature of man, and to produce in him pure charity
and pure works. Hence the assertion so often and so energeticaUy
repeated by the leaders of the Reformation, at the outset of their career,
that even the regenerated cannot fulfil the law.§ On this subject Lu
ther expresses himself with great naivete. In reply to the observation
of the Catholics, — -that God commands not impossibilities, and that, if
we have only the will, we have the power of loving Him with our
whole hearts, and thereby of fulfiUing the law, he observes : " Com-

work, De necessit. Refbrmandte eccl. opuscul. p. 430; yet his expressions are much
milder than Luther's. He says here : " Nos ergo sic docemus ; semper deesse bonis
fidelium operibus summam puritatem, quae conspectum Dei ferre possit, imo etiam
quodammodo iniquinata esse," etc. Quite fa.rse]y doth Zwingle state the Protestant
doctrine. He says (in fidei Christianae exposit. ad regem christianiss. Gall. opp. tom.
ii. p. 558 :) " Fidem oportet esse fontem operis. Si fides adsit, jam opus gratum est
Deo : si desit, perfidiosum est, quicquid fit, et subinde non tantum ingratum, sed et
abominabile Deo  Et ex nostris quidem -rtftSii^ms adseruerant, ( 1 ) omnfe opus
nostrum esse abominationem. Qu^ sentential nihil aliud voluerunt, quam quod jam
¦diximus I" This Luther did not mean to say, for otherwise there would be no differ-
•ence. * Luther. Assert, omn. art. n. 31, opp. tom. ii. foi. 319.
t Melancth. loc. theolog. " Ita fit, ut duplex sit sanctorum natura spiritus el caro."
t Loc. cit. p. 138.
^Mel?,ncth. loc, theolog. p. 127. "Maledixit lex eos, qui non universam legem
semel absolverint. At universa lex nonne summum amorem erga Deum, vehemen.
tissimum metum Dei exigit 1 a quibus cum tota natura sit alienissima, utut maxime
pulcherrimum pharisjeismum praestes, mal-edictionis tamen rei sumus."

244 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
manding and doing are two things. Commandment is soon given, tritf
it is not so easily executed. It is, therefore, a wrong conclusion to say,
God has comraanded rae to love hira ; therefore I can do so.'"*
The intrinsic inanity of this doctrine, its evident repugnance to Scrip-
ture, — -which only the most forced interpretation could conceal, — and
the very pernicious influence which it too evidently exercised over the
morals of those professing if, as well as the cogent objections of Catho
lics, gradually brought about some ameliorations, which passed into the
later writings of Melancthon, and even into the public forraularies, but
stUl fell very far short of that standard, which the Catholic Church
deems herself authorized, both by fhe spirit and the letter of the Gos
pel, to propose to her children. "("
If, now, the question be asked, what do good works, or rather the
sentiments pervading them, — the inward kernel of the regenerated, —
the fulfilment of the law through charity,— -what do good works raerit ?
it is clear, that this question raust be answered in a sense very different
from that of CathoUcs. Already the rejection of the co-operation of
free-wiU necessarily involved the denial of every species of merit, and
rendered the very notion of such a thing utterly unintelligible. As,
raoreover, no true sanctity was believed to exist in the justified, so no
felicity could be derived from it. Accordingly, it was most zealously
contended, that, when the question was about good works, and tho ob
servance of the raoral precepts, the forraer should not be represented
as having reference to the acquisition of eternal happiness, nor the
latter as having any internal connexion with works and the fulfilment
of the law ; and both should be stated as utterly independent one of tho
other, in the same way as justification is something very different frora
sanctification. { To estiraate the whole extent of that separation, which
in this article of doctrine divides the Christian Confessions, we need
only be rerainded of George Major, a very esteemed Protestant, who
ventured to teach, that good works are necessary to salvation. His

* Luther, Commentary on Epistle to Galatians, loc. sic. p. 233.
t Apolog. iv. de dilect. et implet. legis. ^ 50, p. 91. " Haec ipsa legis impletio,
quae sequitur renovationem, est exigua et immunda." Ij 46. p. 88 : " In hie vita non
possumus legi satisfacere."
X Solid. Declar. iv. (j 15, p. 672. " Interim tamen diligenter in hoe negotio caven-
dum est, ne bona opera articulo justificationis et salutis nostrae immisceantur. Propte
rea hae propositiones rejiciuntur : ' Bona opera piorum necessaria esse ad salutem,' "
etc. III. De fidei justitia. Ij 20, p. 658 ; " Similiter et renovatio seu sanctificatio,
quamvis et ipsa sit beneficium mediatoris Christi et opus Spiritus Sancti, non tamen ea
ad articulum aut negotium justificationis coram Deo pertinet ; sed earn sequitur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 245
motive in the introduction of this innovation was very laudable. He
believed that a true Christian bearing and deportment was raost pain
fully neglected araong the members of his Church, and that the preach
ing' of what was then called " the new obedience," was not adequately
discharged ; and, under this impression, he conceived, that, if the ne
cessity of good works for ensuring salvation was generally recognized,
a salutary change in this respect would take place. By this step he
advanced scarcely a whit nearer to the Catholic doctrine than the other
Lutherans ; for, like them, he did not uphold an internal connexion
between holiness and salvation. He only conceived that good works
must be there (outwardly present,) if eternal happiness was to be the
reward of faith.* Nevertheless, his doctrine excited general opposi
tion ; and Von Amsdorf, the old friend of Luther, composed, under
these circumstances, a work, wherein he professed to show that good
works were even hurtful to salvation. f The Formulary of Concord,

* Marheineke thinks, the distinction between the Catholic and the Protestant doc
trine, respecting works, consists herein: that these are considered by Catholics as a
conditio sine qua non to salvation, but not so by Protestants. This is by no means
the case. Such, indeed, was the opinion of Major ; but it is not the Catholie doctrine.
Melancthon in his Erotemat Dtalectices, (p. 276, ed, Wittenberg, 1550,) defines the
notion of the conditio sine qua non, to be, not the internal condition to, or primary
cause of, an effect, but something by the absence whereof the effect doth not take
place : as, for instance, if a king should otfer his daughter in marriage to any one, who
should with great elegance ride up and down a public place, the conditio sine qua non
would have no manner of internal relation to the effect, which is to follow. On the
other hand, the doctrine of the Catholic Church may be represented under the image
of a father promising the hand of his daughter to a youth who sincerely loved her,
and was favoured with her affection. This mutual inclination of hearts is an internal
condition to the solemnization of marriage — something required by fhe essence of the
latter. t The work is entitled, "The Proposition of Nicholas von Amsdorf, that good
works are hurtful to salvation, shown to be a right, true, Christian proposition, preach
ed by St. Paul and St. Luther." 1559. He defended the proposition in the same
sense, as Luther raight have defended the thesis of a disputation : " fides nisi sit sine
uUis, etiam minimis operibus, non justificat, imo non est fides." Op. tom. i. p. 523.
The sense of this thesis must be clear from the preceding statements in the text.
Doubtless it was immediately followed by the other thesis, " impossibile esse, fidem
tssh sine assiduis, multis et magnis operibus. Both these comprise exaggerated
opinions, whose limitation must be drawn from the whole argument in our text. The
editor of Luther's works, in the introduction prefixed to the general collection of that
R-eformer's public Disputations, which are found in great numbers at the end of the
first volume, observes, that from these disputations we may learn, in the surest as well
as the shortest way, Luther's true doctrine ; and this observation we have found very
true.

246 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
which among other things undertook to adjust the controversies pend
ing on this subject, disapproves, indeed, of Amsdorf's doctrine, yet ex
presses that disapprobation in very mild terms ; while it rejects Major's
view as incompatible with the exclusive particles, — " Faith alone saves,
by faith alone we are justified without works."*
If good works, according to the doctrine of the Lutherans, be not
necessary to salvation, are they in any respect necessary 1 This ques
tion was agitated among the Lutherans, and resolved in various senses.
But the very possibiUty of such a question, in a doctrinal system, pre
supposes a strange obliquity of all ideas. The Augsburg Confession
and the Apology frequently employed the expression, " they are neces
sary ;" and the Formulary of Concord appeals to their authority .,f But
what notion, after all we have set forth, is to be connected with the
word "necessary," it were no easy matter to discover. Perhaps it
was meant to be said : " We may take it as certain, that faith will ever
achieve something." Moreover, works go not entirely unrewarded.
The Formulary of Concord assures to thera temporal advantages, and,
to those who perform the most, a greater recompense in heaven.:}:
Accordingly, faith without works would absolutely merit heaven ; but
works would only contribute something thereto 1
In how much more enlightened a way have the schoolraen explained
the relation of faith to works, as conducive to Divine favour and eternal
happiness !§ What is the (living) faith, other than the good work,
still sUently shut up in the soul ; and what is the good Christian work,
other than faith brought to light 1 They are one and the .same, only
in a different form ; and hence. Catholic theologians explain the fact,
why in Scripture salvation is promised sometimes to works, sometiraes
to faith. From this conception of the relation between faith and good
works, Luther in one place attempted to meet the objection against his
doctrine, founded on the very numerous passages in Holy Writ, that
promise to a virtuous conduct eternal felicity. He replies, namely,
that faith and works are " one cake," and therefore, on account of their
inseparable unity, exchange their predicates ; so that to works is
» SoUd. Declar. iv. ^ 15, p. 672. " Simpliciter pugnant cum partieulis. exclusivis in
articulo, justificationis et salvationis." ^ 25, p. 676 : " Interim haudquaquam conse
quitur, quod simpliciter et nude asserere liceat, opera bona credentibus ad salutem,
esse peraiciosa."
t Solid. Declar. iv. § 10, p. 670 : " Negari non potest, quod in Augustatn^ Confes-
sione ejusdemque Apologia hac verba saepe usurpentur atque repetantur : ' bona ope
ra isse necessaria,' " etc.
X L.u.iv. §25, p. 676.
§ See, for mstance, H. Smid's Mysticism of the Middle Age, p. 245. Jena, 1824.
(In Germam )

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 247
ascribed what really belongs to faith, in the same way as the Scripture
refers to the Divine nature in Christ the attributes of his humanity, and
vice versa.* But Luther did not perceive, that by such a mode of
explanation he placed himself on Catholic ground, and utterly annihil
ated his doctrine, that faith without works could justify. For if works
together with faith constitute an unity, — that is to say, if works be
absolutely implied by faith, in the same way as, when no outward,
accidental hindrance occurs, the inference is implied in the reason, the
effect in the cause, how can it be asserted, that faith without works
justifies ? Does it not, then, follow, that faith is of value, only in so
far " as it worketh by charity ?" and thereby alone, would not the
whole Lutheran theory of justification be given up ? Luther became
entangled in his own distinctions, for he here ascribes to faith, as ifie
moral -vi-mfying sentiment, the power of justification ; whereas, according
to the whole tenor of his system, it is to faith as ihe organ which clings
to the merits of Christ, that he must impute this power.f It was pre
cisely from this point of view, that Luther might have discovered how
utterly erroneous was his whole system ; for never certainly would the
Scripture have promised eternal life to works, nor that communicatio
idiomatum have been possible, if faith could justify, merely as ihe instru
ment so often boasted of, and not as involving an abundance of raoral
and religious virtues. Thus, thaf in Holy Writ eternal felicity should
be promised to works, in so far as they emanate frora faith, unquestion
ably supposes that this faith is, absolutely and without restriction, the
one which Catholic theologians are wont to designate as the fides for
mata. Hence, Luther elsewhere abandons this mode of enfeebling the
objection adverted to ; and, in all the plenitude of his power, he cora-

* Luther, Comment, on Ep. to Galat. loc. cit. p. 145.
t It was a very favourite saying of Luther's, that, as good works are the fruits of .
the spiritual birth and the new inward life, we cannot be justified through the same :
on the contrary, works are then only good, when man is already righteous. " That
good works," says he, " merit not grace, life, and salvation, is evident from the fact,
that good works are not the spiritual birth, but only fruits of it : by works we become
not Christians, righteous, holy, children and heirs of God ; but when we have be
come righteous through faith, from God's pure mercy, for Christ's sake, and when
we have been created anew and bom again, then only we perform good works. If
we only insist upon regeneration and subst antialia, on the essence of a Christian,
we have at once overturned the merit of good works towards salvation, and reduced
them to nothing." (Luther's Table.talk, p. 171 : Jena, 160.S.) This view of works
affects not the Catholic doctrine, for this likewise teaches, that it is not by works
that grace and regeneration are merited, but that works are the fruits of the new
spirit. But since Catholics represent the fruits as forming one with the tree, they
cannot say that the new spirit without its fruits insures salvation.

248 EXPOSITION OE DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
raands his followers, not once, but a thousand tiraes, to observe silence
on the subject of works, when justifying faith was spoken of, and con
sequently, to consider both, not as one, but as two cakes of very
different substances.'" Hence, in defining the relation of faith to
works as conducive to salvation, the Forraulary of Concord very wisely
shuns the aUusion to a one cake, but proposes to works, temporal
rewards and a sort of decoration in heaven. We cannot, however,
refrain frora expressing our astonishraent, that raen, like Reinhardt and
Knapp, as we see from their Manuals of Dogmatic Theology, could
believe that by such definitions as those respecting the recompenses in
question, a faith active in good works could be promoted : and still
more, that, in their capacity of exegetists, they could find such a doc
trine reconcUeable with Scripture, which, in the most unqualified
manner, promises salvation fo good works : see, for exaraple, Matthew
V. 1 ; .XXV. 31 ; Roraans viii. 17. f

* Comment, on Ep. to Galat. p. 74. Solid. Declar. iii de fido justif. $ 26, p. 660 :
" Etsi conversi et in Christum credentes habent inchoatam in sc renovation rm, i^anc-
tificationem, dilectionem, virtutes ct bone opera : tamen hai'comna nequaquam immis-
cenda sunt articulo justificationis coram Deo : ut Redemptori Christo honor illibatus
maneat, ct cum nostra nova obedientia imperfecta et impura sit, perturbatse conscien-
tiiE certa et firma consolatione scso sustentare valeant.
t .-V most superficial view of tlie relation between good works and etemal felicity,
as stated in Holy Writ, as well as a remarkable specimen of fanciful and shallow in
terpretation of Scripture, we find in Luther's Table-talk (p. 176, Jena, 1603,} where
the recompenses promised to holiness of conduct are represented only as a tutorial
stimulus, without any reference to the inward hfe of the soul, it is as follows:
" In the year 1542 (accordingly in his ripest years, shortly before his death,) Dr.
Martin Luther said, touching the article of our justification before God, that it was in
this case precisely the same as with a son, who is born, and not made by his own
merit, heir to all the, paternal estates ; he succeeds, without any act or merit of his
own, to all his father's properties. But nevertheless the father exhorts him to do this
or that diligently; promises him a present, to engage him to perform his task with
greater readiness, love and pleasure. As if he should say to the son : If thou be pi
ous, obedient to my commands, and diligent in thy studies, I will buy for thee a fine
coat. So also : come to me and I will give thee a pretty apple. Thus he teaches
his sou to obey him, and although the inheritance will naturally fall to the son, yet
by such promises the father will engage his son to do with cheerfulness what he bids
him ; and thus he trains up his son in wholesome discipline. Therefore we must
consider all such promises and recompenses, as only a pedagogical discipline, where
with God incites and stimulates us, and like a kind, pious father, makes us willing
and joyous to do good, and to serve our neighbour, and not thereby to gain etemal
life, for this he bestows on us entirely from his pure grace." From these so very dif
ferent and opposite views of the same subject, it is again evident, that upon this im
portant article of belief Luther had never formed clear and settled notions, and that
this inward unsteadiness and obscurity made him ever vacillate from one extreme to
another.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 249
What especiaUy eonfirraed the Reformers in their errors, was the
explanation (derived, indeed, from their own system) of several passages
of St. Paul, — for instance, of Romans in. 28, — where it is said, that it
is not through the works of the law, but through faith, that man is
justified : a passage, in writing which the apostle did not dream of the
opposition existing between Catholics and Protestants. St. Paul here
contends against the Jews of his own time, who obstinately defended
the eternal duration of the Mosaic law, and asserted, that, not needing
a Redeemer frora sin, they became righteous and acceptable before God
by that law alone. In opposition to this opinion, St. Paul lays down
the maxira, that it is not by the works of the law, that is fo say, not by
a Ufe regulated merely by the Mosaic precepts, raan is enabled to
obtain the favour of Heaven, but only through faith in Christ, which
has been imparted to us by God for wisdora, for sanctification, for
righteousness, and for redemption. Unbelief in the Redeemer, and
confidence in the fulfilment of the law performed through natural power
alone, on one hand, and faith in the Redeemer and the justice to be
conferred by God, on the other (Romans i. 17, x. z ; Philippians iii. 9,)
— these, and not faith in the Redeemer and the good works emanating
from its power, constitute the two points of opposition, here contem
plated by the apostle. The works of the law, 'ifya. mZ vofiov, St. Paul
accurately distinguishes everywhere from^oocZ works, epyx uya,3-a, x-xxd;
as indeed in their inmost essence they are to be distinguished from one
another : for the forraer are wrought without faith in Christ, and with
out his grace ; the latter with the grace and in the spirit of Christ.
Hence St. Paul never says, that man is saved not through good
works, but through faith in Christ ! This marvellous opposition is a
pure invention of the sixteenth century. Nay, the doctrine, that to
good works eternal felicity will be allotted, has been positively an
nounced by this apostle, Romans ii. 7-10.
xxiii. — The doctrine of Purgatory in its connexion with the Catholic doctrine of
Justification.
The doctrine of the possibility of the fulfilment of the law, touched
on in the last Section, must now be treated raore fully and minutely.
The conflicting doctrines are of such importance, as to deserve a more
precise statement of the arguments on either side. Calvin says :
" Never hath a man, not even one regenerated in the faith in Christ,
wrought a raorally good work, — a work which, if it were strictly judged,
would not be damnable." Admitting even this impossibUity to be pos
sible, yet the author of such an action would sfiU appear impure and
polluted, by reason of his other sins. It is not the outward show of

250 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
works, which perhaps in their external character may satisfy the moral
law, but it is fhe purity of the wiU, which is regarded by God. Now,
if we but raise our eyes to the judgment-seat of the Almighty, who wiU
venture to stand before it ? It is, therefore, evident, that the doctrine
of an internal justification, involving the necessity of the fulfilment of
the law, is reprehensible, because it raust precipitate troubled con
sciences into despair.*
In reply to this, the Catholic observes : Either it is possible for man,
strengthened and exalted by the Divine aid, to observe the raoral law,
in its spirit, its true inward essence, or it is impossible to do so. If the
former be fhe case, then, undoubtedly, such observance cannot be too
strongly urged ; and every one may find a proof for its possibiUty in
the fact, that, on every transgression of the law, he accuses hiraself as
a sinner : for every accusation of such a kind involves the supposition
that its fulfilraent is possible, and even, with assistance frora above,
not difficult. But if the latter be the case, then the cause must be
sought for only in God, and in such a way, that either the Almighty
hath not framed huraan nature for the attainment of that raoral stand
ard which He proposes to it, or He doth not irapart those higher powers,
which are necessary to the pure and not merely outward, but internal,
compliance with His laws. In both cases, the cause of the non-fulfil
ment lies in the Divine wiU ; that is to say, God is represented as not
willing that His will should be complied with, which is self-contradic
tory. But in any case, there could be no conceivable guilt in respect
to this non-obedience to the law, and, accordingly, there could be, not
withstanding the non-observance of the Divine precepts, no obstacle
to the attainment of eternal felicity.f
If it be urged, that reference is had exclusively to man's fallen
nature, which is in a state of incapacity for the fulfilment of the law,
? Calvm Instit. lib. iii. c. 14, § 11, foi. 279. " Duobus his fortitur insistendum,
nullum unquam extitisse pii hominis opus, quod si severe Dei judicio examinarctur,
non esset damnabile. Ad hEce, si tale aliquod detur, quod homini possibile non est,
peccatis tamen, quibus laborare autorem ipsum certum est, vitiatum ac inquinatura,
gratiam perdere ; atque hie est praecipuus disputationis cardo." C. 14, ^ I, foi. 270 :
" Hue, hue referenda mens est, si volumus de vera justitia inquirere : quomodo cee-
lesti judici respondeamus, cum nos ad rationem vocaverit." § 4 : " Illic nihil pro-
denmt extemae honorum operum pompas  Sola postulabitur voluntatis sinccrU
tas." Cf. Chemn. Exam. Cone. Trid. part i. p. 294.
t It many times really occurred to Luther, as if his doctrine led to the conclusion,
that the eternal order of things prevented our observance of the law. So he says
{Table-talk, p. 162, b. Jena, 1603,) " God hath indeed known that we would not,
and could not, do every thing ; therefore hath he granted to us remissionem peccato
rum." Indeed ! !

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 251
we may reply, that God in Christ Jesus hath raised us from this faU ;
and it was justly observed by the CouncU of Trent, that, in virtue of
the power of Christ's Spirit, no precept was impracticable to man. For
to the heritage of corruption, a heritage of spiritual power in Christ
hath been opposed, and the latter can in every way be victorious over
the former. Or do we believe the moral law to have been framed
merely for the nature of Adam, for his brief abode in Paradise, and not
for the thousands of years that humanity was to endure?'*
In modern times, some men have endeavoured to come to the aid of
the old orthodox Lutheran doctrine, by assuring us that the moral law
proposes fo raen 'an ideal standard, which, like everything ideal, neces
sarily reraains unattained. If such really be the case with the moral
law, then he who coraes not up to it, can as little incur responsibility, as
an epic poet for not equaUing Homer's Iliad. More inteUectual, at
least, is the theory, that the higher a man stands on fhe scale of mo
rality, the raore exalted are the clairas which fhe moral law exacts of
him ; so that they increase, as it were, to infinity with the internal
growth of raan, and leave him ever behind them. When we contem
plate the lives of the saints, the contrary phenomenon will arise to
View. The consciousness of being in the possession of an all-sufficing,
infinite power, ever discloses the tenderer and nobler relations of man
to God and to his fellow-creatures ; so that the man sanctified in
Christ, and filled with his Spirit, ever feels himself superior to the law.
It is the nature of heaven-born love, — which stands so far, so infinitely
far, above the clairas of the mere law, never to be content with its own
doings, and ever to be more ingenious in its devices ; so that Christians
of this stamp not unfrequently appear to men of a lower grade of per
fection, as enthusiasts, men of heated fancy and distempered mind. It
IS only in this way that remarkable doctrine can be satisfactorily explain
ed, which certainly, like every other that hath for centuries existed in
" Concil. Trid. Sess. vi. c. xi. " De observatione mandatorum, deque illius neces
sitate et possibilitate. Nemo autem, quantumvis justificatus, liberum se esse ab
observatione mandatorum putare debet : nemo temeraria ilia et a patribus sub ana
themate prohibita voce uti, Dei preecepta homini justificato ad observandum esse im-
possibiUa. Nam Deus impossibilia non juhet, sedjubendo monet et facere quod pos.
sis, et petere quod non possis, et adjuvat, ut possis. Cujus mandata gravia non
sunt, cujus jugum suave est et onus leve. Qui enim sunt filii Dei, Christum dihgunt ;
qui autem dihgunt eum, ut ipsemet testatur, servant sermones ejus. Quod utique
cum divino auxiho praestare possunt," etc. Hence Innocent X, in his constitution
against the five propositions of Jansenius, has rightly condemned the following pro
position (Hard. Concil. tom. xi. p. 143, ii 1 :) " Aliqua Dei prtecepta justis volentibus
et conantibus, secundum prasscntes quas habent vu:es, sunt impossibilia : deest quoque
illis gratia, qu^ possibilia fiant."

252 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
the world, and seriously engaged the human mind, is sure to rest on
sorae deep foundation,— -the doctrine, namely, that there can be works
which are more than sufficient (opera supcrerogalionis, — a doctrine,
the tenderness and delicacy whereof eluded, indeed, the perception of
the Reformers ; for they could not even once rise above the idea, that
man could ever become free from immodesty, unjust wrath, avarice,
&c. The doctrine in question, indeed, on which the Council of Trent
does not enter into detail, in proportion as the principle, whereon it is
based, is more exalted, is on that account the more open to gross misre
presentation ; especiaUy if, as the Reformers were imprudent enough
to do, we look to raere outward, arbitrary actions. Quite untenable is
the appeal to experience, that no one can boast of having hiraself ful
filled the law ; or the assertion, that the question is not as to the possi
bility, but the reality, of such a fulfilment. In the first place, no
argument can be -deduced from reality, because we are not even
capable of looking into it ; and we must not and cannot judge the
hearts of men. We are not even capable of judging ourselves ; and
therefore St. Paul saith, " he is conscious to himself of nothing, but
he leaveth judgment to the Lord."'" Accordingly, the desire to deter
mine the limits of our power in Christ by the reality of every-day
life, would lead to the worst conceivable systera of ethics. Once
regulate the practicable by the measure of ordinary experience, and
you will at once see the low reality sink down to a grade still
lower. Lastly, this view alleges no deeper reason for what it calls
reaUty, and we learn not why this hath been so, and not otherwise ;
so that we must either recur to the first or the second mode of defend
ing the orthodox Protestant view, or seek out a new one.
Calvin commands us to raise our eyes to the judgraent-seat of God.
In truth, nothing is raore fit to avert the sinner from himself, and to
turn hira to Christ, than calling to raind the general judgment, — not
merely that which the history of the world pronounces, but that which
the aU-wise, holy, and righteous God doth hold.f Wo to him who
hath not turned to Christ ; but wo likewise to hira whom the blood of
Christ hath not really cleansed, whom the living comraunion with the

* Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. " Quia in multis ofTendimus omnes, unusquisque sicut
misericordiam et bonitatem, ita et severitatem et judicium ante oculos habere debet,
neque se ipsum aliquis, etiamsi nihil sibi conscius fuerit, judicare : quoniam omnia
hominum vita non humano judicio examinanda et judicanda est, sed Doi : qui illumi-
nabit abscondita tenebrarum, et manifestabit consilia cordium : et tunc laus erit
unicuique a Deo, qui, ut scriptum est, reddet unicuique secundum opera."
t Dr. Moehler here alludes to a celebrated saying of the German poet, " that the
history of the world is the judgment of the world." — Trans.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 263
Godman Himself hath not rendered godly. Can our adversaries even
imagine, that the elect are still stained with sin before the judgraent-
seat of God, and that Christ covers them over, and under this covering
conducts them into heaven 1 It is the most consummate contradiction
to talk of entering into heaven, while stained with sin, be it covered or
uncovered. Hence the question recurs : how shall man be finally de
livered from sin, and how shall holiness in him be restored to thprough
life ? Or, in case we leave this earthly world, still bearing about us
some stains of sin, how shall we be purified from thera 1 ShaU it be by
the raechanical deliverance frora the body, whereof the Protestant For
mularies speak so rauch 1 But it is not easy to discover how, when
the body is laid aside, sin is therefore purged out from ihe sinful spirit.
It is only one who rejects the principle of raoral freedom in sin, or who
hath been led astray by Gnostic or Manichean errors, that could look
with favour upon a doctrine of this kind. Or are we to imagine it to
be sorae potent word of the Divinity, or sorae violent mechanical pro
cess, whereby purification ensues ? Some sudden, magical change the
Protestant doctrine unconsciously presupposes ; and this phenoraenon
is not astonishing, since it teaches, that by original sin the mind had
been deprived of a certain portion, and that in regeneration man is
completely passive. But the Catholic, who cannot regard raan other
than as a free, independent agent, must also recognize this free agency
in his final purification, and repudiate such a sort of mechanical pro
cess, as incompatible with the whole moral government of the world.
If God were to employ an economy of this nature, theu" Christ came in
vain. Therefore is our Church forced to maintain such a doctrine of
justification in Christ, and of a moral conduct in this Ufe regulated by
it, that Christ wUl, at the day of judgment, have fulfiUed the claims of
the law outwardly _/br us, but on that account inwardly in us. The
solace, accordingly, is to be found in the power of Christ, which effaces
as well as forgives sin, — yet in a two-fold way. Among some, it con
summates purification in this Ufe : araong others, it perfects it only in
the Ufe to corae. The latter are they, who by faith, love, and a sin
cere penitential feeling, have knit the bond of communion with Christ,
but only in a partial degree, and at the moment they quitted the re
gions of the Uving, were not entirely pervaded by His spirit : to them
will be communicated this saving power, that at the day of judgment
they also may be found pure in Christ. Thus the doctrine of a place
of purification is closely connected with the CathoUc theory of justifi
cation, which, without the forraer, would doubtless he, to raany, a dis
consolate tenet. But this inward justification none can be dispensed
from ; the fulfilment of the law, painful as it undoubtedly is, can be

254 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
remitted to none. On each one must that holy law be inwardly and
outwardly stamped. The Protestants, on the other hand, who, with
their wonted arrogance, have rejected the dogma of purgatory, so well
founded as it is in tradition, saw themselves thereby corapelled, in
order to afford solace to man, to speak of an impossibUity of fulfilling
the law — a thought which is confuted in every page of Scripture, and
involves the Alraighty in contradiction with Himself. They saw them
selves compelled to put forth a theory of justifying faith, which cannot
even be clearly perceived. Lastly, they saw themselves compelled to
adopt, tacitly at least, the idea of a raechanical course of operations
practised on man after death—new authoritative decrees of the Deity ;
and left unexplained how a deep-rooted sinfulness, even when forgiven,
could be at last totally eradicated from the spirit. Thus do both com
munions offer a solace to man, but in ways totally opposite ; the one
in harmony with Holy Writ, which everywhere presupposes the possi
bility of the observance of the law ; the other in raost striking contra
diction to it : one in raaintaining the whole rigour of the ethical code ;
the other by a grievous violation of it : one in accordance with the free
and gradual development of the human mind, which only with a holy
earnestness, and by great exertions, can bring forth and cultivate to
maturit} the divine seed once received ; the ot'ier without regard to
the eternal laws of the huraan spirit, and by a very guUty encourage
ment to moral levity.
5 xxrv. — Opposition between the communions in their general conception of
Christianity.
In many an attentive reader the statements we have made may have
already awakened the thought, that the Catholic Church views the
whole systera of Christianity, and the immediate objects of the Saviour's
advent, in a manner essentially different from the Protestant corarau
nities. That such a thought is not entirely unfounded, the foUowing
investigations will show, in proportion as they will at the .sarae time
shed the clearest light on all that has been hitherto advanced, dissipate
many doubts, and confirm, with more accuracy and vividness, the
views we have put forth as to the nature of the Protestant doctrines.
According to the old Christian view, the Gospel is to be regarded
as an institution of an all-merciful God, whereby through His Son He
raises fallen man to the highest degree of religious and moral knowledge
which he is capable of attaining in this life, proffers to each one forgiveness
of sins, and withal an internal sanatory and sanctifying power. But,
how now does Luther look upon the Gospel 1
1. He asserts, that Christ hath only in an accidental way discharged

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 265
the office of Teacher ; and that his real and sole object was, to fulfil
the law in our stead, to satisfy its demands, and to die for us. Hence
he reproaches the Papists with teaching, that the Gospel is a law of
love, and comprises a less easy, that is to say, a purer and more exalted
morality than the Mosaic dispensation. In his Commentary on the
Epistle to the Galatians, he says, "On this account principally hath
Christ come upon the earth, not to teach the law, but only to fulfil it.
That he occasionally teaches, is merely accidental, and foreign to his
office ; in the same way, as, beside his real and proper duty, which
was to save sinners, he accidentally restored the sick to health."* In
another place he raakes a similar remark : " Although this is as clear
as the dear sun at noon-day, yet the Papists are so senseless and blind,
that out of the Gospel they have fashioned a law of love, and out of
Christ a law-giver, who hath iraposed far more burthensome laws than
Moses hiraself. But let the fools go on in their blindness, and learn ye
frora St. Paul, that the Gospel teacheth, Christ hath corae not to give
a new law, whereb}' we should walk, but to offer himself up as a victim
for the sins of the whole world."
What a one-sided view did Luther here fake of the mission of Chiist !
His teaching office he calls soraething accidental, and entirely forgets,
that, in forraal opposition to the Mosaic dispensation, Christ proclaimed
a new, purer, more exalted, and therefore severer, law of morality
(Matthew v. 31-48,) and uttered himself those words : "A new com
raandraent I give ye, that ye love one another." (John xiii. 34.) The
misconception, moreover, whereon Luther's complaint is founded, that
the Papists degrade Christ into a mere law-giver and ethical teacher,
will shortly be more closely examined.
2. Yet Luther not only taught, that Christ had not come to impart
to men a purer ethical code, but even maintained, that he had come to
abolish the moral law, to liberate true believers frora its curse, both for
the past and for the future, and in this way to make them free. The
theory of evangelical liberty, which Luther propounded, announces,
that even the decalogue shall not be brought into account against the
believer, nor its violation be allowed to disturb the conscience of the
Christian ; for he is exalted above it and its contents. Luther called
attention to a two-fold use of the raoral law, the Mosaic as weU as the
EvangeUcal, to which soraewhat later a third was added. The first
consists herein, that it convinces the unconverted of their sinfulness,
and, by menacing its transgressors with the divine judgraents, throws

* Comment, on Ep. to Galat. loc. cit. p. 219,

256 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
them into a state of terror : the second, that it conducts those, suffi
ciently shaken and intiraidated, unto Christ, in order to obtain through
him forgiveness of sins. Moreover, the Saxon Reformer maintained,
that the believer, as such, was to raake no use of the raoral law.'*
When the sinner hath come unto Christ, the law ceases for him, and
the Gospel begins ; he is free frora the terrors which the continued
transgressions of the former produce, and Christ unconditionally raakes
good all deficiencies. Hence, Luther so often insists on the necessity of
separating raost pointedly the law and the Gospel, of no longer molesting
and tormenting the faithful with the former, but only of cheering and
solacing them with the latter. He says, "It is of very great importance,
that we should rightly know and understand, how the law hath been
abolished. For such a knowledge, that tho law is abolished, and its
office totaUy set aside, that it can no longer be a ground of accusation
and condemnation against the believers in Christ, confirms our doctrine
on faith. From this our consciences may derive solace, especially in
their raoraents of great fearful struggle and mental anguish. I have
before earnestly and frequently said, and repeat it now again (for this
is a matter which can never be too often and too strongly urged,) that
a Christian, who grasps and lays hold on Christ, is subject to no man
ner of law, but is free from the law, so that it can neither terrify nor
condemn him. This Isaiah teacheth in the text cited by St. Paul ;
• Give glory, thou barren one, that barest not.'
"When Thoraas of Aquino, and other schoolraen assert, that the law
hath been abolished, they pretend that the Mosaic ordinances respect
ing judicial affairs and other secular matters (which they ca\\ jud'ic'ialia,)
and in like raanner the laws respecting ceremonies and the services of
the Temple (kirchwerken,) were after the death of Christ pernicious,
and oh that account were set aside and abolished. But when they say
the Ten Comraandraents (which they call moralia) are not to be
abrogated, they themselves understand not what they assert and lay
down. " But thou, when thou speakest of the aboUtion of the law, be raind-
ful that thou speakest of the law as it really is, and is rightly called,
to wit, the spiritual law, and understand thereby the whole law, making
no distinction between civil laws, cereraonies, and ten coraraandinents.
For when St. Paul saith, that through Christ we are redeeraed frora the
anathema of the law, he speaketh certainly and properly of the whole

* The Formulary of Concord hath also a special article upon a thu-d use of the
law (tertius usus legis;) its use, namely, a standard of Christian life.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 257
law, and especiaUy of the Ten Commandments ; since these alone ac
cuse the conscience before God and terrify it ; whereas the other two
species of law, that treat, so to speak, of civil affairs and ceremonies,
¦do not so. Therefore, we say, that even the ten commandments have
no right to accuse, nor to alarm the conscience, wherein Christ reigns
by his grace ; since Christ hath abolished this right of the law, when he
became an anathema for us."*
In the writings of Melancthon reigns, in a no less striking degree,
the same one-sided view, which can neither satisfy human reason, —
¦desirous in everything of unity of principle, — nor meet in all respects
the practical wants of man. Melancthon, at times, defines very well
the true notions of Christian freedom. For instance, when he says
(what undoubtedly is acknowledged on all sides,) that we are released
from the obligation of observing the ritual law of Moses, and when he
adds, that the beUever, being inwardly and freely moved by the Divine
Spirit, practises the moral law, and would fulfil it, when even it did not
make any outward claims, the Reformer here excellently describes
Christian freedom as a voluntary obedience to God, and consequently
as a release from the fetters, wherein evil held men enchained. But
ammediately, again, he falls back into pure Lutheran definitions, by
distinguishing, in the Christian liberty just described, two things. The
first is, that, by reason of this freedom, the Decalogue condemns not
believers, even though fhey be sinners ; the second is, that they fulfil
the moral law of themselves. Lastly, he expresses himself briefly and
•clearly to this effect — " The law is abrogated, not that it should not be
fulfilled, but that it may be fulfilled, and may not condemn, even when
it is not fulfilled."f Here a multitude of questions press themselves
* Luther, Comment, on Ep. to Galat. loc. cit. p. 257, b ; 258, b. Compare his
instruction how the books of Moses are to be read. Part. v. ed. Wittenberg, p. 1, b.
' ' The law signifies and demands of us, what we are to do, and what we are not to do
and how we are to be in respect to God ; it is exclusively directed to om- conduct
and consists in demands ; for God speaks through the law, — do this, do not this this
I will require of thee. But the gospel preacheth not what we are to do, and not do ¦
requires nothing of us, but turns round, doth the reverse, and saith ilbt, do this do
that, but bids us only hold out our laps, and saith, dear man, this hath God done
for thee,— He hath sent his Son into the flesh for thee, He hath let him be slain for
thy sake, and hath redeemed thee from sin, death, the devil, and hell ; this believe
and hold, and then thou art saved."
t Melancthon (in his Loci Theolog. p. 127) says very well of Christian freedom :
'•' Postremo libertas est Christianismus, quia qui spiritum Dei non habent, legem fa
cere neutiquam possunt, untque maledictionum legis rei. Qui Spiritu Christi reno.
vati sunt, ii jam sua sponte, etiam non praseunte lege, fenmtur ad ea, quas lex jube-
l)at. Voltmtas Dei lex est. Neo aliud Spu:itus Sanctus est, nisi veri Dei voluntas
17

25S EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
on our consideration. For instance, if the essence of freedora consists
in the fact, that it can fulfil, and really doth fulfil, the law, how can
those, who fulfil it not, be numbered araong fhe free ? How can one
and the same freedom love inconstancy to such a degree, that here it
proves itself obedient, there disobedient, and is only uniform in one
thing, that in either case it doth not condemn. We may ask further,
whether the strange freedom of those, who are free with respect to con
demnation, but are not free from evil and disobedience, extends to every
point of the Decalogue X Whether, in general, a limit can be traced,
down to which freedom frora condemnation can render innoxious the
servitude to evil co-existing with it ? We content ourselves with pro
posing these questions, and shall now proceed in our inquiry.
Strobel announced to the learned world, as a great novelty, that
already, in the year 1524 (thus seven years after the commencement
of the great revolution in the Church,) Melancthon called the Gospel
a preaching of penance :* for, before that literary discovery, it was
believed, that he had only much later risen to this idea ! What astonish
ment do we feel, when we reflect on the notion which he attaches to lhe
new v'lvificalion of the Christian by the gospel ! He constantly takes
vivifieatio as the opposite to mortificalio ; and as by the latter ho under
stands only the mortal terrors, at the vengeance which the law an
nounces to all its transgressors ; so to his raind the former signifies
merely the resuscitation, the recovery from these terrors, brought about
by the tidings, that in Christ sins are reiiultcd.'j' The inward resusci-
et agitatio. Quare ubi Spiritu Dei, qui viva voluntps Dei est, regenerati sumus, jam
id ipsum volumus sponte, quod exigebat lex." P. 130, we read as follows : " Habes
quatenus a Dccalogo liberi sumus, primum, quod tametsi peccatores, damnarc non
possit eos, qui in Christo sunt. Deinde, quod, qui sunt in Christo, spiritu Irahunlur
ffld iegcm/aciendam, et spiritu faciunt, amant, timent Deum," etc. P. 131. "Er
go abrogata lex est, non ut nefiat, sed ut, et non facta, non damnet et fieri possit."
Here one assertion evidently destroys the other. Hence, as stated above in the text,
it is taught by iWelancthon in his Apology, that we cannot fulfil the law.
* Strobel, Literary History of Melancthon, loc. theol. p. 240.
t Luther also, De Captiv. Babyl. eccles. Opp tom. ii. foi. 287, and in several other
places, attaches' the same idea to novitas vita. But Melancthon is clearer, in loc.
theol. p. 147. "Qui rectis.«imi senserunt, ita judicarunt: Joannis Baptismum esse
vivificationis, quod ciaddita sitgratix promissio seu condonatio peccatorum." When
Melancthon attempts to give any definition of the Gospel, he is usually as one-sided
as Luther. " Novum Testamentum non iliud est, nisi honorum omnium promissio
citra legem, nuUo justitiarum nostrarum respectu. Vetere Testamento promitteban-
tur bona, sed simul exigebatur a populo legis impletio : novo promittuntur bona citra
legis conditionem, cum nihil a nobis vicissim exigatur. Atque hie vides, quae sit am
plitude gratiae, quEE sit misericordiEe divin* prodigalitas." Loc. theolog. p. 126.
Passages, such as at page 140, are true rarities, and do not agree with the rest.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 259
tation from the death of sin, the immediate communication of a new,
higher, vital energy, which annihilates the earlier weakness, trans
forming it into a victorious, all-conquering power over flesh, Melanc
thon was unable to understand (as the Church had always done) by the
word vivifieatio. Even Calvin took scandal at this opinion of Melanc
thon's ; at least, I am at a loss fo know to whom his counter statements
can be applicable, except to his Wittenberg friend.* Even in the
Apology composed by Melancthon for the Confession of Augsburg, the
new resuscitation, nay, even the expression, " regeneration," are re
ferred to this solace alone,f as is remarked by the Formulary of
Concord.:]: No one can call to mind, that, in the symbolical books of the Luther
ans, the believing sinner, when disquieted on account of his moral
conduct, is ever consoled by the encouraging words : " thou canst do
all in Him, who strengtheneth thee : not thou, but Christ with thee.".
Not to Christ, the strengthener and the sanctifier, do they refer him,
but exclusively to Christ, the forgiver of sins. This solace they really
impart in almost countless passages — on this they constantly insist. To
make moral indolence attentive to itself, would have appeared to them
a reprehensible transmutation of the gospel into the law.§ It must be
obvious to every man, that they could not urge to moral exertion, be
cause such an act would have overthrown their leading doctrine, that,
in the production of all good, man is utterly passive. Most striking in
this respect is the decision, which the Formulary of Concord pronounced
in the Antinomian controversies,, which in themselves presuppose a
most strange aberration of the human mind. It is there especially en-

* Calvin, Instit. 1. iii. c, 3, § 4, foi. 210. " Vivificationem interpretantur consola
tionem, quse ex fide naseitur : ubi scdicet homo, peccati conscientia prostratus, ac
Dei timore pulsus, postea in Dei bonitatem, in misericordiam, gratiam, salutem, quae
est per Christum, respiciens, sese erigit, respirat, animum coUigit, et velut e morte in
vitam redit  non assentior, quum potius sancte pieque vivendi studium significet,
quod oritur ex renascentia : quasi diceretur hominemsibi mori. ut Deo viere incipiat."
t Apolog. iv. §21, p. 73. "Coda rursus debent concipere consolationem. Id fit
si credent promissioni Christi, quod propter eum habeamus remissionem peccatorum.
Haec fides, in illis pavoribus erigens et consolans, accipit remissionem peccatorum
justificat et vivificat. Nam ilia consolatio est nova et spiritualis." On regeneration,
see § 26, p. 76.
X Solid. Declar. hi. de fidei justif. § 13, p. 656.
§ On this ever-recurring consolation, see Apology iv. §11, p. 68; § 13, p. 69 ;
§14, p. 70; §19, p. 72 and 73; § 20, p. 73; §21, p. 73; §26, p. 76; § 27, p 77 j
§ 30, p. 78 ; § 38, p 8t ; § 40, p. 83 ; § 45, p. 87 ; § 48, p. 90, and so on. In the
Formulary of Concord there occurs as repeated mention of this solace, as in the
Apology.

260 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
joined, that the gospel should not be mired up irith the law ; for other
the merits of Christ would be abridged, and troubled conscience
robbed of their sweetest solace.'* Accordingly, it is there said, thi
a wider sense, undoubtedly, fhe gospel is the preaching of penanc
weU as of the forgiveness of sins ; but in its most proper sense it is
the latter — only the announcement of the pardoning mercy of G
If to one, who recaUs to mind the epistle to the Romaiis, i. 15-18,
opposition must appear singular enough, so the fact is still more reir
able, that, under the grace to be announced, absolution from si
alone understood ; and the truly sanctifying grace is passed ove
utter silence. In one passage, indeed, the communication of the 1
Spirit is vaguely mentioned ;:j: but should any one wish to refer th
the truly purifying, and effectually sanctifying Spirit, he would i
certainly err ; for the activity of the Spirit is, in this formulary,
pressly confined to consolation ; on which account. He is terraed
Paraclete ; and his office to convince the world of sin (arguere de
cato) is represented as one, not peculiar, but foreign to Him, undei
new covenant. § If it be said, however, by way of excuse, the
other parts the sanctifying spirit of Christ is spoken of, let no one
satisfied therewith : for the article, which undertakes to treat of

* Sohd. Declar. v. de lege et Evang. § 1, p. 676. " Cavendum est ne hsE'
doctrinarum genera inter se commisceantur, aut Evangelion in legem transforn
Ea quippe ratione meritum Christi obscuraretur, et eonscientiie perturbatis dul
ma consolatio (quam in Evangelio Christi, sincere praedicato, habent, qui etiai
se in trravissimis tentationibus adversus legis terrores sustentant) prorsus eripere
t L. c. § 4, p. 678. It is said of the Gospel in a wider sense ; " Est cone
poenitentia ct remissione peccatorum." § 5, p. 678. " Deinde vocabulem Evai
in alia et quidem propriissima sua significatione usurpatur : et tum non concione
pffinitentia, sed tantum prcedicationem de dementia Dei complectitur." Cor
§ 15, p. 681 and 682: § 16, p. 682. "Quidquid enim pavidas mentes conso
quidquid favorem et gratiam Dei transgressoribus legis offert, hoc proprie est, et
dicitur Evangelion, hoc est totissimum nuntium. Gratia (is only) remissio pec
rum." Apolog. iv. § 13, p. 69. "Evangehum, quod est propria promissio r
sionis peccatorum."
X Sohd. Declar. v. de lege et Evang. § 17, p. 682. " Lex ministerium est,
per literam occidit et damnationem denuntiat : Evangelium autem est potcnti:
ad salutem omni eredenti, et hoc ministerium justitiam nobis offert et Spiritum
tum donat."
§ L. c. § 8, p. 679. " Manifestum est, Spiritus Sancti officium esse, non ta
consolari, verum etiam (ministerio legis) arguere mundum de peccato (Joh. xv
et ita etiam in Novo Testamento facere opus alienum, quod est arguere : ut f
faciat opus proprium, quod est consolari et gratiam Dei prsedicare. Hanc en;
causam nobis Christus precibus suis et sanctissimo merito eundem nobis a Patre
petravit et misit ; unde et Paracletus seu consolator dicitur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 261
signification of the gospel, is certainly the place where such a subject
must be handled in all its bearings.
What gross misconceptions, what profound errors, do we encounter
here !, A feeling of infinite pain seizes on the Christian observer, at
witnessing such doctrines — at witnessing such fierce divisions in one
and the same revelation ! And most painful is the experience he
makes, that not even one man felt the necessity of seeing those di
visions composed ! The controversies, indeed, which, upon this mat
ter, were carried on in the Lutheran Church, indicate a sense of un-
easinesss, prevailing among many of its members — an obscure per
ception, that some prodigious mistakes had been committed ; but to
reconcile effectually those feuds, was a thing which occurred to no man.
This inward disquiet it was which drove Agricola of Eisleben into
thorough Antinomianism : a hidden irapulse, unknown to hiraself,
urged him to escape from this turmoil of contradictions, to pour out
his insane blasphemies against Moses, to demand that no further use
should be made of the law, to require that, for the future, grace only
should be preached up in the Christian churches, and in this way to cut
the Gordian knot, and to rush into the wildest extremes. In this, as in
other matters, the Formulary of Concord has restored no inward aud
essential harmony ; and without entirely giving up the Lutheran point
of view, it was out of its power so to do.
The life of the Saviour constitutes, in every relation, an organic
unity ; and everything in him, his sufferings, and his works, his doc
trines, his conduct, his death on the cross, were in a like degree cal
culated for our redemption. It is the merits of the entire, undivided
God-man, the Son of God, whereby we are won again to God. His
three ofiices, the prophetic, the high-priestly, the royal, are alike ne
cessary ; take one away, and the reraaining immediately appear as un
inteUigible, as devoid of consistency. Thus, by fhe advent of the Son
of God into the world, there were proffered to men, not by accident, but
by necessity, at once, the highest degree of religious and ethical know
ledge ; the ideal of a life agreeable to God ; forgiveness of sins, and a
sanctifying power : and, as in the one life of the Saviour we find all
these united, so they raust, in like manner, be adopted by us.
It is undeniable, and no arts can long conceal the fact, that Christ
proposed, in the raost emphatic manner, to his followers, the highest
ethical ideal, corresponding to the new theoretical religious knowledge,
and further developing the Old Testament precepts. It is likewise
equally certain, that in his name are announced to all, who believe in
hira, grace and forgiveness of sins ; that is to say, pardon for every
moral transgression. These are two phenomena, which, as they stand

262 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
in direct opposition one to fhe other, require, in consequence, some
third principle which may mediate their union. This third conciliating
principle, as it is to unite the two, must be kin alike to law and to
grace, to the rigid exaction and to the merciful reraission. This is the
sanctifying power which emanates frora the living union with Christ ;
the gratuitous grace of holy love, which, in justification, He pours out
upon His followers. In this grace all law is abolished, because no out
ward claim is enforced ; and, at the sarae tirae, the law is confirmed,
bec.Tuse love is the fulfilment of the law : in love, law and grace are
become one. This is the deep sense of the Catholic dogma of justifica
tion, according to which, forgiveness of sins and sanctification are one
and the same ; according to which, justification consists in fhe reign
of love in the soul. Hence the maxim which the ancient Church,
after St. Paul (Rora. iii. 25,) so frequently repeated, that, on entering
into communion with Christ, the sins, coraraitted before that event,
were forgiven, but not future sins ; iraplying that now Christ would
fulfil the law in us, and we in hira. In the Catholic Church, therefore,
controversies could never be prolonged as to the relation between law
and grace, because, by its doctrine of justification, such an opposition
was essentially and eternally precluded : while, on the other hand, the
Reformers misapprehended the essence of love to such a degree, that,
instead of recognizing in it whatever was raost spiritual, most vital,
most resuscitating, and thereby, in conscfquence, the fulfilment of the
law, they looked on it as merely the law itself. Instead of raising
theraselves to the heights of Catholicism, and thence beholding how in
love the entire undivided Christ becometh living within us, and the
raoral teacher and forgiver of sins is alike glorified, they urged it as
matter of reproach against the Catholic Church, that it buried Christ,
because, in their one-sided view, they regarded the Mediator only in
his capacity of Pardoner.*

xxv. — The culminating point of inquiry. — Luther maintains an inward and essen
tial opposition between religion and morahty, and assigns to the former an etemal,
to the latter a mere temporal, value.
This so decided and unreconcUed opposition between gospel and law

* Apolog. IV. de justific. § 23. p. 75. " Itaque, qui negant fidem (solam) justifi
eare, nihil nisi legem, abohto Evangelio et abolito Christo, docent." § 26, p. 77 :
'Adversarii Christum ita intelligunt medlatorem et propitiatorem, quia merueritha-
bitum dilectionis  Annon est hoc prorsus sepelire Christum, et totam fidei doc
trinam toUere."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 263
leads fo a total degradation of the latter ; so that all differences between
Catholicism and Protestantism, in the article of justification, may
shortly be reduced to this ; namely, that the Catholic Church considers
religion and moraUty as inwardly one and the same, and both equally
eternal ; while the Protestant Church represents the two as essentially dis
tinct, the forraer having an eternal, the latter a temporal, value. Luther,
in nuraberless passages of his writings, insists on keeping both princi
ples, the religious and the ethical, as far apart, nay, further apart, than
heaven and earth ; on separating them, like day and night, like sun
shine and darkness. He teaches, that we are not to let the moral law
by any means intrude on fhe conscience ; that, in considering our re
lations to God, we are not to look to our personal bearing to that law,
and that, in general, we are to attend to it only in the conduct of our
every-day earthly existence. When the question recurred to him,
wherefore, then, was the moral law given, he could make no other re
ply, than " that it was given for the sake of civil order ;" or, that it had
so pleased God to establish such an ordin ance, the observance whereof,
as might be said of any mere legal institution, afforded Him pleasure.
The maintenance of the moral law, accordingly, he would leave to the
jurisdiction of the state, and not by any means include among real re
ligious concerns. It will be well, however, to hear Luther's own words,
who, if anywhere, is in this matter his own best interpreter. He says,
" we must thus carefully distinguish between both, placing the gospel
in fhe kingdom of heaven above, and the law on the earth below, call
ing and holding the righteousness of the gospel a heavenly and godly
righteousness, and that of the law a human and earthly one. And thou
must separate and distinguish the righteousness of the gospel as pecu
liarly and carefully from the righteousness of the law, as our Lord God
hath separated and divided the heavens from the earth, light from dark
ness, and day from night. So is the righteousness of the gospel light
and day ; the righteousness of the law darkness and night ; and would
to God we could divide them still further one frora the other.
" Therefore, as often as we have to treat of, and to deal with, faith,
with heavenly righteousness, with conscience, &c. &c., let us cut off the
law, and let it be confined to this lower world. But if the question be
about works, then let us enkindle the light whi ch belongeth to works of
legal justice, and to the night. Thus wUl the dear sun, and the clear
light of the Gospel and of grace, shine and illumine by day, the light of
¦ the law shine and Ulumine by night. And so these two things must
¦ever be separated one from the other, in our minds and our hearts, that
the conscience, when it feels its sins and i.-i terrified, may say to itself,
now thou art on the earth ; therefore let the lazy ass there work, and

2 64 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
serve, and ever carry the burden imposed upon it. That is to say, let
the body, with its members, be ever subjected to the law. But when
thou mountest up to heaven, leave the ass with ifs burden upon the
earth. For the conscience must have nothing to do with the law, works,
and earthly righteousness. So the ass remains in the valley, but the
conscience ascends with Isaac up the mountain, and knows nothing
cither of the law, or of works, but seeks and looks only for the forgive
ness of sins, and the pure righteousness which is proffered and imparted
to us in Christ.
" On the other hand, in civil government we must most rigidly exact,
and observe obedience to the law ; and, in that departraent, we must
know nothing, either of gospel, or conscience, or grace, of forgive
ness of sins, of heavenly righteousness, or even of Christ himself; but
we must know only how to speak of Moses, the law, and works. Thus
both things, to wit, the law and the Gospel, are to be severed as far as
jiossible one frora fhe other, and each is to reraain in the separate place
f o which it appertains. The law is to reraain out of heaven, that is to say,
out of the heart and the conscience. On the other hand, the freedom
of the Gospel is fo reraain out of the world, that is to say, out of the
body and its members. On this account, when law and sin shall come
into heaven, — that is to say, into the conscience, — we raust iramedi
ately drive thera out ; for the conscience must at no time know of law
or sin, but of Christ only. And again, when grace and freedom come
into\he world, — that is fo say, into the body, — we must say fo them :
' hearken, it becometh not ye to walk and dwell in the hog-sty and on
the dung-heaps of this earthly Ufe, but upwards to heaven ye should as
cend.' "*
Luther cannot often enough recur to the idea of the internal and
essential difference of tho religious from the ethical principle, as in fhe
case of such an excellent discovery was to be expected. Elsewhere he
savs, "Because it is so hazardous and dangerous to have anything to do
with the law, and it may easily occur that herein we sustain a perilous
and grievous fall, as if we were to be precipitated from heaven into the
very abyss of hell ; it is very necessary that every Christian should
learn to separate the two things, most carefully, one from the other.
Thus, he can let the law rule and govern his body and its merabers,
but not his conscience. For the same bride and queen must remain
unspotted and unpoUuted by the law, and be preserved in all her in
tegrity and purity for her only one and proper bridegroom — Christ^
As St. Paul saith, in another place, I have entrusted ye to a man, that
I may bring a pure virgin to Christ.
* Comment, on Ep. to Galat. loc. cit. p. 62.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 265
" Therefore must fhe conscience have its bridal bed, not in a deep val
ley, but on a high mountain, where Christ holds sway and jurisdiction ;
who neither terrifies nor tortures poor sinners, but, on the contrary,
consoles them, forgives sins, and saves them."*
Luther's reply to the question, " what need is there then of the moral
law ?" is recorded in the following passage : — " Why do men keep the
law, if it do not justify ? They who are just observe it, not because
they are thereby justified before God (for through faith only doth this
occur,) but forthe sake of civil order, and because they know that such
obedience is weU-pleasing and agreeable to God, and a good example
and pattern for improvement to others, in order that they may believe in
the gospel." (Let the reader remember Zwingle's views on the same
subject, c. I. § IV.)
Had Luther felt, in a higher degree than we can discover in him, the
want of a more general completion and more consistent developraent of
his views, he would most certainly have embraced the opinion of a
merely righteous Demiurges, as asserted by the Gnostics ; laid claim
to their heretical antinomianism in behalf of the Pneumatici ; and, like
Marcion, have separated the Old from the New Testament.
Marcion, too, was unable to reconcile law and grace, the all-good,
merciful God, with the God who imposes moral precepts and who
chastises ; and proceeded so far as to hold the legislative God of the
old covenant to be essentially distinct frora the God of the new. This
opinion, a,bsurd as it is in itself, possessed, however, a certain consist
ency, as did also the assertion of the Valentinians, that they were
exempt from the law, but that Catholics, on the other hand, could be
saved only by its observance ; for they entertained the opinion that
they were substantially different from the latter ; that they were Pneu
matici, and the Catholics Psychici,— beings belonging to an inferior
grade of existence. But in Luther we discover no cohesion nor con
nexion of ideas ; and his point of view is in itself utterly untenable.
To the moral law he assigned . the destination of terrifying the con
science ; and yet the law and the conscience are to stand in no inward
relation, one to the other ; an association of ideas, which is utterly
inconceivable ! By holding up the moral law, the sinner is to be ter
rified into the conviction, that for having violated it he has deserved the
eternal torments of heU ; and yet it is to possess a mere temporal worth,
and be destined for merely transitory relation ! How then are we to
nnderstand the mission of Christ, and especially his atonement ? Did

t Loc. cit. p. 64. Compare p. 79, 168, 172.

266 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
not the latter take place, in order to deliver us from fhe eternal punish
ment that had been affixed to the transgression of the moral law ? But
how, we must repeat it, can the violation of a finite law, merely adapted
for this period of earthly existence, entail an eternal chastisement ?
Was it for the fulfilraent of so miserable an end that the Son of God
was to become incarnate ? It might, at least, have occurred to Luther's
mind, that, if in the unconverted the consciousness of violating the law
were accompanied with such deep sorrow, and produced such terrors of
conscience, he ought not to expel it frora the conscience of the con
verted. It might have been expected that he would, at least, be sensible
that the law would lose all its efficacy on the unbelieving, if, in rela.
tion to the regenerated, he represented it as so paltry ! The law, then,
is to lead to Christ ! Strange conceit I If the law stand in no essential,
intimate relation to Christ, how can it conduct to hira? How can that,
which abideth not in hira, and hath not root in him, smooth the way
to him ? For so Luther teaches, when the law hath brought the sinner
to Christ, it must be again banished from the interior of man — his
conscience and his heart — and be confined to his body ! What doth
not belong essentially and eternally to the spiritual part of man, can at
no period of time, and in no state of existence, very strongly affect it.
If thus the conscience of the sinner is to be moved by the law, and in
order to rid himself of his own anguish he is to embrace the forgiver
of sins, then, surely, in the man justified in Christ, the law is not to be
liraited to this earthly and transitory existence. Therefore hath Christ
not abolished, but fulfilled, the law, which was to conduct to hira !
Rightly hath it been represented as Israel's distracting grief, that her
God abode without her, far removed from her, and thundering forth
terror and despair. But, ai the same time, and in most intimate con
nexion with this state of things, the law of Israel was likewise only ex
traneous, and widely reraote from her, and therefore menacing on
stony tablets, and not inscribed on the living heart ; for the law is God's
declared will ; and thus alienation from God involved also alienation
from his law. By the coming of the Son of God into the world, and
his reception into our souls, this disunion between God and raan termi
nated : — in Christ both are reconciled, and are become one. ShaH
then the law, which had been extraneous, not penetrate also into the
interior of man, and there become living, and, consequently, be fulfilled ?
Yea, by reconciliation with God we are reconciled, and become one
with His law also. By the living reception of God into our hearts,
through the means of faith, we likewise, and necessarily, receive His
law ; for the latter is God's eternal will, and one with Him ; so that,
where God is, there also is His law.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 267
Religiousness and virtue ! how intimately, how vitally, are they
united ! And in the same degree, therefore, religion and morality —
faith and the law I Contemplate the immoral man — see how fading,
how drooping, too, is all religious life within him, how utterly incapa
ble it is of putting forth blossoms ! How the clear, pure knowledge
of divine things is obscured within him ! Contemplate the history of
nations, and ye will learn how every ira morality and unbelief, or rais-
belief, have gone hand in hand ! This truth the progress of heathenism
has inscribed in frightful characters in the book of history. On the
other hand, when the Saviour would lay the foundation for Christian
piety — for faith in hiraself, he coramands us to obsefve in life
what he hath taught ! And this was the experience of all the saints,
that the more moral they became, the more their piety increased ; that,
in proportion to the fidelity and purity wherewith the Divine law was
realized within thera, the deeper their religious knowledge became!
Whence comes the fact, that a genuine piety evaporates, when a viola
tion of the moral law occurs ; and, again, to the observance of the
latter the former is so easily annexed ? Doth not this point incontro
vertibly to an essential unity of the two ? Oh, believe me, whoso sees
himself forced, in order to preserve in his heart and conscience a con
fiding faith, to banish thence the moral law, hath in his heart and
conscience an erroneous faith ; for the true living faith not raerely
agrees with the moral law — it is one with it. Again, too, whence the
fact, that the religious and moral elements cannot really exist asunder ;
that the one perpetually seeks the other, nay, bears it in ifs own bosom ?
Frora the living sense and the clear aknowledginent of our dependence
on the aU-gracious and merciful God, humUity and confidence first
spring, next the fulness of love, which already includes obedience and
resignation to the will of heaven, whereby we tread immediately on
ethical ground. If the first virtues be more religious, the last are more
ethical ; but the distinction between thera is absorbed in love— their
living centre — the point wherein religiousness and raoraUty unite.*
Now only have we obtained a coraplete solution to the Protestant
doctrine, that faith, /In its abstract sense, alone saves. Salvation the
Catholic attaches only to the undivided interior life of the regenerated
— to faith and love — to the fulfilraent of the law, or to the concurrence
of the religious and ethical principles : he places both in an equal rela
tion to a future life, for both alike possess an eternal value. Luther,
* In modem times Schleiermacher, Twesten, and Sack, have shown themselves
to be genuine Protestants, in severing, quite immoderately, the ethical and the reli
gious principle one from the other ; this, however, has been done more by the two
former thau by the latter.

268 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
on the other hand, recognizes faith alone as the principle of eternal
feUcity, because he "ascribes to morality only an earthly, perishable
worth. The above alleged argument of the Protestants, that works, on
account of the partly sinful faculty whence they emanate, have not a
saving efficacy, is in itself inadequate ; for from the same motive they
should represent faith as weak and defective ; and, consequently, deny
it the power of insuring salvation. But from the point of view which
we have now reached, we can survey the whole, and all becomes per
fectly clear and luminous. Hence it was quite in the spirit of Luther,
and even better than he understood himself, that Andrew Poach — a
writer who took part in the controversies raised by Major — advanced
the proposition, that even the perfect fulfilment of the law, that is to
say, the purest morality, had no claim to eternal happiness.*
Now have we at last succeeded in completely unfolding the specula
tive idea, which lies at the bottom of the Protestant doctrine of justifi
cation. We have before observed, that the relation towards evil,
wherein the Reformers placed fhe Alraighty, and their ulterior doctrine,
that it cannot even by Divine power be rooted out from the regenerated,
are based upon the idea that evil necessarily adheres to everything
finite. The same thought may also be e.xpressed in the following
manner. The sense of sin cannot be effaced from all finite conscious
ness — from the consciousness of man — it constantly accompanies and
tortures man, because evil is inseparable from him, as a Umited being ;
to this he is predestined. But how doth he obtain quiet ? By the
lifting up of the mind to a higher point of view — to the inward essence
of things — to the Infinite : in the consciousness of God, in faith, evil
vanishes. Hence, raoral freedora annihilated was converted into free
dora frora the moral law, which has relation merely to the temporal,
limited, external world, but has no kind of reference to that which is
eternal and exalted above space and time. But, however, we by co
means intend to assert, that the Reformers were conscious of this
fundamental principle of their system ; on the contrary, had they un
derstood themselves — had they conceived whither their doctrines led —
they would have rejected them as unchristian. Yet we may also under
stand wherefore the Catholics, if they wished to uphold the idea of the
holiness and justice of God ; if they wished to maintain human free
dom, insure the dignity of the moral law, confirm the true notion of
sin, and the debt of sin, and not suffer fhe doctrine of redemption in
* " Propositio ' bona opera sunt necessaria ad salutem ' non potest consistere in
doctrina legis, neque lex ullas habet de aeterna vita promissiones, etiam perfectissime
impleta." Auctore Andrea Poach, 1535. The orthodox Lutherans, indeed, woiUd
not admit this view.

s
BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 269
Christ to be converted into a very folly, should, with all their energy,
have opposed the Protestant theory of faith and justification.

§ XXVI. — Analysis of the elements of truth and of error in the Protestant doctrine
of faith, as hitherto stated.
If we now take a retrospective view of all that has been advanced,
and reduce all to a short summary, it will foUow that in Protestantism
the religious element formed the more luminous side, and the ethical
the darker ; and this, of course, was attended with the consequence,
that ultimately the religious element was regarded only with a very
oblique and distorted view.
The religious element no one will fail to notice in Protestantism,
who only recalls to mind that notion of Divine Providence, which Lu
ther and Melancthon put forth at the commencement of the Reforma
tion, but which Calvin defended to the end of his days. The action
of Providence the Reformers by no means made to consist merely in
the guidance of all things little and great, in the wise and tender con
duct of individuals, as of the whole human race. No ; according to
thera, aU the phenomena in the world of man are God's own work, and
man is the mere instrument of God : everything in the world's history
is God's invisible act, visibly reaUzed by the agency of man. Who can
here fail to recognize a religious contemplation of all things? All is
referred to God — God is all in all.
The same pious view of the world, and the world's history, extends
to the more special circle of Christian doctrines. The fundamental
principles of Christian piety are, doubtless, rigidly maintained ; but
only a perverse application of them is made ; for the same relation,
wherein, as we have seen, the Deity is represented to be in respect to
man, is established between Christ and the beUever. The Redeemer
is, in such a way, all in all, that he and his spirit are alone efficacious,
and faith and regeneration are exclusively his act ; so that, as, accord
ing to Luther's doctrine, man disappears before God, so the Christian
likewise disappears before Christ. The following passage will furnish
us with the clearest insight into Luther's feeUngs on this subject : " I
can well remember," he remarks, " that Dr. Staupitz, who was provin
cial vicar of the Augustinians, when the gospel first began to be
preached, said to me, ' it affords me the greatest consolation, that this
doctrine of the gospel, which is now coining to light, gives all honour
and praise to God alone, and nothing to men. Now it is clear and

270 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
evident that we can never ascribe too much honour, goodness, &;c., to
our Lord God.' So he then consoled me : and it is the truth, that the
doctrine of the gospel takes from raen all honour, wisdom, and justice,
and ascribes them to the one just Creator, who creates all things out
of nothing. Now it is much safer to ascribe too much to our Lord God;
albeit, however, we can never too much ascribe to Hira. Herein I do
not err and sin, for I give to both — to wit, God and man — what apper
taineth to each."*
The feeUngs whereby Luther was guided, are, to judge from such ap-
pearances, sound to their inmost core ; but as, in feeUng, truth and
error can lie enclosed, and only in a higher grade of intellectual life
are separated one from the other, so this is here the case. In Luther
we imagine ourselves to be transported to the primitive tiraes of our
race, when, before the raind of man, yet giddy frora his fall, all forms
pass in motley confusion ; God and man are no longer kept distinct, and
the acts of both are blended together.
'I'he principle of freedom Luther did not apprehend ; since in it he
abhorred the destruction of aU deeper religious feeUng and true huraili
ty ; viewing in it an encroachment on the rights of the Divine Majes
ty, nay, the self-deification of man. To be free and fo be God was,
in his opinion, synonymous.f But what was the consequence ? While
he desired to oppose the self-will, he annihilated the free-will, of raan ;
and, in combating his self-seeking, he assailed, withal, his self-existence
and individuality. It is a circumstance worthy of special considera
tion, that Luther, so often as he will prove man to be no longer in pos
session of the higher freedom — that freedom which fruth, piety, and
virtue ensure, shows also involuntarily, that he no longer possesses the
freedom of election, and confounds both species of freedom, which are
yet so very distinct, one from the other I The freedom of election is
for raan the necessary condition to a higher freedom, but not the same.
Thus the Reforraer worked himself up to an incapacity to discover in
the Catholic notion of humility any humUity at all ; for huraiUty, accord
ing to hira, consists in the renunciation of an independent personality,
* Luther, Comment, on Ep. to Galat. loc. cit. p. 35.
+ Luther de servo arbitrio ad Erasm. Roterod. 1. 1. foi. 117. b. " Sequitur nunc,
libermn arbitrium esse plane divinum nomen, nee uUi posse competere, quam soli
divincB majestati ; ea enim potestate facit omnia quEe vult m coelo et m terra. Quod
si hominibus tribuitur, nihil rectius tribuitur, quam si Divinitas quoque ipsa eis tri-
bueretur, quo sacrilegio nullum esse majus possit. Proinde theologorum erat, ab isto
vocabulo abstinere, cum de humana virtute loqui vellent, et soli Deo relinquere ;
deinde ex hominum ore et sermone id ipsum tollere, tanquam sacrum ac venerabile
nomen Deo suo asserere."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 271
and of personal dignity, and is of an essentiaUy physical nature ; where-
as, according to the genuine and old Christian view, humility is of a
moral essence, and must depend on a free homage, a free oblation of
oneself. The Reformers said : " See, thou art not thyself free, and
yet thou wouldst fain be free; in this consists all thy perverseness."
The Catholic, on the other hand, said : " O, man, thou art created free ;
but if by thy freedom thou becomest a bond-slave to God, thou wilt
receive thy freedom glorified back." Hereby it was possible for the
CathoUc to explain how a false freedora could be sought after ; and his
whole system became at once a Theodicea — a justification of God on
account of evU in the world, which Protestantism must absolutely re
nounce, as it can never explain how man, whora it believes to be abso
lutely devoid of free-wiU, could ever corae to believe himself a free
agent, and thereby become evil ; unless, with the want of freedom, he
be destined to this longing after freedom, and in this way he be doomed
to an annihilating contradiction of his own nature with itself, and there
by all evil be referred to God.
In fact, this course of reasoning the Reformers fearlessly pursued ;
nsisapprehended, together with free-will, the essence of the raoral law
and raoraUty, which, without free-wiU, is inconceivable ; and yet ven
tured withal to accuse Catholics of want of humility — Catholics, accor
ding to whose doctrine that word can alone possess a rational sense ;
and who, when they say man that confesses himself a sinner before
God (and this is the principle of all humility in faUen creatures), are
alone consistent.
These grievous perplexities necessarily required a theory of justify
ing faith, such as the new Church gave. Reduced to a rational expres
sion, this faith accordingly signifies the giving ourselves back full of
confidence to God, as at our birth, and through the course of our lives,
He hath constituted us ; — a well-grounded expectation that He will
grant us a favourable issue out of the enigmatic labyrinth of evil, which
He hath himself prepared, and into which He hath conducted us. By
such a method, undoubtedly, no glory accrues to man ; but whether any
glory be thereby rendered to God, the enlightened observer will be able
to judge.*

• Luther (de servo arbitrio ad Erasm. Roterod. 1. 1. foi. 236.) expresses this thought
in the following way : " Ego sane de me confiteor, si qua fieri possit, noUem mihi dari
liberum arbitrium aut quippiam in manCi mea relinqui, quo ad salutem conari posseiu ;
non solum ideo, quod in tot adversitatibus et pericuUs, deinde tot impugnantibus
dffimonibus, subsistere et retinere illud non valerem, cum unus doimon potentior sit

272 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES

§ x.icvii. — Affinity of Protestantism with Gnosticism, and some Pantheistic systems of
the Middle Age. More accurate determination of the difference between Zwingle's
and Luther's principles.
There is no religious phenomenon, to which the system of the Refer-
mers offers more resemblance, than Gnosticisra, to which we have al
ready had, now and then, occasion to advert. In the first place, the
latter sprang out of a glowing desire after eternal life, and the deepest
sense of human misery in general, and of the raisery of sin in particu
lar. So deep a horror for evU fiUed its disciples, that they deeraed it
absolutely incompatible with the creation of the good God, and thence
proceeded even to uphold a dualism of principles. From the present
forra of human existence, which arose out of the mysterious concur.
rence of these principles, evU, according to them, was quite insopara.
ble ; it could, though combated, never be overcome.
Down to the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, ^e find Gnosticism
continuing in broken and detached systems. Tho Reformers in the
sixteenth century embraced it under a milder forra. It is not to be
doubted, but that they were moved by the Uke feelings ; that they were
deeply impressed with the sinfulness of the world, and on that account
represented huraan nature as so thoroughly corrupted, that the disease
was in this life absolutely incurable,
Secondly, this sense of sin, pious, doubtless, but confused and dis
tempered in itself, tended, araong the Protestants as well as the Gnos-

omnibus hominibus, neque ullus hominum salvarctur ; sed quod etiam, si nulla peri-
cula, nulla: advcrsitates, nulli dosmones essent, cogerer tamen perpetuo in incertum
laborare et aerem pugnis verberare. Neque enim conscientia mea, si in tetemum
viverem et operarer, unquam certa et secura fieret, quantum facere deberet, quo satis
Deo fieret. Quocumque enim opere perfecto reliquus esset scrupulus, ad id Deo pia-
ceret, vel an ahquid ultra requireret, sicut probat experientia omnium justiciariorum,
et ego meo magno malo tot annis satis didici.
"At nunc cum Deus salutem mcam, extra meum arbitrium tollens, in suum re-
ceperit, et non meo opere aut cursU, sed sua gratia et misericordia promiserit me
senare, securus et certus sum, quod ille fidelis sit, et mihi non mentietur, tam potens
et magnus, ut nvlli damones, nulla advcrsitates eum, frangere, aut me illi rapere,
poterunt. Nemo (inquit) rapiet eos de man-d mea, quia pater, qui dedit, major om
nibus est. Ita fit, ut si non omnes, tamen aliqui et multi salventur, cum per vim
liberi arbitrii nullus prorsus servaretur, sed in unum omnes perderemur. Tum etiam
certi sumus et securi, rws Deo placere, non merito operis nostri, sedfavore miseri
cordia sua nobis promissa, atque si minus aut male egerimus, quod nobis non im-
putet, sed paterne ignoscat et emendet. Hac est gloriatio omnium sanctorum in
Deo suo,"

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 273
ties, towards its own destruction ; and, as it did not comprehend, and
thereby maintain itself, it became utterly extinct.
The higher the degree of objective sinfulness is considered, wherein
the subject sees himself involved without personal guilt, the more the
magnitude of subjective self-committed evil disappears ; and human
nature is then charged with the debt, which the individual had con
tracted. How much the Gnostics sought to excuse themselves, by
means of their theory of evil, is well known. In like manner, the Pro
testants represent Adam, who is accounted the only sinner, as succeed
ed by Christ, who alone worketh good ; and if, by the former, all per
sonal guilt is made irapossible, so, through- the latter, all personal merit
is rendered unnecessary. If the former hath bereaved man of all moral
freedom, and, consequently, of all capacity for good, the latter is so
constituted, that all liberty, aU independent working of good on the part
of man, becoraes unnecessary ; and the raore unavoidable the necessity
of sinning is represented to have been in the first Adara, the more
easily obtainable is forgiveness through the second Adam described to
be. The error here is precisely the sarae as if one were to believe, that
a deep sense of guilt was possible, only under the condition of a pro
digious raagnitude of evil deeds committed by us ; for, on the contrary,
experience shows, that, when the amount of evU, objectively consider
ed, is sraall, it is always most deeply felt, and most strongly detested.
In fact, no blood-guiltiness, no perjury, no adultery is necessary, in order
to raake one Weep out his whole life in penitential tears. In like man
ner, it is quite unnecessary that, through Adam, men should have been
bereaved of aU reason, and their every fibre infected, in order to inspire
them with a deep sense of the misery under which they languish, and
to make thera haU a Redeemer with joy. In Adara we were wounded,
but not killed ; the wound causes a pain to be felt, and the physician
to be welcomed, and admits of a perfect cure ; but in death all pain is
extinguished, and no life returns.
Thirdly, Gnosticism desired of its followers the consciousness, the
knowledge (yiai-if,) that they were the sons of the good God ; that they
could not be lost ; that they were quite certain of salvation ; and with this
claim was associated the doctrine, that sorae raen are by birth o] nvevfixTi-
x«('(menofthe spirit,) others o< ¦^^u;^;(xl>|'(menofthe soul,) and others, again,
01 ^o'ixoi (men of clay.) In Protestantism, we find, as parallels. Faith,
which comprises the absolute assurance of eternal life, and the doctrine,
that some are, from eternity, predestined to happiness, others to damna
tion ; and this is merely another mode of expressing the Gnostic classifica
tion of men. Even the Gnostic doctrine of the Pneumatici contains a
principle, that incited to the highest moral enthusiasm, to the most per-
18

274 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
severant struggle against all evil ; but it is well known how horribly
this doctrine was abused in life. It is the sarae with the Protestant
certitude of eternal life, and of absolute predestination. The convic
tion, that through God's mercy, and without any raoral obligation on
my part, I shall infallibly have a share in eternal happiness, can inspire
me with gratitude the warmest, and the most capable of producing the
fairest fruits in life ; and this it was which Luther expected to be the
result of his doctrine. But the notion, that heaven will not be lost to
the believer, or to hira who firraly confides ; and that no raerit, that is
to say, no personal worth, bears any inward relation to salvation, coidd
as easily produce the opposite effects in practice ; and that these did not
fail to ensue, Luther himself often enough complains, and the course of
our investigations wUl furnish us with numerous proofs. We do not
contend, that such an assurance, in noble, tender, and sensitive souls,
if such can vaunt of this assurance, is not capable of bearing the most
abundant fruits ; but how doth the view, which the Reformers entertain
of huraan sinfulness, entitle them to reckon upon souls of such a stamp ?
If to this it be objected, that every doctrine can be abused, we adrait
the fact, but raaintain, that truth of itself never gives occasion to abuse ;
that, on the contrary, abuse springs only from the false position, whore-
in any one sets himself in relation to the truth : whereas, with an erro
neous doctrine, abuse is necessarily intertwined, and it is a mere matter
of chance whether it conduce to any one's spiritual welfare. This is
the case with the doctrine, that without fulfilling any moral obligations,
we become, by faith alone, partakers of Divine grace ; this is the case
with the Gnostic and Protestant feeling of assurance, and with the doc
trine of predestination, which it presupposes.
Fourthly, Marcion was so impressed with the loftiness of the New
Testaraent revelation, with the revelation of God, as a gracious, lov
ing, and raerciful Father, that, on that account he held the divinity in
Christ to be essentially different from the one that created the world
filled with evils of every kind, gave in the old covenant such severe
laws, and so strictly, according to them, meted out rewards and punish
ments. Into what contradictions Luther brought Nature and Grace,
Law and Gospel, we have already seen, and not less so, how, in the
Redeemer, he saw exclusively the merciful forgiver of sins.* Marcion,
the most pious of Gnostics, but who evinced scarcely anv trace of a

* TertuH. adv. Marc. 1. i. u. 2. " Et ita in Christo quasi aliam inveniens disposi-
tionem solius et puraa benignitatis eit diversae a Creatore, facile novam et hospitam
argumentatus est divuiitatem in Christo suo revelatam."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 27S
scientific spirit, supposed, that the good God in Christ took compassion
¦on men, without incurring any obligation to concern Himself as to
their destiny ; since they belonged to a creation to which He was a
stranger : but he forgot, that it was inconceivable how men could even
understand Him, and enter into communion with Hira, because, as be
ings created by the Demiurges {a spirit independent of God,) they pos
sessed nothing akin to God, no manner of Ukeness unto God. In his
foUy, he thought he more highly exalted the mercy of God, by repre
senting Hira as redeeming creatures, not only estranged from Him by
sin, but, in their very essence, aliens to Him. In like manner Luther.
Fallen man, according to him, was nothing but sin, entirely bereft of
the Divine image ; a doctrine by which he thought to exalt the glory
ef the Saviour ^ without considering, that he, who has no longer any
thing to be redeemed, cannot possibly be susceptible of redemption.
Yet these parallels must now be closed, especially as we should be
thrown into no small embarrassment, were we to Compare Luther's
ascetic exercises with those of Marcion. Such very opposite practical
results flowed from theories which have the closest affinity with each
other. But even Prodicus, the most libertine enemy to the law, and
the Cainites professed theoretical maxims similar to those of Marcion !
Another doctrine, to which Protestantisra bears undeniable relation'.
ship, is the ideal Pantheism, whose adherents, through the whole course
of the middle age, were arrayed against the Church, in no less violent
opposition than that which she encountered frora the Gnostico-Mani-
chean Dualists. To the former class belong Amalrich of Chatres, and
his disciple, David of Dinant, with their followers, various classes of
the Fraticelli, Lollards, and Beghards, the brothers and sisters, of " the
Free Spirit," together with several others. They held the doctrine of
the One and All of things, — of the absolute necessity of everything
which occurs, — and, consequently, of evil in the creation, of the want
'of free-will in man, and yet of the utraost latitude of freedom, which
he can enforce against the dictates of the moral law,— of the certainty
of salvation, — that is to say, the return to the Deity, or absorption in
His bosom, which, indeed, forms a necessary part of Pantheism, and of
every doctrine that ascribes a divine essence to raan. To this class
Wycliff belongs, who only further expanded the fatalistic doctrines
more hesitatingly taught by Thomas Bradwardine ; ascribed, in his
Trialogus, evil to God ; and, with the denial of freedom of election in
man, admitted in his system an absolute predestination, and on this ac
count was censured by an English synod.
Luther and Zwingle, to a certain extent, diverged info these opposite
¦courses i and herein consists, if we judge rightly, the real difference

276 EXPOSITlOiSf OF 1)0CTR1NAL DIFFEREIsCES
between them. Luther approximates more to the Gnostico-Manichear?
view of the world; — Zwingle to the Pantheistic. In the first period of
his opposition against the Church, Luther, in his peculiar humility,
wished to refuse, to fallen man only, every species of freedom in what
concerned hoUness. But, in the course of his hostility, he thought to
give a further support to his notion of humility, by representing raan,
as in himself, devoid of freedom, — -a proof of his unscientific spirit, — ¦
for, by this second doctrine, he entirely took away all weight from the
first. It is, however, evident, from numerous passages in his writings,
that his principal object was to inspire men wilh humility and piety,
by consideration of their deep guilt in Adam ; and that, in tbe course
of the struggle, he evinced a disposition to cling only to this ground
work of his system,-— which we may call the would-be Christian, —
and to give up the other, which we may characterize as the specula
tive one.* Zwingle, on the other hand, leant almost exclusively onthe
latter (for what he aUeged respecting original sin, and evil in general,
is scarce worthy of attention ;) he pretty openly declared for Panthe
ism, and thereby attached himself to the principles of that second party
described above, which, in the middle age, unfurled the banner of oppo^
sition against the Church. The following statement wiU furnish the
reader with more detailed explanations.
The leading principles in his -svriting on providence are as follows J
All power is either created or uncreated. If it be uncreitcd, it is God
himself; if it be created, it raust needs be created by God. But, to be
created by God, signifies nought else than to bc an emanation of Ilif
power ; for whatever is, is from Him, throngh Him, and in Him, nay,
is Hi:t''.srJf. Thus, created power is ever but a phenomenon of uni
verse! power, in a new subject, and a new individual.^ The notion of

+ Luther de servo abitr. adv. Erasm. loc. cit. p. 177, b. "Nonne agnoscis ? Jam
quasro et peto, si gratia Dei desit, aut separetur ab ilia vi modicula, quid ipsa faciet?
Inefficax ("inquis) est, et nihil facit boni. Ergo non faciet, quod Deus aut gratia ejus
volet ; siquidem gratiam Dei separatam ab ea jam- posuimus, quod vero gratia Dei non
facit, bonmn non est. Quare sequitur, liberum arbitrium sine gratia Dei prorsus non
liberum, sed immutabiliter captivum et servum esse mali, cum non possit vertcre se
solo ad bonum. Hoc stante, dono tibi, ut vim liberi arbitrii non modo facius modi-
culam, fac eam angelicam, fac, si potes, plane divinam, si adjeceris tamen hanr
^Ucsfahile7n appendicem, et citra gratiam Dei ineffcace^n dicas ; mox ademeris illi
omnem vim : quid est vis inefficax, nisi plane nulla vis ?" But as might be expected
from this conclusion, we find immediately a recurrence to the old doctrine : " I'lmim
ergo stet, . . . nos omnia necessitate, nihU hbero arbitrio facere, dum vis Hberi arbi
trii nihil est, neque facit, neque potest bonum,. absente gratia.
} Zwmgh de providentia, lom. i. foi. 354, a. " Quae tamen creata dicitur, cum

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 277
a power, peculiar to a created being, is as incompatible with the notion
-of the Deity, as with the notion of a created being, since this would
thereby be conceived as uncreated. To wish to be free, is accordingly
identical with wishing to be one's own God ; and the doctrine of free
dom leads at once fo self-deification, and to polytheism. The predicate
" Freedom," and the subject " creature," are mutually incompatible ;
.and the expression, " a free creature," involves a contradiction.
He continues : Freedom, as a self-power, being inconsistent with the
omnipotence of God, the notion of a creature living according to its
own design is evidently subversive of the wisdom of God. For this is
as much as to suppose, that God would alter his decree, which can only
be eternal, and consequently immutable, according to human caprices
and actions, the result of human prudence. The notion of Divine
Providence is, therefore, according to Zwingle, in every respect, one
and the same with that of the inevitable necessity of all occurrences ;
and quite consistently, therefore, he rejects, with the idea of free-will,
all freedora of thinking also.*
His thoughts on the essence of created energies Zwingle discloses
further, xvhen he says, the being of all things is the being of God, and
-God Himself; for, should we assert the contrary, then the notion of
the infinite, which appertains to God, is destroyed ; since any thing,
which is not Himself, is placed beside Him, and out of Him.-f To
render his ideas more intelligible to the Landgrave of Hesse, he makes
nse of the following comparison. As plants and animals grow out of
omnis virtus numinis virtus sit, nee enim quidquam est, quod non ex illo, in illo, et
j)er illud, imo illud sit, creata, inquam, virtus dicitur, eo quod in novo subjecto, et
jiovl specie, universalis aut generalis ista virtus exhibetur. Testes sunt Moses,
Paulus, Plato, Seneca." (! !)
* L. c. " Jam si quicquara sua virtute ferretur aut eonsilio, jam isthinc cessarent
¦sapientia et virtus nostri numinis. Quod si fieret, non esset numinis sapientia sum
ma, qui non comprehenderet ac caperet universa ; non esset ejus virtus omnipotens,
quia esset virtus libera ab ejus potentia, et idcirco alia. Ut jam esset yis, quE non
esset vis numinis, esset luz et intelligentia, quae non esset numinis istius sapientia."
What conclusions for a Reformer ! Above all, Zwingle should have been advised
to reform his logic. More plausible, yet still devoid of all true solidity, is the follow
ing : " Immutabilem autera diximus administrationem ac dispositionem, hanc ob
causam, ut et eorum sententiam, qui hominis arbitrium liberum esse adseverant, non
ondique firmam, et summi numinis sapientiam certiorem ostenderem, quam ut eara
.eventus ullus latere possit, qui deinde imprudentem cogeret aut retractare aut mutare
i!onsilium." t L. e. foi. 355, b. " Cum autem infinitum', quod res est, ideodieatur, quod essen-
!tia et existentia infinitum sit, jam constat extra infinitum hoc Esse nullum esse
posse." . . . foi. 356 : " Cum igitur unum ac solum infinitum sit, necesse est pra3ter
^00 nihil esse.''

278 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c.
the earth, and, when their individual life is extinct, dissolve again into
its bosom, so it is with the universe in respect to God : — and he adds,
in passing, the consoling observation, that from thence the imraortality
of man is very apparent, since we see, that, nought which has ever
been, can quite cease to be, as it only returns fo the Universal Being.
He even cannot refrain from a digression, to the effect that the Pytha-
gorian doctrine of the transmigration of souls is not quite groundless,
and presents one very favourable side.'''
From aU this Zwingle infers, that there can be but one cause, and
that the so-called secondary causes should not be regarded as causes,
but only as means and instruments of the first, which is at once the
only cause.f By this he utterly denies, that man can be the free prin
ciple of causation in a series of actions, and represents him as a com
pletely passive instrument — a living machine, which never acts from
itself,, which is only set in motion, and is alike incapable either of good
or of evil. So far Zwingle, who only reduces to its first principles
Luther's doctrine of the servitude of the human wiU. We have often
wondered at the so-called orthodox Protestant theologians of our days,
when they opposed modern theological and phUosophical systems, which
more consistently carried out the principles of the Reformers, so Uttle
did Protestant orthodoxy understand itself! With aU his deviations
on particular points,. Schleiermacher is, in my opinion, the only genuina
disciple of the Reformers.

* L. c. " Sed hanc sententiam paulo ¦juVoo-o^/K^Tfjoi' tractalam .... exemplo
eonfirmabimus," etc.
t L. c. foi. 358, K

CHAPTER IV.

DIFFEHENCES IX THE DOCTRINE OF THB SACBAUENTS.

J XXVIII. — Doctrine of Catholics on the Sacraments in general.
The doctrine of the sacraments we shall now treat immediately after
the exposition of the doctrine of justification ; since, according to the
expression of the Council of Trent, justification is, by raeans of the
sacraments, either originally infused into us, or subsequently increased,
or, when lost, is again restored.'* We shall begin with stating the
CathoUc doctrine. The nature of the sacraments in general will first
be defined ; next the object of their institution ; then the manner in
which fhey communicate grace will be explained ; and, lastly, their
number will be stated.
A sacrament is defined, by the catechism of the CouncU of Trent, to
be an outward sign, which, in virtue of the divine ordinance, not only
typifies, but works, the supersensUal ; to wit, holiness and justice. f
Here the same manual notices the distinctions which, according to the
definition we have cited, exists between a sacrament and an iraage, or
the sign of the cross and fhe like.
On the object of their institution, the same catechism enlarges in the
foUowing manner. In the first place, man, as a being belonging to the
world of sense, stands in need of a sensible type, to obtain and to
preserve the consciousness of what passes in his supersensual part. It
adds, if raan were a pure spirit, then would the divine powers, which
produce justice and holiness, require no sensible raediura. In fhe
second place, the catechism represents the sacraments as pledges of the
Divine wUl in regard to man, as sureties of the truth of God's promises.
It is only with difficulty, it continues, that men can be brought into
belief ; hence it was, that God, in the Old Testaraent, in corroboration
of His word, made use of outward signs to strengthen the confidence of

* Concil. Trident. Sess. vii. decret. de Saeram.
t " Quare ut explicatius, quid sacramentum sit, declaretur, docendum erit, rem
esse sensibus subjectam, qum ex Dei institutione sanctitatis et justitiEe tum signifi-
candse, turn efiUciends, vim habet."

280 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
man in the Divine assurances. In Uke manner, such signs have been
instituted by Christ, to serve to men as pledges of the forgiveness of
sin, of heavenly grace, and of the communion of the Holy Spirit.
Thirdly, the sacraments are represented as the channels (quasi alvc'i,)
whereby the power which flows from the sufferings of Christ, the grace
which the Saviour hath merited for us, is individualized, and applied
ta each one ; in order that by aid thereof, the health of the soul raay
be re-established, or confirmed. Fourthly, reraarks the catechism, they
are to be considered as outward marks and tokens of confession araong
the faithful. Lastly, the idea, with which this exposition of the cited
manual concludes, is far more ingenious and more profound than it
may at first sight appear, — the idea, namely, that the sacraments con
tribute the more to cherish Christian piety, as they are well calculated
to humble arrogance by the reflection, that, as raan had ignominiously
delivered himself over to the dominion of the lower world, so he needs
its mediation to enable hira to rise above it. That false spiritualism,
which, during a considerable part of the Middle Age, as well as at the
period of the Reforraation, everywhere burst forth, and sought to obtain
ascendancy, might, by an earnest consideration alone of the great
humiliating truth which this idea involves, have attained to a conscious
ness of its fearful aberrations."'
As regards the mode in which the sacraments confer on us sanctify.
ing grace, the Catholic Church teaches, that they work in us, by means
of their character, as an institution prepared by Christ for our salvation
(ex opere operate, scilicet a Christo, in place of quod operatus est
Chri.stus,)-f that is to say, the sacraments convey a divine power,
merited for us by Christ, which cannot be produced by any human
disposition, by any spiritual effort or condition ; but is absolutely, for
Christ's sake, conferred by God through their means. Doubtless, man
must receive this grace, and therefore be susceptible of it ; and this
susceptibUity is evinced in repentance and sorrow for sin, in fhe desire
after divine aid, and in a confiding faith. But he can only receive it,
and therefore be only susceptible of it. By this doctrine, accordingly,
the objectivity of Divine grace is upheld ; and we are prevented from

'•' L. c. p. 167. The whole exposition of the catechism is taken from the manuals
of the theologians of the Middle Age : for example, from Hugh St. Victor, Alexan
der Hales, Bonaventura, and Thomas Aquinas. See the last named schoolman's
Summ. tot. theolog. Par. 3 Q. Ixi Art. 1. p. 276.
t Concil. Trid. Sess. vn. can. viii. " Si quis dixerit, per ipsa novae legis saera-
menta ex opere operate non conferri gratiam, sed solam fidem divinse promissionis ad
gratiam conscquendam sufiicere, anathema sit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 281
drawing down the effects of the sacrament into the region of the sub
jective ; and, frora entertaining the opinion, that these consisted in
mere raoral and dialectic results, in human feelings, considerations,
and resolves, which, as at the view of a picture representing Christ
crucified, are excited within us at the moment of receiving, or even
may precede the reception. This human activity, except in the case
of infants to be baptized, is indeed necessary ; but it is not the divine
grace promised in the sacrament, nor doth it even merit it. Nay, the
religious energies of the human soul are set in new motion by the
sacrament, since its divine matter impregnates the soul of man, vivifies
it anew, establishes it in the most intimate comraunion with God, and
continues to work within all raen, who do not show themselves in
capable of its graces, or, as fhe council expresses if, do not place an
obstacle in the way.'"
The doctrine of justification, — according to which the divine activity
precedes the human, and then both, in case the latter doth not obsti
nately resist, constitute one and the same divine and human work, —
recurs in the theory of the sacraments. And from the universal relation
¦* Concil. Trid. 1. c. can. vi. " Si quis dixerit, Sacraraenta novae legis non conti-
nere gratiam, quam significant, aut gratiam ipsam non ponentibus obicem non con.
ferre, quasi signa tantum, etc. anathema sit." Bellarmine has treated this subject of
the sacraments with the felicity which he always evinces in doctrinal investigations :
" Igitur ut intelligamus,* says he, " quid sit opus operatum, notandum est in justifica
tione quam recipit aliqus, dum percipit sacraraenta, multa concurrere, nimirum, ex
parte Dei, voluntatem utendi ilia re sensibili ; ex parte Christi, passionem ejus ; ex
parte ministri, voluntatem, potestatem, probitatem; ex parte suscipientis, -voluntatem,
fidem, et posnitentia-m ; denique ex parte sacramenti, ipsam actionem externam, quae
consurgit ex debita applicatione materlEe et formae. Caeterum ex his oranibus id,
quod activfe et proximfe et instrumcntaliter efficit gratiam justificationis, est sola actio
ilia externa, quie sacramentum dicitur, et haec vocatur opus operatum, accipiendo
passivfe (operatum,) ita ut idem sit sacramentum conferre gratiam ex opere opcr.
ato, quod conferre gratiam ex vi ipsius actionis sacramentalis a Deo ad hoe insti
tute, non ex merito agentis vel suscipientis." After proving all that has been here
stated, and Ln reference to what has been said of the minister, after showing that his
will only is necessary, Bellarmine continues : " Voluntas, fides, et pcenitentia in sus-
cipiente adulto necessarif) requiruntur, ut dispositiones ex parte subjecti, non ut
causas activa; ; non enim fides et poenitentia effiiciunt gratiam sacramentalem, neque
dant efficaciara sacraraenti, sed solum toUunt obstacula, quie impedirent, ne sacraraen
ta suam efficaeiam exercere possent, unde in pueris ubi non requiritur dispositio,
sine his rebus fit justificatio. Exemplum esse potest in re natm-ali. Si ad ligna com-
burenda primum exsiccarentur ligna, deinde excuteretur ignis exsilice, tum applicare
tur ignis hgno, et sic tandem fieret combustio, nemo diceret causam immediatam
combustionis esse siccitatem, aut excussionem ignis ex silice. aut applicationem ig
nis ad ligna, sed solum ignem, ut causam primariam, et sohs calorcm, seu calefaction-
em, ut causam instrumentalem." Bellarm. de Saeram. I. ii. t. 1. 1. iii. p. 108-9.

282 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
which, according to Catholic doctrine, exists between grace and free
will, we might infer, that the opus operatum doth not establish a
divine activity only, nor iraply a mere inertness on the part of man.'*
That Catholics reckon seven sacraraents, needs no further evidence ;
but Catholics, we may notice in passing, assert of no sacrament, that
its reception is entirely and absolutely necessary to salvation. So, for
instance, the ardent desire of a catechumen for baptism, when in
vincible outward obstacles prevent its accomplishment, is sufficient.
God, who freely chooses one mode of communicating to us His grace,
can make use of another ; but it is not for man to reject, according to
his caprice, the means of salvation offered to him by Christ, and to
prefer another path of grace. This would argue a very gross presump
tion, and be a most culpable conterapt of the divine ordinances. A
spirituality of this kind is, with all its pretensions to refinement, nought
else than a coarse, carnal arrogance.

§ XXIX. — Lutheran doctrme of the Sacraments in general. Consequences of this
doctrine.
At the comraenceraent of fhe Reformation, Luther and Melancthon
evinced on this matter the most decided opposition to the Catholic
Church ; and the internal ground of this opposition lay entirely in their
one-sided conception of the justification of man before God. Hereby
especially the communication of really sanctifying graces, by means of
the sacraments, was thrown into the back-ground, nay, even totally
called in question ; just as if the Reformers dreaded being sanctified.
The highest point to which they could rise, was the one-sided view of
the sacraraents, considered as pledges of the truth of the Divine pro
mises for the forgiveness of sins. The sacraments, accordingly, were
to have no other destination, than to make the faithful receiver assured
that his debt of sins was remitted, and to console and to quiet hira.
The sacraments being now no longer considered as channels of grace,
which convey an internal sanctifying power, and prqfer it to man, their
effects were necessarily confined to the subjective acts of the individual
at the moment of reception ; and it was asserted, that the participation

* Let the reader compare Sess. vi. c. vi. of the Council of Trent with what will
be said below respecting penance. Many divines, moreover, along with Bellarmine
in the passage just cited, bring, in connection with the doctrine of the optis operatum,
the fact, that the efiicacy of the sacraments is not determined by the virtue and piety
of those who dispense them.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 283
of them was only in so far attended with fruit, as faith in the forgive-'
ness of sins existed.
Hereby, therefore, in the fiirst place, the opus operatum— the objective
character of these raeans of grace — was of necessity rejected ; and
everything drawn down into the sphere of the subjective. A second
point of opposition was forraed by the Lutheran notion of a sacrament,
as above described ; inasmuch as Catholics, with whom forgiveness of
sins and sanctification are one and the same divine act, understand
both, by the justification produced or augmented by the medium of the
sacraraents. As it is by the right use of the sacraments that man is sanctified, so
it is by the same means that his sins are forgiven him, or, when these
are already forgiven, that sanctifying grace is increased. On the other
hand, the Reformers, whose system everywhere lays too exclusive a
stress on the pardon of sins, teach that even the sacraments serve only
as instruraents for confirming faith in this remission of sins. In the
first edition of his " Loci Theologici,"* Melancthon betrays not even a
perception of any deeper or more comprehensive notion of the sacra
ments, than the one here stated ; and Luther, in his work on fhe
Babylonish captivity of the Church, unfolds no other view-t
In regard to the distinction between the symbols of the Old Testa
raent and the Sacraments of the New, Catholic theologians were wont
to teach, that the former imparted no justifying grace, that placed us
in a real, vital communion with God, but that the latter did so. This

* P. 46 : " Apparet quam nihil sacraraenta sint, nisi fidei exercendae /^mfxoa-uv^."
P. 141 , et seq. : " Nostra imbecilUtas signis erigitur, ne de misericordia. Dei inter tot
insultus peccati desperet. Non aliter atque pro signo favoris divini haberes, si ipse
tecum coram coUoqueretur, si peculiare aliquod pignus misericordiae, qualecunque mi-
raculum tibi exhiberet : decet de his te signis sentire, ut tam certo credas, tui miser-
tura esse Deum, cum beneficium accipis, cura participas mensae Doralni, quam credi-
turus tibi videris, si ipse tecum coUoqueretur Deus, aut aliud quidquam ederet mira-
culi, quod ad te peculiariter pertineret. Fidei excitandae gratia, signa sunt proposita.
Probabilis et illi voluntatis sunt, qui symbolis seu tesseris raiUtaribus haec signa com-
paraverunt, quod essent notae tantum, quibus cognosceretur, ad quos pertiuerent pro
missiones divinsE."
t Op. Jen. tom. iii. foi. 266, b. " Omnia sacraraenta ad fidem alendam sunt in-
stituta." 289, b : " Error enim est sacraraenta novas legis differre a sacramentis ve
teris legis penes eflScaciam significationis." 287 : " Ita nee verum esse potest,
sacramentis inesse vim efBcacem justificationis, seu esse signa efficacia gratiae. Hsec
enira crania dictmtur in jacturam fidei, ex ignorantia, promissionis divinse. Nisi hoc
modo efficacia dixeris, quod si adsit fides indubitata, certissime et efEcacissime grati.
am conferunt."

234 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
distinction the Protestants evidently could not approve, since they held
justification and sanctification as separate things, and asserted that the
forraer was determined only by faith. What prevented them, how
ever, from maintaining that our means of salvation were the channels
of truly sanctifying graces, as cannot be asserted of the Jewish sjm-
bols ? But Melancthon writes : — Circuracision is nothing ; so is bap
tism nothing ; the comraunion of the Lord's Supper is nothing ; they
are rather testimonies and er/p^ccythi(sea]s) of the Divine will toward
thee ; through them is thy conscience assured, if it ever doubted of the
graciousness and the good-will of God in thy regard." Here baptism
and the holy coraraunion are ranked indiscriminately with circuracision ;
and, like it, are represented as mere signs of covenant. Melancthon,
however, expresses himself stiU raore distinctly on this point : he likens
the sacraments of the New Law to the signs, which were given to
Gideon, to assure hira of the victory he would gain. Herein, however,
we raust beware not to alter the point of comparison, which Melanc
thon wishes to institute. He does not mean to say, that in the same
manner as the pledge, given to Gideon, afforded him the certainty that
he would overcome the adversaries of God's people, so the sacraraents
are to us a sign of victory that we shall conquer our eneray, naraely,
evil. No, in the opinion of Melancthon, the resemblance consists only
in the abstract assurance. In the one case, the assurance refers to the
fact, that Israel would come victorious out of the impending contest ;
in the other, it implies only that we should derive consolation, even
were we to succumb in the struggle. So mean a conception of the
sacraments necessarily led to the view, that they operate only through
faith in the Divine proraise of the forgiveness of sins.
It was only in course of the disputes with the fanatics, as Luther
called thera, or with the Sacraraentarians, that the Reforraers of Wit-
temberg approximated again to the doctrine of the Church. Already
the Confession of Augsburg expresses itself, though indefinitely enough,
yet still in a manner to enable CathoUcs to declare themselves tolera
bly satisfied with it.
The " Apology " is stUl more explicit, for, in a few brief words, it
says, that a sacraraent is a cereraony, or a work instituted by God,
wherein that is represented to us, which the grace annexed to the cere
mony proffers.'*

* Confess. August. Art. xiii. " De us<l sacramentormn docent, quod sacraraenta
instituta sint, non modo ut sint notiE professionis inter homines, sed magis ut sint signa
et testimonia voluntatis Dei erga nos, ad excitandam et confirmandam fidem in his,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTaNTS. 289
But, by degrees, the Lutherans again adopted the entire notion of
the opus operatum, although they continue, even down to the present
day, to protest against it-^a protest which can be accounted for only
by their apparent ignorance of the origin of the Lutheran opposition to
the same, and by the arbitrary signification they have attached to the
Catholic doctrine.'^ Thus, in course of time, no important difference
inherent in the 'nature of things could be pointed out ; but, as a dis
pute had once existed between Catholics and Protestants, and tho later
Protestants would not acknowledge the mistakes of the elder ones, they
saw themselves forced to invent differences. Even Chemnitius gave
Luther's original doctrine in a very disfigured form, and would not
avoW that he indulged in any such one-sided view of the sacraments,
and even took the trouble to misrepresent the schoolmen, particularly
Gabriel Biel, in order to conceal from the eye of uninformed readers
Luther's own variations. f
Meanwhile the original view of Luther on the sacraments (though,
as the correction, which shortly after was made in it, showed it had
arisen out of a heedless spirit of opposition, and from want of serious
reflection,) produced very important consequences. As the aforesaid
means of salvation, according to this theory, were, by their symbolical
character, destined only to confirm and consolidate faith in the forgive
ness of sins j so the number of the old ecclesiastical sacraments must
of necessity be diminished. Every one at the first glance must per
ceive, that matrimony could no longer be numbered among these, for
it was assuredly not instituted to serve as a pledge for the forgiveness
of sins. E ven the signification of holy orders could no more be appreci
ated, since this sacrament was as little destined to nourish and foster
tho faith of the person ordained, that his sins were remitted. j In

qui utuntur, proposita. Itaque utendura est sacramentis, ita ut fides accedat, quae
credat proraissiouibua, quae per sacraraenta eihibcntur et ostenduntur." Apolog. p.
178 : " Sacraraenta vocamus ritus, qui habent mandatum Dei, et quibus addita est
promissio gratiae." P. 206 : " Sacramentum est ceremonia vel opus, in quo Deus
nobis exhibet hoo, quod offert annexa ceremoniae gratia."
* Marheineke admits this at least, and says the difference between the two con
fessions consists simply iu this, that Catholics teach, " sacramenta continere gra
tiam." Protestants, on the other hand, Inculcate " sacramenta conferre gratiam."
Catholics make use of both expressions, as raay be seen from what has been already
stated. But how far the continere is unsuited to the Protestant theory, the in, sub
et cum pane clearly point out.
t Chemnit. Exam. ^ 11, p. 39. His misrepresentations are well pointed out by
Bellarmine in his work " De Sacramentis," 1. ii. p. 110.
X Melancth. loc. theolog. p. 157. "Matrunonium non esse iilstitutum ad signifi-

286 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
¦short, the number of seven sacraments (in direct contradiction to Scrip
ture, and the well-founded tradition of the Catholic, as well as of the
orthodox Greek Church, nay, even of the Nestorians and Monophy-
sites, who, fourteen hundred years ago, separated from the comraunion
of these Churches,) was reduced to two ; and merely the sacraments of
baptism and the Lord's supper retained ; although the two so retained
could not even be understood. Confirmation was only to be a renewal
of baptism ; and the Lord's supper, which was considered merely as a
pledoe of the forgiveness of sins, was to supply the place of extreme
unction ; for, in danger of death, man needed most the assurance of
the pardoning mercy of Godt Of penance we shall have fo spenk
more in detail.*
On the other hand, it is evident that the Catholic, who does not con
ceive the believer under the one-sided view of a man that, for Christ's
sake, has obtained merely the remission of his sins ; but, under the
living believer, understands a raan redeeraed from sin, and consecrated
to God in mind and sense, needs a circle of sacraments, embracing aU
the important events of life, and reflecting the ever-recurring view of
his earthly pilgrimage, — a circle of sacraments which symbolically ex
press the high relation of each passage of his life to the atonement of
Christ, and guarantee and really irapart the divine energy, which is
requisite to its beginning and its'consummation.
The entangleraent of man with the lower world, which since Adam's
disobedience, hath been subjected to a curse, is revealed in the raost
diverse ways. Even so diverse are the ways whereby we are raised up
to a world of a higher order, in and by the fellowship with Christ. f If,

candam gratiara " (gratia is here only the divine forgiveness of sins) " non est quod
dubitemus. Quid autem in raentem venit iis, qui inter signa gratite ordincm nume-
rarunt ? Cum non aliud sit ordo, quam deligi ex ecclesia eos, qui decent," etc.
'*' Melancth. 1. c. p. 156. " Signum gratis certum est participatio mensae, hoc
est, manducare corpus Christi et bibere sanguinem. Sic enim ait ... . quoties fece-
ritis, facite in memoriam mei. Id est : cura facitis, admoneamini Evangelii, seu
reraissionis peccatorura. . . Est autera significatio hujus sacramenti, confirmare
nos toties, quoties labescunt conscientios, quoties de voluntate Dei erga nos dubita-
mus." ^That is to say, as often as we doubt, whether God bc earnest in forgiving us
our sins.) " Id cum ahas sape, tum maxime, cum moriendum est, accidit. Unc-
tlonem arbitror esse eam, de qua Marci vi," . . . (the fourteenth verse of the fifth
chapter of James did not then occur to his mind !) " Sed ea signa esse tradita, ut
certo significent gratiam, non video." (As if it were not expressly stated in James :
t Thom. Aquinas (Sumra. p. iii. q. Ixv. art. i. p, 296) objects : " Videtur, quod non
debeant esse septem sacramenta. Sacramenta enim efficaeiam habent ex virtute

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PKOTEST-A.NTS. 287
by earthly generation and birth, we have been brought into a general
connexion with this distracted world ; so, in our raaturer years, this
connexion ever meets us in more special relations, and in more definite
forms : and what, by our birth, was deposited as a germ, is now ex
panded, and thereby reaUzed and strengthened. But man feels him
self ever more and more strongly straitened by the laws of this world,
divina ex et virtute passionis Christi. Sed una est virtus divina et una Christi passio :
una enim oblatione consuraraavit in sempiternum sanctificatos." Araong other
things, he replies : " Dicendum quod sacramenta ecclesiae ordinantur ad duo, scilicet
ad perficiendum hominera in his, quae pertinent ad cultum Dei secundum religionem
Christianae vitas, et etiam in remedium contra defectura peccati. Utroque autem
modo convenienter ponuntur septera sacramenta. Vita enim spiritualis conformita-
tem aliquara habet ad vitam corporalem, sicut et csetera corporaha conformitatem
quandara spirituaHura habent. In vita autem corporali duphciter ahquis perficitur.
tfno modo quantum ad personam propriam, alio modo per respectum ad totam com-
munitatera societatis, in qua vivit : quia homo naturaliter est animal sooiale. Re
spectu autera sui ipsius perficitur horao in vita corporali dupliciter. Uno modo per
se, aequirendo sciheet aliquam vitae perfectionem: alio modo per accidens, scilicet
removendo impedimenta vitse, puta aegritudines vel aliquid hujusmodi. Per se autem
perficitur corporalis vita tripliciter. Primo quidem per generationera, per quara homo
uicipit esse et vivere. Et loco hujus in spirituali vita est baptismus, qui est spuritualis
regeneratio : secundum lUud ad Titum iii. Secundo, per augmentura, quo aliquis
perducitur ad perfeetam quantitatcm et virtutem. Et loco hujus in spirituah vita
est confirraatio, in qua datur sanctitas et robur. Unde dicitur discipulis, jara bapti
zatis, Luc. ult. . ' Sedete in civitate, quoad usque induamini virtute ex alto.' Tertio
per nutritionera, qua conservator in homine vita et virtus. Et loco hujus in spirituali
vita est Eucharistia, unde dicitur, Joann. vi., ' Nisi raanducaveritis camera filii ho.
minis ot biberitis ejus sanguinem, non habebitis vitam in vobis.' Et hoc quidem
sufEceret homini, si haberet et corporaUter et spirituaUter impassibilem vitam. Sed
quia homo incurrit interdum et corporalem infirmitatem et spiritualem, scilicet pecca
tum, ideo necessaria est homini curatio ab infirraitate. Quae quidem est duplex, una
quidera est sanatio, quae sanitatera restituit. Et loco hujus in spirituali vita est poeni
tentia, secundum illud Psalmi : ' sana animam raeara, quia peccavi tibi.' Alia autem
est restitutio valetudinis pristinae per convenientem difetem et exercitium. Et loco
hujus in spirituah vita est extrema unctio, quffi removet {leccatorura reliquias, et
hominem paratum reddit ad finalem gloriam, unde dicitur, Jac. v  Perficitur
.autem homo in ordine ad totam comraunitatem dupliciter. Uno modo per hoc, quod
accipit potestatem regendi raultitudincm seu exercendi actus publicos. Et loco hujus
in spirituali vita est sacramentum ordinis, secundum illud, Hebr. vii., ' quod saeer.
dotes hostias offerunt non tantum pro se, sed etiam pro populo.' Secundo, quantum
ad naturalem propagationem : quod fit per matrimonium tam in corporali quam in
spirituali vita, ex eo quod non solum est sacramentum, sed naturae officium. Ex his
etiam patet sacramentorum numerus, secundum quod ordinantur contra defectum
peccati. Nam baptismus ordinatur contra carentiam vitae spiritualis : confirmatio
contra infirmitatem animi, qum in nuper natis invenitur : Eucharistia contra labilita-
tem animi ad peccandum : poenitentia contra actuate peccatum, post baptismum
commiBsum," etc.

888 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
^—they encorapass him with ever-growing force ; and of his own free
choice, as well as under a sort of mysterious necessity, he contracts,
with a being of his own kind, the closest alliance in the bonds of
earthly and sexual love, in order to provide for the perpetuity of his
species, and thereby for the «'hole economy of this lower world. Here
by he becomes at once an active and efficient member of the state,
which is itself a larger, but ever limited circle of families, who, usually
having all sprung from one and the same progenitor, have, through
their opposition to other associations of families, been drawn into pecu
Uar destinies, and thereby received the impress of a special character ;
while, in a common order, and for rautual protection against such an
opposition, they maintain themselves with all the individual interests
deterrained by such a state of things. If, when once man hath come
into the world, all the relations we have adverted to take place only
at particular periods of his life, there are others again which pervade
every stage of his existence. Self-preservation forms the centre point
of all earthly exertion, which is concentrated in the care for one's live
lihood. Much as thou mayest strive, 0 raan ! by a new recruiting of
thy bodily strength, to renovate thy earthly e.xistence, the seed of death
Was laid in the first moraent of thy life, — it announces its being amid
the fairest bloom of personal charms, — it waxes more and more in
strength, and, at last, overraasters life itself. Thus, in various alter
nations of earthly action and suffering, of joy and of Sorrow, doth the
end of life unavoidably grow out of the beginning; it i.s betokened by
sicknesses of various kiuds, until the creature, that had sprung out of
dust and ashes, again resolves into the same.
To this inferior order of things, the Church, in virtue of the commis-
sion given to her by Christ, opposes a higher order, not to annihilate
the former, but to bestow on it the blessings of redemption, to explain
its significancy, and to purify, by heavenly influences, all the stages of
earthly and sinful e.xistence ; to raise huiuaiiity again up to God, as
through Adam it had fallen, and to exalt time into eternity. Symboli
cal signs bring the higher world raore immediately within the percep
tion of sense, and withal convey from that world the capacity for its
influence. To the earthly birth, stained with sin, the spiritual second
birth for heaven is annexed. At the moment when the growing perils
of the world threaten to encompass the individual, and lay fast hold
upon him, cometh the confirmation of his spirit, by the Spirit from
above, to enable hira to encounter the arduous impending struggle.
The earthly sexual intercourse, calculated as it is to draw down man to
destruction, into the lowest depths of terrestrial existence, is transform
ed into a heavenly alliance ; and sensuality, which is opposed to all

??ETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 289
giermanent connexion, is subdued in Christ the Lord, and made instru
mental to the indissoluble union of spirits. If by marriage man con
tracts a more intimate alliance with the earthly and limited existence
of fhe state ; so marriage is sanctified by a symbolical action, which,
while it consecrates it to be the central organ fbr the union of all be
lievers, makes them consider theraselves merabers of an all-erabracing
divine kingdom on earth, which, totally distinct from circumscribed
terrestrial kingdoms, is destined to permeate all these, and to vivify
them with its spirit ; in the same way as the individual's ecclesiastical
llife should pervade his civil existence. If matrimony be the vital con
dition, not only of states, but of all earthly existence, and of its regular
j)rQgress, so Holy Orders are the condition to aU ecclesiastical life, and
all the other sacraments. In opposition to the earthly nurture, and the
^perishable food, the celestial Bread is offered us for our lasting spiritual
sustenance through life ; so that the Table of the Lord forms the centre-
f oint of divine service and religious existence, as the table of the father
of the family constitutes the centre nf domestic service and civil life.
-If in the violent obstructions of bodily organism the foe of earthly life
manifests himself, so Extreme Unction iiuparts strength and consola
tion, — warning us, that, in every case, the real man is redeemed by a
higher .power ; and this, especially in the approaching dissolution o£
the bond between body and soul, never fails of its effect. The holy
action devoted to the cure of the penitent sinner, who, after being in
corporated into the Church, hath grievously fallen, cannot be conceived
¦as a normal principle in the history of the spiritual life^ for, otherwise^
the fall after regeneration would come to be regarded as unavoidable
•and necessary, — that is to say, as no sin. But yet it hath been ordain
ed by God^s mercy as an extraordinary dispensation of grace ; and su
the septenary number of sacraraents is now filled up.
Protestantism despaired of the possibility of the earthly being quite
pervaded by the heavenly element, and of the former being viewed
through the medium of the latter ; and hence it was forced, not only to
reject the doctrine of seven sacraments as the effect of human pre
sumption, struggling against an unavoidable necessity ; but, in the two
sacraments it retained, it saw only the principle of the forgiveness of
sins, rendered necessary in consequence of the indomitable carnal spirit
¦of man. 19

290 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
s jjx  Further consequences of the original Lutheran view of the essence of a'
sacrament.
That infant baptism, aecording to the Protestant view of the sacra
ments is an act utterly incomprehensible, cannot be doubted : for if il
be through faith only that the sacrament takes effect, of what value can
it be to the unconscious child ? The Anabaptists, against whora Lu-
ther was so incensed, drew but the natural inferences from the proraises
which he haid laid down, and could not be refuted by him without his
proving unfaithful to his own principle.
In the same way, it was not difficult to come to the conclusion, that,
with such views, there was not the slightest reason for adopting a real
presence of Christ in the Eucharist. For if the Lord's Supper, as Luther
said, be only a pledge of the forgiveness of sins, no reason can be
assit^ned why Christ should be present. The bare bread, and the bare
wine, would achieve all v/hich was expected of the sacrament. As little
as God need be personally present in the rainbow, to make that natural-
phenomenon— selected as a tolsen of proraise to the infant world, that
the inhabitants- of the earth should never more be destroyed by a;
deluge-— attain its pacifying end ; so little is the real presence of the
Saviour necessary in the sacrament of the altar, if it be to serve only
as a pledge of the remission of sins. This Andrew Carlstadt perceived;
and, from the very principle laid down by Luther, as to the mode of
¦yiewins a sacrament, he drew conclusions against the real presence of
Christ in the Lord's Snpper ; and, in our opinion, Plank should not
have doubted whether Carlstadt had not really been conducted in this
way to the denial of the Real Presence, as in one of his writings he
himself stated it."' We recognize the internal consistency and neces
sity of Carlstadt's view, so soon as he had fallen into Luther's one-sided
conception of the sacraments. Here, it appears to us, we have found
the clue for explaining the fact, that, shortly after the breaking out of
the dispute adverted to, Luther wrote, in the following manner, to
Bucer and Capito, who had requested of him an elucidation of the dif
ficulties whicb Carlstadt had raised against the real presence of Christ
in the sacrament of the altar. He says, that five years previously he
had come to tlie same opinion as Carlstadt had arrived at, and would
willingly have enforced it, "in order to be able to give a blow to the Pa--
» Plank, History of the rise, &c. of the Protestant system of doctrine, 2d book,
p. 215.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 291
pacy," had he not been deterred by the clear words of Scripture.*
His whole theory of the sacraments led him to the adoption of Carl
stadt's view ; and what with repugnance he saw himself forced to
revere as Scriptural, possessed in his system no internal consistency.
With the same urgency should Luther's opinion, that fhe foundations
of the Church had been shaken, since it had fallen into essential errors,
have led him to dispute the true presence of the Lord in the sacraraent.
For it was, doubtless, inconsistent to admit, on the one hand, a real,
and therefore efiicacious, presence of Christ in the Church ; and on the
other hand, fo assert, that she had fallen away from Him, or rather.
He had withdrawn from her, and, in matters of such vast moment, had
suffered her tp walk her own way.
If we be justified, perhaps, in assuming, that Luther's, and, more
especially, Melancthon's, general exposition of the sacraments, had
prepared the way for the original Helvetic view of the Lord's Supper
(for the conclusions, which Luther himself was so disposed to draw,
pressed not less urgently on the minds of others ;) so, on a nearer con
sideration, we raay discover, in this exposition, the source whence
eraanated the rejection of all the sacraments, or, at least, that indiffer
ence for them, to which, in the first period of the Reformation, we
discern so strong a propensity, as, for instance, in Carlstadt and
Schwenkfeld. Luther, and especially Melancthon, had more than once
asserted, that he, who held fast in faith to the Divine promise, did not
even need the sacraments. ¦(¦ Hence, against th« doctrine, that sacra
ments are the pledges of the forgiveness of sins, Carlstadt observes :
" he who hath the right remembrance of Christ, is sure of his redemp
tion, and hath peace in God through Christ,^not through the sacrament.

•* E Miinch, in Bilibald Firkheimer's Schweizer-Krieg, p. 54, communicates a
letter of this scholar to Melancthon, wherein the same view appears to bc stated.
It is said : " So (Ecolampadius, Zwingle, and others, are highly opposed to Luther'
and if Luther had not investigated the matter so deeply, and had not engaged in so
strenuous an opposition against Dr. Carlstadt, he would have been the leader in this
cursed error." Pirkheimer means to say, that it was only out of opposition to Carl.
stadt, that Luther had been brought back to the doctrine of a real presence of Christ
in the Lord's supper.
t Melancthon loc. theol. p. 142. " Sine signo restitui Ezechias potuit, si nuda;
promissioni credere voluisset : vel sine signo Gideon viettuus erat, si credidisset. Ita
sine signo justifieari potes, raodo credas." Luther de captivit. Babylon. 1. c foi
280 ; " Neque enira Deus ahter cum hominibus egit aut agit, quam verbo promis
sionis. Rursus nee nos cum Deo unquam aliter agere possumus, quam fide in ver.
bum promissionis ejus. Opera ille nihil curat, nee eis indiget, quibus porius erga
homines et cum hominibus et nobis ipsis agimus." Foi. 286, b : " Qui eis credit is
implet ea, etiamsi nihil operetur."

292 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
If Christ be our peace and our assurance, then creatures without soul
cannot tranquillize us and make us secure."* It was only when Luther
heard his own thoughts uttered from the lips of others, that he found
them dangerous and untrue. Hence, in his larger catechism, he suffers
not a word to escape him, whereby the sacraraents could be represented
as anywise superfluous ; na^-, with all earnestness, and fhe greatest
urgency, he exalts their power and efficacy. f
§ XXXI. — ZwingUus and Calvin on the sacramenta.
Zwinglius formed the worst and most miserable conception of the
sacraraents, that it is possible to iraagine ; yet, in doing so, as we have
said, he merely followed out the hints given him by Luther and Me
lancthon. He considers the sacraments only as ceremonies whereby a man pro
fesses hiraself a member of the Church, and a follower of Christ. He
accordingly very much approves of the Lutherans throwing aside the
belief that the sacraraents contribute aught towards justification ; but
he laments the raore that they should still regard them as pledges of
the Divine raercy and favour ; since he, whose faith needs such a eon.
firmation, actually possesses none. In this respect, he says, the recep
tion of the sacraraents rather affords the Church an assurance that her
followers believe, than that they themselves becorae thereby more
sure and steadfast in their faith.:];

» Seethe extracts from Carlstadt's writing, in the above cited work of Plank, p.218.
t Catech. maj. p. 510.
X De vera et falsa religione Commentar. Op. tom. xi. fol. 197-9. He thus con
cludes : " Sunt ergo sacraraenta signa vel cercmonisB, pace tamen omnium dicam,
sive neoticorura sive veterura, quibus se homo ecclesite probat aut candidatum aut
raiUtem esse Christi, redduntque ecclesiam totam potius certiorem de tua fide, quam
te. Si enim fides tua non alitor fuerit absoluta, quam ut signo ceremoniali ad con-
fu-mationem egeat, fides non est." De peccato originali declarat. 1. c. fol. 122:
" Signa igitur nihil quam extemas res sunt, quibus nihil in conscientia cffieitur.
Fides autera sola est qua beamur  Symbola igitur sunt externa ista rerum
spiritualium, et ipsa minime sunt spiritualia, ncc quidquam spirituale in nobis per.
ficiunt : sed sunt eorum, qui spirituales sunt, quasi tessertp." lOsewhere he expresses
himself, however, in a somewhat milder strain ; for instance, in Ins Fidei Ecclesias-
tica Expositio, 1. c. p. 551 : " Docemus ergo, sacramenta coh debere, velut res sacras,
ut quae res sacratissimas significent, tam eas, quae gestae sunt, tam eas quae nos agere
et exprimere debemus. Ut baptismus significat et Christum nos sanguine suo
abluisse, et quod nos ilium, ut Paulus docet, induere debemus, hoc est ad ejus formu-
1am vivere ; sic Eucharistia quoque significat cum omnia, qu,-e nobis divini liberah-
tate per Christum donata sunt, tum quod grati debemus ei charitate fratris amplecti.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 293
If, contrary to the clearest teaching of Holy Writ, and the testimony
of all Christian ages, Luther and Melancthon had degraded the sacra
ments into mere tokens of covenant between God and men ; so Zwin
glius advanced a step further, and represented them as signs of covenant
between man and man. Who could now connect any sense with the
words of Christ : " He who believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved ?"
And how powerless and unmeaning must the passage of Paul appear,
wherein he calls baptism " the laver of regeneration, and of the new
ness of the Holy Spirit ?" But the uncertainty of belief, which Zwin-
gUus exhibits at the beginning of his treatise on the sacraments, is
worthy of notice. He begs pardon, if he offends the opinions of others,
and he declares that, with the exception of Eck and Eraser, he is at
peace with every one, and in return claims the indulgence of others
for himself."' He speaks as if the question turned on mere human
opinions — on things of a doubtful nature ; just as if the Christian Church
were such a wretched, mismanaged body, that she did not even know,
and could not know, with certainty, what it was which she daily prac
tised, and practised at the command of Christ, and must through all
centuries continue to practise. When once the firm ground, and sure
and eternal footing, is abandoned, then all must indeed vacillate, and
all doctrines be abandoned to mere conjecture.
It was quite in the opposite sense that Calvin taught. His doctrine,
with the exception of one point, differs not at all from that of the
Lutheran formularies. Calvin carefully points out all the parts of what
is understood by a sacrament, and recommends, with much urgency,
its use.f The point in which he deviates from the Catholic and the

qu§L Christus nos suscepit, curavit, ac beatos reddidit." Here, accordingly, the sa
crament signifies soraething for the receiver, not for the Church only. But this
writing of Zwuiglius was his swan-like song, as Bullinger in the preface to it asserts,
p. 550 : " Nescio quid cygneum vicina morte cantavit." A very high strain of song
truly ! Yet in his work, Devera et falsa religione, p. 108, he had already expressed
himself in a similar way.
* De vera et falsi relig. Jib. i. p. 197.
t Calvin. Institut. lib. iv. § 3, fol. 471. " Ut exigua est et imbecillis nostra fides,
nisi undique fulciatur, ac modis omnibus sustentetvur, statim ooncutitur, fluctuatur
vacillat adeoque labescit. Atque ita quidem hie se captui nostro pro immensa suS,
indulgentia attemperat misericors Dominus, ut quando animales sumus, qui hum;
semper adrepentes ct in carne haerentes nihil spirituale oogitaraus, ac ne concipimus
quidera, dementis etiam istis terrenis nos ad se deducere non gravetur, atque in came
proponere spiritualium honorum speculum," etc. Helvet. 1, cap. xix. p. 65 : "Pree-
dicationi verbi sui adjunxit Deus mox ab initio in ecclesia suS, sacramenta vel signa
sacramentalia. Sunt autem sacramenta symbola mystica, vel ritus sancti aut sacras
actiones, k Deo ipso institutae, constantes verbo suo, signis, et rebus significatis, ijui-

294 E-KPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Lutheran doctrine, consists especially herein, that he wiU have the
sanctifying grace distinct and separate from the sacrament, as the
sensible sign. The former, according to him, is not conjoined with the
material element : and hence to every Christian is this eleraent ten
dered, but not so the divine nourishraent.'* The necessity of this
doctrine, in the system of Calvin, is evident; for as it is only to the
I leet that the Divine grace is imparted, and the rest arc passed over
by God, so grace must by no means be connected with the visible
sign.f Nay, the Divine grace worketh irresistibly : it raight, therefore,
easily happen, that sorae, not among the chosen, should, without the
Divine will, be classed among the elect, if the heavenly nurture and
power united with the sensible sign itself were offered to every one !
Hence in baptism the non-elect are only outwardly washed ; and the
same receive in the Lord's supper but mere bread and wine ; a vicw
which Gottschalk, a predestinarian of the ninth century, likewise enter
tained ; at least such an opinion is imputed to him. Moreover, Calvin
also admits but two sacraments. J
bus in ecclesia summa sua beneficia homini exhibita retinct in memorii, ct subinde
renovat, quibus itera promissiones suas obsignat, et quae ipse nobis interius prastat,
exterius representat, ac veluti oculis contemplanda subjicit, adeoque fidem nostram,
spiritd Dei in cordibus nostris operante, roborat et auget, quibus denique nos ab omni
bus aliis populis et rcligionibus separat, sibiquc soli consecrat et obligat, ct quid a no
bis requirat significat."
* Loc. cit. § 9, fol. 474. " Castemm munere suo tunc ritfe demum perfunguntur
(sacramenta) ubi interior illi magister spiritus accesserit: cujus unius virtute et corda
penotrantur, et affectus perraoventur, et sacramentis in animas nostras aditus patet.
Si desit ille, nihil sacramenta plus praestare mentibus nostris possunt, quam si vel so-
lis splendor coecis oculis affulgeat, vel surdis auribus vox insonet. Itaque sic inter
spiritum sacramentaque partior, ut penes ilium agendi virtus resideat, his ministerium
duntaxat relinquatur ; idque sine spiritfis actione manet frivolum, illo vero intus agen.
te, viraque suara exercente, raultte energiae refcrtum."
+ Loc. cit. ^17, fol. 477. "Spiritus Sanctus (quem non omnibus promiscue sa
cramenta advehunt, sed quem peculiariter suis confert) is est, qui Dei gratiassecum
afFert, qui dat sacramentis in nobis locum, qui efficit, ut fructificent." Here lies the
real point of difference. Now C:>.lvin makes the matter appear, as if the Catholics
separated the power working in the sacraments from their primary fountain, and
looked upon them as working of themselves. " Tantum hie quajritur, propriane et
intrinsica fut loquuntur) virtute operetur Deus, an extemis symbolis suas rcsignat
vices. Nos vero contendiraus, qu^cunque adhibeat organa primariae ejus operationi
nihil decedere." And now, " Interim illud tollitur figmentura, quo justificationis
causa virtusque Spiritus Sancti dementis, ceu vasculis ac plaustris, includitur."
X Loc cit. § 19, fol. 478. " Sacramenta duo instituta, quibus nunc Christiana ec
clesia utitur, baptismus et cojna Domini." Quite in the same sense are the first Hel-
vetic Confession, c. xix; the Augsburg, art. xxv. ; the Gallic, art. xxxv. p. 123; the
Belgic, art. xx2iv.-v. p. 192.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 295
^ xxxu. — Baptism and Penance.
After having pointed out the divergences of opinion as to the nature
¦of a sacrament in genei-al, we must now proceed with details, and begin
with baptism."' It is principally in describing the effects of this means
of salvation, that the Christian Communities differ from one another ;
and, indeed, the different notion which each entertains of justification,
determines, as we may suppose, this diversity of opinion. If, according
to Catholic doctrine, original sin in children, in adults original sin
together with actual sina, is by the due reception of baptism removed,
according to that process of regeneration above described ; — so that
the believer, having become a member of Christ, walketh no more
according to the flesh, but interiorly quickened by the Divine Spirit,
showeth himself a new man : so among the Protestants, their well
known theory of the mere forgiveness of sins is here again predominant-
Through the faith received before baptism, is the adult justified ; but
through baptism, in which all that Christ hath done for us is appUed,
and the Holy Ghost with all his gifts is imparted, this faith is sealed.
This certainly is a far more elevated theory of baptism 4 one, unques
tionably, more consonant to Holy Writ, than that adopted by Luther, at
the commencement of the Reforraation. However, according to the
Lutherans, original sin still reraains in the baptized — an opinion, which
cannot in this place be matter of any further investigation. The Cal
vinistic formularies point out very beautifuUy fhe new life, commencing
with baptism, and they do so still better than the Lutheran.f

* In its sixth session, the Council of Trent supposes the case of an adult, who by
¦baptism is received into the Christian Church ; and, in fact, in this waj the holy act
-can best be liinderstood.
t Catechism, maj. part iv. ^ 9, p. 12. " Sda fides personam dignam facit, ut
hanc salutarem et divinam aquam utiliter'suscipiat." ^ 14, j». 54 : "Quapropter qui-
vis Christianus per omnem vitam suara abunde satis habet, ut baptismum recte per-
disoat atque exerceat. Sat enim habet negotii, ut credat iirmiter, quaecunque bap-
tismo promittunttir et ofFeruntur, victoriam nempe mortis ac dioboli, remissionem
|)eccatorum, gratiam Dei, Christum cum omnibus suis operibus [his sufferings and
death and the like] et Spiritum Sanctum cum omnibus suis dotibus." (This is not
true, see 1 Cor. zii.) The Smalcald Article, part iii. c. 5, ^ 1, in order to be able to
say something against Catholics, confounds scholastic opinions with the doctrine of
the Church. Helvetica 1, cap. xx. p. 71 : " Nascimur enim omnes in peccatorum
sordibus, etsumas filii irae. Deus autem, qui dives est misericordia, purgat nos a
peccatis gratuity, per sanguinem filii sui, et in hoc adoptat nos in filios, adeoque foj-
dere sancto nos sibi connectit, et variis donis ditat, ut possimus novam vivere vitam.
Obsignantur haec omnia baptismo. Nam intus regeneramur, purificamur, et renova-
juiur a Deo per Spiritum Sanctum," etc.

29& EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
The Catholic Church, moreover, from the second century, hath fn-
vested' t original sirapTe act of baptism with a rich abundance of sym
bolical ceremonies, in order to stamp more deeply on the minds of her
children the idea of this sacrament, and to symboUze, by various
emblems^ the exalted nature of the newness of life in Christ. Al
though, doubtless, the symbolization of this sacrament, unessential in
itself, belongs not to this place, but only the doctrine itself j yet we
may be permitted to draw, in a few words, the attention of the reader
to this ceremonial, and thereby render him more farailiar with the
Catholic view of baptism, whereby it will become more evident w hat a
decided influence this view hath on tho conception of the other sacra
ments. As the Lord once, by a raixture of spittle and dust, cured the
corporeal deafness of a man, so the same mixture, applied in baptism,
denoteth the fact, that the spiritual organs are henceforth opened for
the mysteries of God's kingdom. The burning candle signifieth that
now truly the divine light from above hath fallen upon the mind, and
the darkness of sin been changed into a celestial .•splendour. The
salt denoteth the v/ise man, freed from the folly of this world : the
anointing with oU, the new priest ;. for every Christian is, in the spiritual
sense of the word, a priest who hath penetrated into the inmost sanc
tuary, and hath renewed the most living communion with God in Christ
.Tesus; and the white garment imports that the believer, washed clean
in the blood of the Lamb, raust henceforth preserve, unto the second'
coraing of the Lord, the innocence which he had lost in the first Adam,.
and won again in the second. Syrabol is crowded upon symbol, in
order to express, in the most manifest way, the one idea ; that a total,
permanent change is to occur in man, and a new, higher, and lasting
existence is henceforward to commence ;• and hence, among other rea
sons, baptisra is not repeated.
Hereby, on the part of the Church, the confident expectation, — on
the part of the believer, the solemn vow, is declared, never more to fall
into any grievous (mortal) sin ; but rather to wax more and more in
holiness of life. If such a sin be coraraitted, then the darkness, the-
foUy of the world, and the unpriestly life, take again possession of the
soul ; and thereby is communion with God broken off, and the bap
tismal grace forfeited. Hence, if the sinner wish to be converted from
his evU ways, he needs a new reconcUiation with God» and therefore
another sacrament; and such a sacrament is penance conceived to be^
Yet it ought not to be hence inferred, that penance, as a sacrament, is
instituted only for such as return from a course of conduct, and a state
of feeUng, absolutely incompatible with the a.bode of Christ in their?

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 297
souls. It is for all believers an institution of fatherly instruction, ex
hortation, correction, quieting, and solace.
But it is quite otherwise in the Lutheran, and even in the Calvinistic
creed. Since, according to this creed, the power of the Divine Spirit
in regeneration is able to work no extirpation of sin ; since, on the
contrary, original sin as such, the carnal sin as such, though weakened,
is still considered to endure in fhe man " born again of water and the
spirit ;" a totally different view of the relation of the baptized to Christ
is necessarily entertained.. And the sins, — even the more grievous
sins, — of the former, appear not as anything which hath dissolved that
state of grace obtained in baptism, and therefore not as anything
whereby the feUowship with Christ would be again broken off. All
sins, raoreover, being but the particular forras of original sin, not ex
tirpated, but only forgiven in baptism, and in all this God only working
salvation, but raan, on the other hand, not acting independently, bap
tism not only iraparts the assurance, that all our sins committed before
baptism are forgiven, but gives the pledge of the remission of all the
sins to be afterwards committed.* Baptism is a letter of indulgence
sealed by God for one's own life, and therefore, in every transgression,
we need only recall and recuscitate in our rainds the promises recorded
in thaf letter ; and this is what the Reforraers call a regressus ad bap
tismum. Hence, baptism is characterized also as the sacrament of
penance, that is to say, as the moral pledge given by God, that sins
at every moraent of his life are reraitfed to the believer, and that he
is admitted to gi-ace ; or, in other words, penance is no peculiar sacra-
ment.f Hence, Luther could not pardon St. Jerome for having called

* See Luther's Commentary ou the Epistle to the Galatians. " Therefore we say
that man is a true Christian ; not one who hath and feeleth no sin, but one to whora
the sins which he hath and feeleth are not imputed by our Lord God, and on account
of the faith which he has in Christ. And this doctrine ministers to the poor con
science a mighty and steady solace, when it would be like to quake before God's
wrath and judgment. Wherefore is a Christian, when he is what he ought to be,
perfectly and entirely free from all laws, and subject to nn law whatever, whether
internal or external."— p. 68. (Nothing conduces to his condemnation provided ho
only believe.)
t Melancthon, however, occasionally makes an exception, the cause whereof we shall
hereafter have occasion to show. Apolog. art. iv. : " In ecclesiis nostris plurimi sff pe
in anno utuntur sacramentis, ab solutione et ca;na, Domini." Art. v. ; " Absolutio
proprie dici potest sacramentum pcenitentiae, ut etiam scholastici theologi eruditi-
ores (?) loquuntur." Art. vu. : " Vere igitur sunt sacramenta, baptismus, coina Do-
mmi, absolutio, quse est sacramentum poenitentia:." In the third revisal of his Loci,
after 1545, he says : "Cum autem vocabulum sacramenti de ceremoniis inteUigituS

298 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
penance the second plank redeeming from shipwreck ; since, as he,
says, the first, namely, baptism, could never be lost, provided only man,
so often as he was seized with terror for his sins, renewed fhe promises
made in baptisra. He is even of opinion, that this view is borne out
by the principle of the Church, forbidding the repetition of baptism.
Accordingly, while Catholics conceive the effects of baptisra to extend
to our whole lives, in such a way, that, frora the raoment of baptism, to
the close of our earthly career, life ought to flow on pure, stainless,
and ever consecrated to God ; Luther looks on these effects of baptism
as administering consolation to man, even amid all his transgressions.
Thus, had the Reformers considered the real internal renovation and
sanctification of raan to be possible through baptism, and regarded this
renovation as one with justification, they would have seen clearly, that,
by any grievous sin, the grace of baptisra could be lost, and penance
would then have been acknowledged as a second sacraraent. But,
since they look on justification as raerely the forgiveness of sins, and
the sacraraent of baptisra as its seal or letter, the operation of baptisra
according to them, continues uninterrupted.'*
The particular parts of penance are accordingly very differently de
scribed by the two confessions. The Protestants regard contrition and
faith, as the stages through which a particular penitential act takes its
course. Contrition they explain by " terrors of conscience " (conscientim
terrores,) which consist in that dread of the Divine judgraent, that at
tends the consciousness of the non-fulfilment of the Law. This fear

institutis in preedicatione Christi, numcrantur htec sacramenta, baptismus, cffina Do
mini, absolutio." Compare Augusti's Christian Archaology, vol. ix. p. 28.
* Melancthon loc. theol. p. 145. " Usus vero signi (baptismi) hie est, testariquod
per raortera transeas ad vitam, testari quod mortificatio carnis tuae salutaris est."
[The notion of mortificatio, and of the transitus ad vitam, or of the vivifieatio, has
been explained above, and is evident from what follows.] " Terrent peccata, tcrret
mors, terrent alia mundi mala ; confide quia a-^pxyiS-a. accepisti raisericordiae erga te,
futurura ut salveris, quomodocumque oppugneris a portis inferorum. Sic vides, et
significatum baptismi et signi usum durare in Sanctis per omnera vitara." P. 146:
" Idem baptismi usus est in mortifieatione. Monet conscientiam reraissionis pecca
torum, et certam reddit de gratia Dei, adeoque efficit ut ne desperemus in mortifiea
tione. Proinde quantisper durat mortificatio, tantisper signi usus est. Non absol-
vitur autem mortificatio, dum vetus Adara prorsus extinctus fuerit." P. 149 : " Est
enim poenitentia vetustatis nostrcE mortificatio, et renovatio spiritus : sacramentum
ejus, vel signum, non aliud, nisi baptismus est." P. 150 : " Sicut evangelium non
amisimus alicubi lapsi, ita nee evangelii, a^^pxyUtt baptismum, Certum est autem
evangelium non semd tantum, sed iterum ac iterum remittere peccatum. Quare
non minus ad secundum condonationem, quam ad primam, baptismus pertinet." All
these passages are but extracts from Luther's work, De captivate Babylonica. Op.
tom. ii. fol. 287, b.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 299
is next banished by instrumental faith : and the conscience hereby
obtaining the solace and the quiet which the Lutherans so exclusively
look to, the whole penitential act is terminated. Hence, absolution is
nothing more than a declaration that sin is forgiven.'^ Even the Cal-
vinists have not refused their approbation to this decision ; yet they
have received it with the modification which their, in some degree pro-
founder, doctrine of justification demanded."}"
§ XXXIII. — Continuation of the doctrine of Penance.
The Catholics raise the sarae objections to fhe Lutheran view of
penance, as to Luther's doctrine of justification. They accuse it of
poverty, and they charge it with holding down the believer to an ex
treraely low grade of the spiritual life, allowing him scarcely a percep
tion of the fulness of fhe riches of evangelical grace, while it is very
far from expressing the biblical idea of fceravota,. The doctrine of the
Catholic Church is, that the sacramental penance should pass through
three stages ; whereof the first is contrition, with the firm purpose of
change of life ; the second, confession ; the third, satisfaction : and
hereby the sacerdotal absolution also receives a signification, wholly
different from that which is attached to it by the Protestants. As re
gards, in the first place, contrition, it is of an essence far raore exalted
than what the Lutherans terra conseientuE terrores, above which only
the rudest natures are incapable of rising ; for thdse terrors involve no
detestation of sin, as such, and contain no trace of the tenderer erao-
tions : they are but the dread of sensible evU. It is contrary to all
experience, that, within the circle of Christian life, sorrow for raoral
transgressions, and for the falling short of evangelical perfection, can
or ought to be called forth only by the representation of hell-torraents :
and he who would obstinately insist thereon, would merely deduce a

* Confessio Augustana, art. xn. " Constat autem pcenitentia proprie his dua
bus partibus ; altera est contritio, seu terrores ineussi conscientiae, agnito peccato ;
altera est fides, quffi concipitur ex evangelio seu absolutione, et credit propter Chris
tum remitti peccata, et consolatur conscientiam, et ex terroribus liberat."
+ Calvin. Instit. lib. iii c. 34, ij 8. The Lutheran denomination of the two parts
here occurs under the name of mortificatio and vivifieatio. But, as we remarked
above, by the former expression, the putting oflF of the old raan, and by the latter the
putting on of the new man, are to be tmderstood ; so signifying soraething other
than the Lutheran contritio et fides. When Augusti, in his Archaology (vol. ix. p.
25,) says, the termmology of the Calvinists is either borrowed fi'om Melancthon or
made to harmonize with his, the first assertion is decidedly true, but the seeond is
not at all so.

300 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
general rule from the experience of his own individual feelings, and, in
the same measure, furnish a reraarkable exaraple of his own narrow-
mindedness, as well as of his ignorance of the plastic power of Chris
tianity. It would be even contrary to the raost clearly attested facts,
to represent the dread of Divine chastisements as the only path which
first leads men into the bosom of the Christian Church. Christ is the
divine teacher of truth ; and we need only peruse the Clementines, and
the account which Justin hath given of his conversion to Christianity,
at the commencement of his dialogue with the Jew Trypho, as well as
the narrative which Tatian, in his apology for tho Christian religion,
and Hilarius of Poictiers, in his work on the Trinity, have furnished
of their respective conversions,'* to convince ourselves that the transi
tion from heathenism to Christianity was especiaUy brought about by
the following means, to wit, — the recognition of reason, that Christ
had communicated most credible revelations respecting divine things,
and freed the frail heart of man from uncertainty and distracting
doubt. We should not look on the teaching office of Christ as merely
accidental, as Luther did, and thereb}' fell into such a narrow concep
tion of things. He who, from a desire of truth, first embraces the Son
of God manifested in the flesh, stands on much higher ground than
one who has been induced to do so from the fear of hell ; and other
motives at least will concur to produce the sorrow for sin. How, then,
within the pale of Christianity, should this sorrow consist only in that
fear ? But even where it exists, it is very far, according to CathoUc
principles, from completing the notion of repentance. The dread of
the divine judgments is deeraed by CathoUcs (o be only an incitement
to repentance, — a gerra frora which, after it hath been further expand
ed, soraething far nobler must grow out, if a true or perfect contrition
is to be manifested. Out of faith and confidence, which, according to
Catholics, must precede, and not follow, repentance, the hatred to sin,
and the germs of Divine love are to be unfolded ; so that these raust

* Lactantius divin, Instit. lib, i. c, 1, is brief enough to permit our citing a passage
in reference to this subject. After having described the assiduity with which the
ancient philosophers sought for the truth, he says : " Sed neque adepti sunt id, quod
volebant, et operam simul atque industriam perdlderunt: quia Veritas, id est arcanum
summi Dei, qui facit omnia, ingenio ac propriis non potest sensibus comprehendi :
alioquin nihil inter Deum hominemque distaret, si consilia et dispositiones illius ma
jestatis aeternae cogitatio assequeretur humana. Quod quia fieri non potuit, ut homi
ni per scipsura ratio divina innotesceret, non est passus hominem Deus, lumen sapi-
entiae requirentem, diutius oberrare, ae sine uUo laboris efFectu vagari per tenebras
inextricablies, Aperuit oculos ejus aliquando, et notionem veritatis munus suum fe
cit," &c.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 301
concur to make up the penitential feeUng, Contrition (contritio chari
tate formata) is with them a profound detestation of sin, springing out
of the awakened love for God, with the conscious, deliberate determi-
nation never more to sin, but rather to fulfil the Divine law from and in
E love for Him. In every case, they hold no emotion of the soul
worthy the name of repentance, unless with this eraotion be connected
at least a firra deterraination of the wUl to abstain from aU sin, though
even this resolution may not be determined by clearly defined motives
of a higher kind.*
Moreover, it is scarcely necessary to call attention to the frequency
with which the differences between the Christian communions in the
doctrine of justification recur in the matter before us. The Protestants
suppose the terrors of conscience to be the only condition necessary to
render us susceptible of the blessings manifested to us in Christ Jesus.
Instrumental faith delivers from these terrors, and man is justified by
it alone. But, frora faith, the resolution to begin a new life, and the
gerras of love, are expected, indeed, as the fruit, but of themselves con
tribute nought towards making us acceptable to God, and are, therefore,
no sign of the Protestant notion of contrition, in so far as it is the con
dition of faith. With Catholics, on the other hand, sanctification and
forgiveness of sins are one act : accordingly, should the latter ensue,
the spirit of man must be moved by far other motives than mere fear.
The Lutheran doctrine of contrition has exerted a determining influ
ence on that of confession. Everything which is truly interior must,
according to CathoUc doctrine, be outwardly expressed : the love for
Christ in our interior must manifest itself externally in works ofchari-

* Bellarm, de pcenitent. lib. 1, c. xix., tom, iii. p, 948 : " Cum partes poenitentiaB
quaerimus, non quosvis motus, qui quoctmque modo ad poenitentiam pertinent, quae-
rimus, sed eos duntaxat, qui ex ipsa virtute poenitentiae prodeunt. Porro terreri, cum
intentantur minae, non est ullius virtutis actus, sed naturalis afFeetus, quem etiam in
pueris et in ipsis bestiis cemiraus. Ad haec siepe terrores in iis mveniuntur, qui poeni.
tentiam nullam agunt, ac ne inchoant quidem, ut in daemonibus, qui eredunt et con-
treraiscunt. Jac, 11." [There is, however, a distinction between believe and tremble,
and tremble and believe, which Bellarmine has here overlooked.] Saepe e tiam non-
nulli veram posnitentiam agunt, nullo poenae terrore, sed solo Dei et justitiae amore
impulsi, qualem credibile est fuisse beatam illam faeminam, de qua Dominus ait Luc .
vii. : ' dimittuntur ei peccata multa, quoniam dilexit multum.' Quod si terrores sine
poenitentia, et pcenitentia eine terroribus aliquando esse potest, certo non debent ter
rores illi inter partes pffinitentias numerari. Denique fides, ut mox probabimus, non
est pars poenitentiae, sed eam praecedit." Seethe work "Hugo of St. Victor, and
the theological tendencies of his age," by Albert Liebner, Leipzig, 1832, p. 465,
where we may see how much more deeply the schoolmen have treated this subject than
the reformers.

S02 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES «
ty to the brethren, and what we do unto these, we do to him also. It is
the sarae with contrition and the confession of sins before God,— -an
act itself purely internal ; if il be deep, strong, and energetic, it seeks
an outward manifestation, and becomes the sacramental confession be-*
fore the priest ; and what we do to him, we do again unto Christ like-
wise, whose place he represents. Origen rightly compares sin to an
indigestible food, which occasions sickness at fhe stomach, till it has
been thrown ofi" by a motion in the bowels. Even so is the sinner
tormented with internal pain, and then only enjoys quiet and full
health, when, by raeans of confession, he hath, as it were, eased himself
of the noxious internal stuff. Two enemies, who wish for a sincere re
conciliation, and, in their hearts, despise their hatred, will certainly feel
themselves forced to avow to each other their mutual injustice ; and it
is only by means of this confession that their reconciliation becomes
sincere, and peace is restored to their souls. For man is so constituted,
that he doth not believe in his interior feelings, unless he see thera in
an outward raanifestation ; and, in fact, an internal sentiment is then
only ripened to consummation, when it has acquired an outward shape.
Moreover, a true confession to God cannot be indefinite ; for, our sins
are not merely abstract ; we are guilty of specific, definite transgres
sions : and so a true confession of sins to God, is one necessarily enter
ing into minute details ; consequently, a confession to the priest is ne
cessary. But now the internal confession of sins — -the interior pain, which is
required by the Lutherans for penance — is merely a dread of the Di
vine judgraents : it is no detestation of sin ; no hearty, inward hatred
of sin, which can only spring up by degrees after absolution — afler the
assurance of the forgiveness of sins hath been already obtained. Hence,
an outward unbosoming of the conscience is absolutely impossible, be
cause the sinner is really not yet in that spiritual disposition to induce
him to confess. Sin is not internally rejected ; how then should the
rejection of it be outwardly manifested? HuraUity is stUl wanting :
shame still confounds the sense of the sinner ; because sin is too much
his own, and is not yet estranged from his will. On the other hand,
he, who truly and heartily hates sin, confesses it with an involuntary
joyful pain ; with pain, because it is his own ; but with a joyful pain,
because it now ceases to belong to him, and to be his own. Hence,
too, we can understand, why Protestants look on Catholic confessioii
as a carnifi^ina conscientiarum, a racking of the conscience. However
much, accordingly, the first Reformers did homage to the principle of
ecclesiastical, and particularly of auricular, confession, this institution

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 3 OS
Would not long endure."* The faithful were taught to do something,
Vhich, according to the general views of their teachers respecting
penance, they could not do ! they were to Confess, and yet the sin sur
viving in their soul closed their lips ; they were, by confession, to free
their breast from sin,»and yet they .could never properly extricate them
selves' from its entanglements.
Private absolution, however, the Reformers, from a particular motive,
wished, in every case, to retain ; for, as the individual was to refer ter
himself the general forgiveness of sins, they deemed it right to give
them a special absolution.f

* Luther de captiv. Batrjrl. Opp. t. li. fol. 292. " Occulta autem confessio, quffl
Inodo celebratur, etsi probari ex scripture non possit, miro modo tamen placet, et
litilis, imo necessaria est, nee vellem eam non esse, imo gaudeo eam esse in Ecclesia
Christi." Art. Smalcald. P. iii. c. via. p. 303, " Nequaquam in Ecclesia confessio
et absolutio abolenda est : prassertim propter tenaras et pavidas Conscientias, et prop
ter juventutem indomitara et petulantem, ut audiatur, examinetur et instituatur in
doctrina Christiana." And We often find the same doctrine elsewhere laid down.
t The XXI. Canon of the fourth council of Lateran (Hard. Cone. tom. vii p. 35,)
says : " Omnis utriusque sexus fidelis, postquara ad annos discretionis pervenerit,
omnia sua solus peccata comfiteatur fideliter, saltern semel in anno, proprio sacerdoti,
et injunctam sibi poenitentiam studeat pro viribus adimplere, suscipiens reverenter ad
minus in pasche Eucharistia; sacramentum."
This canon is to be ranked merely among disciplinary observances, for the deter
mining of the time when any one should confess doth not belong to the essence of the
sacrament. Even the present very laudable practice, of always going to confession
before communion, doth not rest on any general law of the Church. He, who doth
not feel himself guilty of any grievous transgression, can, without confessing to the
priest, approach of his own accord to the table of the Lord ; and so, doubtless, what
was forraerly the practice might again be renewed, and each one resort to confession^
only when he found his conscience particularly burdened. But every well-thinking
man, acquainted with the human heart and its wants, must deeply lament, if ever
the present practice should be changed ; and it is only the indolent priest, who relucj
tantly discharges his undoubtedly painful office, that could desire such a change.
The intellectual Pascal, who, perhaps, of all theologians and philosophers of modern
times, has, in his Pensees, cast the deepest glance into the raisery of raan, unfolds in
one passage his arrogance and his inchnation to deceive himself, and never to trace a
faithful image of his own interior. He then, with reference to the difFerences be
tween the Christian comraunions, proceeds to say: " En voiei une preuve qui me fait
horreur :
" La religion Catholique n'oblige pas a d^Couvrir ses p^ch^s indiflKrement a tout
le raonde : elle souiFre qu'on dcmeure cach^ a tous les autres homraes, mais elle en
excepte un seul, a qui elle commande a d^couvrir le fond de son coeur, et de se faire
voir tel qu'on est, II n'y a que ce seul horame au monde qu'elle nous ordonne de
d6sabuser, et elle I'oblige a un secret inviolable, qui fait que cette connaissance est
dans Iui, comme si elle n'y ^tait pas, Peut-on s'imaginer rien de plus charitable et
de plus doux ? Et n^anmoins la corruption de I'homme est telle, qu'il trouve encore

304 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
If in confession internal repentance is outwardly manifested, and tho
sinner thereby reveals his hidden spiritual condition to the priest of th6
Church, this Church, in her turn, acts on hira again by the claim of
satisfaction i so that, if contrition forms the essence of penitential feel.
ing, and the confession of sins its form and its completion, its confirma
tion is secured by satisfaction. These three acts of the sinner, — for
satisfaction, as far as regards his will, is already performed, though its

de la dureth dans cette loi ; et c'est une des principales raisons qui a fait rcvolter cen
tre I'Eglise une grande partie de I'Europe.
" Que le coeur de I'horamfe est injuste et dSraisonnable, pour trouver raauvais qu'on
I'oblige de faire, a l'(;gard d'un homme, ce qu'il serait juste en quelque sort, qu'il fit il
regard de tous les homraes ! Car estil juste que nous les trompions 1
" II y a difFiirens d^grfis dans cette aversion pour la vSritiS : mais on pent diro
qu'elle est dans tous en quelque dcgre, parcequ'clle est insup(;rable dc I'amour propre.
C'est cette mauvaise d^licatcsse qui oblige ceu.\ qui sont dans la n6ccssit6 de rcpren.
dre les autres, de choisir tant de d(;tours ct de tcmp^ramens pour ^vitcr de les chequer.
II faut qu'ils d^minuent nos diSfauts, qu'ils fassent semblant de les excuser, qu'ils y
mfelent des louanges et des teraoignages d'afFection et d'estime. Avec tout cela, cette
medicine ne laisse pas d'etre am^rc a I'araour propre. II en prends le moins qu'il
peut, et toujours avec dugout, et souvent memo avec un secret d<5pit centre ceux qui
la Iui pr^scntent.
" II arrive de la que, si on a quelque intdret d'etre aira<5 de nous, on s'^loigne de
nous rendre un office qu'on salt nous 6tre di^sagr^able : on nous traite comme nous
voulons 6tre traits : nous haissons la vdritfe, on nous la cache ; nous voulons 6tre
fiatt^s, on nous fiatte ; nous aimons a 6tre trompr6s, on nous trompe.
" Cost qui fait, que chaque degre de bonne fortune, qui nous ^Ifcve dans le monde,
nous ^loigne davantage dela v^rit^, parccqu'on apprehende plus de blesser ceux dont
I'afFeetion est plus utile et I'aversion plus dangereuse.
" Un prince sera la fable de toute I'Europe, ct Iui seul n'en saura rien. Je ne
ra'^toune pas ; dire la v6rit^ est utile a celui a qui on la dit, mais ddsavantageux ^
ceux qui la disent, parcequ'ils se font hair. Or ceux qui vivent avec lus princes
aiment mieux leur int^rfets que cclui du prince qu'ils servent, et ainsi iis n'ont garde
de Iui procurer un avantage, en se nuisant a eux-m6mcs.
" Ce malheur est sans doute plus grand et plus ordinaire dans les plus grandes for
tunes ; mais les moindres n'en sont pas exemptes, parcequ'il y a toujours quelque in-
t^ret a se faire aimer des homraes, Ainsi, la vie humaine n'est qu'une illusion per-
petuelle ; on ne fait que s'entre-tromper et s'entre-flatter. Persoime ne parle de nous
en notre pr&ence, comme il en parle en notre absence, L'union qui est entre les
hommes n'est fondee que sur cette mutuelle tromperie ; et peu d'amiti^s subsisterai-
ent, si chacun savait ce que son ami dit de Iui, lorsqu'il n'y est pas, quoiqu'il parle
adors sinc^rement et sans passion,
" L'homme n'est done que d^guisement, que mensonge, et hypocrisie, ct en soi-
mferae et a I'egard des autres. II ne veut pas qu'on Iui dise la verity, il fevite de la
dire aux autres ; et toutes ces dispositions, si doignees de la justice et de la raison,
ont une racuie naturelle en nous." — Pensees de Pascal, p. 1, art. v. u, 8, t. i. p. 194,
etc. Paris, 1812.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 305
'¦execution be delayed, — are the conditions to the priestly absolution,
^wherewith the sacramental penance is concluded. We may easily .per-
>ceive, that absolution, according to Catholic principles, can by no means
he a mere declaration that sins are forgiven, because the contrition re
quired does not consist in mere terrors of conscience ; and something,
far other than a raere instrumental faith in the merits of Christ, is de
manded of the penitent. The above-described succession of acts on
the part of tile sinner, united with the sacerdotal function (or, in other
words, the full sacrament) is the organ of God's justifying grace,
whereby man obtains the forgiveness of sins in sanctification, and sanc
tification, in the forgiveness of Bins.
Those theologians who pretend that the differences between the
Christian coramunions, in the article of absolution, consist only herein
^ — that, according to Catholic principles, the priest acts merely from
the fulness of his power, while the Protestant minister declares only the
will of God, and announces the same to the sinner , those theologians,
we say, understand not a single syllable of the doctrinal peculiarities of
the two comraunions. (^ For never did any man entertain the opinion,
that he could of himself forgive sinsj) and the Protestant declaration,
that sins are remitted, bears quite another sense, than scholars of this
sort suppose.
Respecting satisfaction, which, before absolution, we considered con>-
.suramated, at least as regards the will, it is now necessary to enter into
a few details. It is of a two-fold kind ; the one referring to the past,
the other both to the future and the past. For example, if any one
accuses himself of possessing unlawful goods, by theft, usury, robbery,
cheating, or any other way, it is required, that the penitent should make
restitution of the same, if he -wish to obtain the forgiveness of his sins.
But, as, in many cases, those robbed or defrauded cannot obtain pos
session of their lost property, so a corresponding renunciation of the
unlawful goods, in some other appropriate way, is enjoined ; for it is
evidently in the very nature of things, that no one, while retaining the
pm'loined goods, can truly repent of his theft. Hence the forgiveness
of sins, which, according to Catholic doctrine, is identical with the in
ternal extirpation of sin, appears determined by satisfaction ^ for the
wilUng, joyous, restitution of property unrighteously acquired, is, in
itself, satisfaction. According to the different transgressions, satisfac-
tion, as is obvious, must take a different form. This is the first species
of satisfaction, consisting in the performance of what true contrition ab
solutely requires. The cure that follows needs the most careful atten
tion, and the still debilitated moral powers require the application of
strengthening remedies. The priest, who has learned to know the
20

306 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES?
spiritual state of the sinner, ordains, accordingly, the fitting remedies^
—pious exercises, calculated to keep up his self.'vigilance, and to- ira'
part to the will a safe, lively, and vigorous impulse, in the direction it
most needs. The enjoining of such remedies belongs to the active
superintendence of the Church ; and he who knows the nature of man,
his effeminate tenderness towards himself, his- timorous unsteadiness in
the choice of vigorous means conducive to his salvation, wiU easily un
derstand why the Church should have come in aid of his weakness, and
been directed by Christ to support and deternrine, by the declaration of
her own firm and manifest will, the will of her children. The declared
will of the parent, is the stay to the will of the child ;¦ it comes rn to its
aid, doubling it, as it were, tiU it has attained sufiicient strength.""
Considered from one point of view, however, these penitential ex
ercises, imposed by the Church, bear fhe character of real punishments,
and, from the foundation of the Church, were ever regarded in this
light ; and this again drew down upon her the charge of Pelagianisra.
The matter accordingly stands thus : By the transgression of the eter
nal moral law, man contracted an infinite debt, which he was totally
incapable of discharging. Christ took it upon himself: and to all, who
will enter into a true, interior^ living coraraunion with Hira, the
Righteous one, that debt is remitted. But, as in the fulness of His-

* Catechismus eX decreto Concil, Trident, p. 343. "Satisfacere est causas pef.,
eatorum eXcidere, el eorum sujggestioni aditum'non indiilgfere. In quam sententianr
alii assenserunt, satisfactionem' esse purgationcm, qua eluitur quidquid sordium prop.
ter peccati maculam in animSt resedit, atque a jptenis tempore definitis, qu^lbus teneba.
mur, absolvimur. Quse cum ita sint, facile erit fidelibus persuadere, quam neces
sarium sit, ut poenitentcs in hoc satisfactioni? studio se exerceant. Docendicnim
sunt, duo esse quEe peccatum consequuntur, maculam et poenartt: ac quamvis sem
per, culpa dimissa, sinoul etiam mortis retemaj supplicium, apud inferos constitutum,
condonetur, tamen non semper contingit, quaiaadmodum a Tridentina Synodo de.
claratura est, ut Dominus peccatorum reliquias et poenam, certo tempore definitamr
quae peccatis debetuTy remittal," etc. P. 347 ; " Divus etiam Bemardus duo affir-
mat in peccato repertri, maculam aniraee et plagam : ac turpitudinem quidera ipsam
Dei misericordia tolU : verum sanandis peccatorum plagis valde necessarium esse
eam curam, quffi in remedio p(Enitentise adhibetur, quemadmodnm enim, senate vul-
nere, cicatrices quaedam remanent, qute et ipsaecurandse sunt : ita, inaninaa culpa
condonato, supersunt reliquiae peccatorum pnrgandte," etc, P. 352 : " Sedillud im
primis a sacerdotibus ot)servari oportet, ut, audita peccatorum' confessione, emtequam'
pcenitenBera a peecatis absolvant, diligenter curent, ut, si quid ille forte de re aut de
eiistimatione proxirai detraxerit, cujus peccati merito daranandus esse videatur, cu-
mulata satis factiwie compenset : nemo enim absolvendus est, nisi prius, quse cujus.
cunque fuerint, restituere pollieeatur. At quoniam multi svmt, quibus etsi prohxe
poUicentur, se officio satis esse facturos, tamen certura est ac deHberatum' nunquam
promissa exsolvere, omnino ii cogendi sunt, ut restituant," etc.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 307
tnercy the Almighty instituted this ordinance, it was not His will to re
lease all who should return to Him, after personal guilt, from the tem
poral punishments which man is capable of enduring. And justice,
which is not superseded by love, requires the imposition of such penal
ties, the more especially as those who believe in Christ, and by baptism
are become raerabers of His body, have received full strength to observe
the Divine law ; for it is of such only there is question in the article of
penance. The contempt of God's commandments, on the part of these, and,
stiU' more, the grievous violation of thera by a believer, is, even in case
of amendment, deservedly punishable, and must be atoned for. Holy
Writ abounds in examples of men who, after having obtained the re
mission of their sins, still received temporal chastiseraents at the hand
of God ;— -a fact utterly inexplicable, if a raan, being once justified,
could escape entirely without punishraent. The reforraers, indeed, ex
plained these chastiseraents, as having a mere correctional tendency,
yet in such glaring contradiction to raany passages of the Bible, that, so
interpreted, they offer no sense.* From this emasculated opinion the
Reformers might well have turned away, had they but calmly inter
preted the language of the uneducated raan, on meeting with misfor
tunes : " I have deserved them," is his ordinary exclamation. They
Would then have perceived, that undebauched feeling regards sufferings
as soraething far different from mere means of correction ; and huraility
would not have failed to suggest a view more consonant with its own
spirit. Moreover, if there be no temporal punishments for fhe righteous, there
are then no eternal ones for the unrighteous. On the other hand, if there
are eternal punishraents for the latter, so there must be teraporal punish
ments for the former, when after baptism they relapse into sin ; for the
question here is as to the notion and essence of punishraents, and not as
to any of their accidental qualities. If they be in their nature purely
remedial, they cannot, in the one case, be destined solely for cure, and,
in the other, only for chastisement, in the strict sense of the word ; and
vice versa, if they be in their essence solely vindicative, they must every
where retain this character. Both exclusive views, however, are erro
neous. Nay, as in God, goodness and justice are one, so each of those
attributes concurs in determining the object of punishraents ; and it is
only when man has wilfully repelled the pardoning and reconciling good
ness of God, that he feels the arm of His justice alone. It was there-

* See note A in appendix.

808 BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS.
fore an inconsistency, on the part of the Reformers, to leave intact the
Scriptural doctrine of heU-torments, and yet to look on punishraents
solely as the means of amelioration.
The Church, which, in the tribunal of Penance, recognizes a divine
institution, must contemplate all the relations wherein the sinner stands
to God, and foster in hira the feeling that he is deserving of chastise
ment for his transgresssions. She must attentively consider punish
ment in all its bearings, and irapose satisfaction in the strict sense of
the word, so as withal to prevent the relapse of the penitent, to confirm
hira in virtue, and to cherish tho feeling of repentance. The priraitive
Church took precisely this view of penitential exercises ; and it is con
trary to history to assert that the satisfactions it required, were directed
solely to the conciliation of the Church. The old visible Church did
not separate itself frora Christ, as in modern times has been done, out
of the pale of Catholicisra : and raen therefore transferred to priraitive
Christianity their own modern conceptions, arising out of the very op
posite principles, when they endeavoured to enforce this unfounded
theory touching the ancient satisfactions.
The Church, moreover, has repeatedly, in language as unequivocal
as it was affecting, declared, that through the satisfactions she exacted,
the raerits of Christ could be, in no wise, irapaired ; that this species
of satisfaction ought not to be confounded with that achieved by
Christ; and lastly, that the works of satisfaction which she required,
must emanate from the penitential spirit that Christ himself inspires,
and from thence solely derive their value. Those works, on the other
hand, she declared, which are not offered up by a sinner justified and
regenerated, being perverse in themselves, must not be included in the
above denomination."" Nevertheless, down to the present day, the
Church has never been able to convince her adversaries, that, by these
ordinances, the glory of Christ is not obscured, nor human self-righteous
ness promoted. But who does not perceive the necessity of such an
opinion on the part of the Protestants, when he maturely weighs the
Protestant doctrine of justification, which we have above described ? If
satisfaction in the form of restitution were raade a condition to the for-

* Concil. Trid, Sess. xiv. c. viii. " Neque vero ita nostra est satisfactio hsc,
quam pro peecatis nostris exsolvimus, ut non sit per Christum Jesum. Nam qui ex
nobis, tanquam ex nobis, nihil possumus, eo co-operante, qui nos confortat, omnia
possumus. Ita non habet homo unde glorietur, sed omnis gloriatio nostra in Christo
est, in quo vivimus, in quo mereraur, in quo satisfaciraus, facientes fructus dignos
poenitentifB : qui ex illo vira habent, ab illo ofliruntur Patri, et per ilium acceptan-
tur a Patre."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 309
giveness of sins, what was this but to declare works as necessary to
salvation ? If the Protestants exacted satisfactions as spiritual remedies,
they would give countenance to the principle that raan must co-operate
with God, and that the forgiveness of sins depended on sanctification.
If they declared satisfaction, in the proper sense of the word, to form an
integral part of Penance ; then this were tantamount to the opinion,
that the just man could fulfil the law ; for punishment is inflicted on
the sinner baptized, in order precisely to impress him with the conviction
that he was enabled to observe fhe precepts of the law. Whichever
way, accordingly, we look at satisfactions, the fundamental doctrines
of Protestantism forbid their forming part of their penitential system.'"
With the ecclesiastical punishraents we have described as remedies
and satisfactions, the doctrine of Indulgences is connected, the abuse
whereof, real and undeniable, led the Reformers into so many false
steps, and would have been calculated to furnish them with sorae excuse,
were it not expected of great men, for which they wished to pass, and,
especially, of a Divine envoy (and such Luther was incUned to regard
hiraself,) that they should not take occasion, from the abuse of truths,
to reject those truths themselves. From the earliest ages of Christianity,
indulgences were understood to be, the shortening, under certain con
ditions, of the period of penance, imposed by the Church, and, withal,
the remission of the temporal punishment,! The most important con
dition was fulfiUed, when the sinner furnished such proofs of contrition.

* Melancth. loc. theol. p. 65. " Quid enim videtur magis convenire, quam ut sint
in ecclesia. publicorum scelerura satisfactiones ? At ills obscurarunt gratiara."
Calvin. Instit, lib, lv. c. 4, ij 25 : " Tahbus raendaciis oppono gratuitam peccatorum
remissionem : qu^ nihil in scripturis clarius prGedicatur."
t Concil. Aneyran. (an. 314) c. v. ; Hard, Concil. tom. i. p, 273, " nv; tTs i-irurxi-
-JTOU; l^OO<ri±V fi^WV TOV TPOWOV T«? e^IS-TgO^^; ^tUUfAOITcLV^TAC ^thctv^pat'je^^M , « ?rAS10fat
TTgoa-Tl^iv^t x^ovav- TT^o TFatrm S\ natt o TT^odyoiy 0to;, »il o /urra TatyTa l^eTO^s^^ai' Ksti
ouTW »' <t>(A.«v&gairi!t iOT|MfTfsiV&ai," Concil. Nicen. an. 325, c. xii. lib. i. p. 327 : "'«?'
a-rcta-i Ji rouroi; ^r^oo-n'itg/ 'i^ird^uv t«v TT^oaipiT-tv, xai to £/xof tm; jUSTavoiAs. oa-tit ^eu -yap
x*i tpo/S.^ text Saxgva-; kai i/^o^ovh nxt dyx^cspyisLt^Tiiyi-Tna-rgo^iiy ip-y^Kx) oy ,ryii/x:ni l-TFl-
J-eintuvTo.t," etc. Compare Concil, Carth. iv. u. 75.
TRANSLATION,
Concil. Ancyr. (anno 314) c. v. Hard, Concil. tom. i. p. 973. " But bishops have
the power, when they have examined into the character of the conversion, to exer
cise clemency, or to prolong the tirae : above all, let the anterior and the subsequent
course of life be thoroughly sifted, and so let mercy be exercised." Concil, Niceen.
ann» 325, u. xxii. lib. i. p. 327 : " But in all these things it is proper to investigate
the object and the nature of the repentance. But such as, by dread, and tears, and
patience, and good works, manifest their conversion in deed, and not in appear
ance," etc. Compare iv. Council of Carthage, c. 75.

310 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
and of newness and holiness of heart, that he seemed no longer to need
the special ecclesiastical remedies we have described, and appeared
worthy to be released from the temporal punishment."'
At a later period, many theologians gave greater extension to the
doctrine of indulgences ; but their opinions, though very well grounded,
have not been declared articles of faith in any formulary of the Church,
and, therefore, enter not into the plan of this work. The Council of
Trent, with wise precaution, decreed no more, than that the Church
has the right to grant indulgences, and that these, dispensed with wis
dom, are useful, f
Of the relation which the doctrine of purgatory bears to these satis
factions, we shall elsewhere have occasion to speak.
§ XXXIV. — Doctrine of the Catholics on the most holy sacrament of the Altar,
and on the Mass.
The mighty subject, which is now about to engage our attention,
gave birth to the most iraportant controversies between the Christian
communities. All the other distinctive doctrines are here combined,
though in a more eminent degree ; for although, as has been clearly
shown, in every point of difference the whole system of doctrine is mir
rored forth, yet here this is more especially the case. On the view,
too, which we take of this subject, depends the fact, whether the Church
be destined to possess a true and vital worship, or ought to be devoid
of one.
According to the clear declarations of Christ and his apostles, and
the unanimous teaching of the Church, attested by the immediate fol
lowers of our Lord's disciples. Catholics firmly hold thaf in the sacra
ment of the altar Christ is truly present, and indeed in such a way.

• In the ancient Church, the absolution was given only after the satisfaction had
been performed.
t Concil, Trident, Sess. xxv, decret, de indulg. At the same time the abuses in the
dispensation of indulgences are openly and sharply rebuked and forbidden. " In his
tamen concedendis moderationem, juxta veterem et probatam in ecclesia consuetu.
dinem, adhiberi cupit : ne nimi& facilitate ecclesiastica dieciplina enervetur. Abusus
vero, qui in his irrepserunt, et quorum occasione insigne hoc indulgentiarum nomen
ab hEereticis bletsphematur, emendates et correctos cupiens, prsesenti decreto genera-
liter statuit, pravoa questus omnes pro his consequendis, unde p'urima in Christiano
populo abusuum causa fluxit, omnino abolendos esse. Cseteros vero, qui ex super-
etitione, ignorantia, irreverentia, aliunde quoraodocunque provenerunt  mandat
omnibus episcopis, ut diligenter quisque hujusmodi abusus ecclesisE suce colhgat, eos-
que in prima synodo provincial! referat," etc.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 311
that Alraighty God, who was pleased at Cana, in Galilee, to convert
water into wine, changes the inward substance of the consecrated bread
and wine info the body and blood of Christ.'"
We therefore adore the Saviour mysteriously present in the sacra
ment :"|" rejoice in his exceeding condescending compassion ; and
expresses, in canticles of praise and thanksgiving, our pious emotions,
as far as the divinely enraptured soul of man can express them.ij:
Out of this faith sprung the mass, which, in its essential purport, is as
old as the Church, and even in its more important forms can be proved
io have been already in existence in the second and third centuries.
But to unfold more clearly the Catholic doctrine on this point, it is
necessary to anticipate somewhat of our reflections on the Church.

* Concil. Trid. Sess. xni. u. iv. "Quoniam autem Christus, redemptor noster, cor
pus suum id, qued sub specie panis oflferebat, vere esse dixit ; ideo persuasum semper
in ecclesia Dei fait, idque nunc denuo sancta h«ec synodus declarat, per consecra-
tionem panis et vlni, eonversionem fieri totius substantise panis in substantiam corpo
ris Christi Domini nostri, et totius substantiEe vini in substantiam sanguinis ejus.
-Quas conversio convenienter et proprie a sancta. Catholica ecclesi£l transubstantiatio
«Bt appellata."
+ L. c. c. V. "Nullas itaque dubitandi locus relinquitur, quin omnes Christi
£deles, pro more ia cathohc^ ecclesia. semper recepto, latrise cultum, qui vero Deo
debetur, huic sanctissimo sacramento in veneratione exhibeant, N4que enira ideo
minus est adorandum, quod fuerit a Christo Doraino, ut sumatur, institutum. Nam
ilium eundem Deum prsesentem in eo adesse credimus, quera Pater seternus introdu-
cens in orbera terrarum dicit : ' et adorent eum omnes Angeli Dei,' quem magi pro-
«identes adoravemnt, quem denique in Galileea ab apostolis adoratum fuisse, scriptura
testatur." X The well-known Christian hymn saith : —
" Lauda Sion salvatorem,
Lauda ducera et pastorem.
In hymnis et canticis.
Quantum potes, tantum aude.
Quia major omni laude ;
Ncc laudare sufficis.
Laudis thema specialis
Panis vivua et 'vitahs
Hodie proponitur," etc.

fnanoflier we find the following : —
" Pange lingua gloriosi
Corporis mysterium,
Sanguinisque pretiosi,
Quem in mundi pretium,
Fructus ventris generosi
Eex effudit gentium," etc.

312 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
The Church, considered in one point of view, is the living figure of
Christ, manifesting hiraself and working through all ages, whose aton-
ing and redeeraing acts, it, in consequence, eternally repeats, and unin
terruptedly continues. The Redeeraer not merely Uved eighteen hun
dred years ago, so that he hath since disappeared, and we retain but
an historical remembrance ofhim, as of a deceased man : but he is, on
the contrary, eternaUy Uving in his Church ; and in the sacraraent of
the altar he hath manifested this iii'a sensible manner to creatures en
dowed with sense. He is, in the announcement of his word, the abid
ing teacher ; in baptism he perpetually receives the chUdren of men
into his communion ; in the tribunal of penance he pardons the contrite
sinner ; strengthens rising youth -svith the power of his spirit in confir
mation ; breathes into the bridegroom and the bride a higher concep
tion of the nuptial relations ; unites himself most intimately with all
who sigh for eternal life, under the forms of bread and wine ;. consoles
the dying in extreme unction ; and in holy c«'ders institutes the organs
whereby he worketh aU this with never-tiring activity. ( If Christ, con
cealed under an earthly veU, unfolds, to the end of time, his whole
course of actions begun on earth, he, of necessity, eternally offers him
self to the Father as a victim for men ; and the real permanent expo
sition hereof can never fail in the Church, if the historical Christ is to
celebrate in her his entire imperishable existence.'" )
The following may perhaps serve to explain the Catholic view on
this subject, since it is a raatter of so much difficulty to Protestants to
form a clear conception of this dogma.f
Christ, on the cross, has offered the sacrifice for our sins. But the
incarnate Son of God, who hath suffered, died, and risen again from
the dead for our sins, living, according to his own teaching, is present
in the Eucharist, the Church from the beginning hath, at His comraand

* Cone. Trid. Sess. xxii, c, 1, "Is igitur Deus et Dominus noster, etsi semel
seipsum in ara crucis, morte intereedente, Deo patri oblaturus erat, ut setemam illic
redemptionem operaretur ; quia tamen per mortem sacerdotium ejus extinguendum
non erat, in coena novissima, qua nocte tradebatur, ut dialectfe sponsse suas ecclesiaj
visibile, sicut hominum natura exigit, relinqueret sacrificium, quo cruentum illud,
semel in cruce peragendum, repra:sentaretur, ejusque memoria in finem usque sseouli
permaneret, atque illius salutaris virtus in remissionem eorum, quse a nobis quotidie
committuntm, peccatorum applicaretur," etc. C, ii : " Et quoniam in divino hoc-
sacrificio, quod in missi peragitur, idem ille Christus oontinetur, et incruente immo-
latur, qui in ari crucis semel se ipsum cruente obtulit, docet sancta synodus, sacrifi
cium istud vere propitiatorium esse, per ipsuraque fieri, si cum vero corde et rect^
fide, cum metd et reverentH, contriti ac poenitentcs ad Deum accedamus," etc.
t See note B iu Appendix.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 313
(Luke xxii. 20,) substituted the Christ mysteriously present, and visible
only to the spiritual eye of faith, for the historical Christ, now inacces
sible to the corporeal senses. The forraer is taken for the latter, be
cause the latter is likewise the forraer — ^both are considered as one and
the same ; and the eucharistic Saviour, therefore,' as the victim also for
the sins of the world. And fhe more so, as, when we wish to express
ourselves accurately, the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is put only as
a part for an organic whole. For his whole life on earth — his rainistry
and his sufferings, as well as his perpetual condescension to our infir
mity in the Eucharist— constitute one great sacrificial act, one raighty
action undertaken out of love for us, and expiatory of our sins, consist
ing, indeed, of various individual parts, yet so that none by itself is,
strictly speaking, the sacrifice. In each particular part the whole
recurs, yet without these parts the whole cannot be conceived. The
will of Christ, to manifest His gracious condescension to us in the
Eucharist, forms no less an integral part of his great work, than all be
sides, and in a way so necessary, indeed, that, whilst we here find the
whole scheme of redemption reflected, without it the other parts would
not have sufficed for our coraplete atonement. Who, in fact, would
venture the assertion that the descent of the Son of God in the Eucha
rist belongs not to His general merits, which are imputed to us ? Hence
the sacramental sacrifice is a true sacrifice — a sacrifice in the strict
sense, yet so that it must in no wise be separated from fhe other things
which Christ hath achieved for us, as the very consideration of the end
of its institution will clearly show.'" In this last portion (if we may so

* In TheophUus L, S. register. AnnsE Comnenae Suppleraenta (Tub 1833, c. iv.
pp. 18-23) a fragment frora the still unprinted panoply of Nicetas is communicated
in reference to Soterichus Panteugonus, the oldest document, to our knowledge, in
forming us of any doubt being entertained, whether the mass be really a sacrifice.
Soterich hved in the twelfth century, under Manuel Comnenus, and maintained the
opinion that it was only in an improper sense that Christ in the Eucharist was said to
be otTered up as a victim to God. But tlie Greek bishops assembled together rejected
this view, and Soterich presented a recantation, which ie not contained in the above.
named writing, but which I printed in the Theological (Quarterly Review of Tiibin
gen. (See the Tubinger Quartalschrift, 1833, No. 1, p. 373.) The recantation runs
thus ; S/^i>^^iivZ rS ayiif nu hp^ trunS-,f Itt) t? t»v flyo-iav x«l tiIv vvt v^nr-xyofAinv Kai Tijv
to'ts fTgoo-a^flsTo-siv ara^i toit /Acvoytvov! Kt) hn-ib^mrio-xiro! xiyou, xx) to'te ir^ora.p^Ma-a.v
[it stands so written in the Paris codex, but it ought evidently to be w^i>a-a.}(6iivcti j Ktt)
yuv frdxiv v^ord-yKrSxt, ic tj)v ttl/nv ma-xv kx) filxv, xx) t? /jiii oyTo) <fovoiJiiT/ indtfix. Kh
Tl irgot dviTjo^OT w^iiriutrxi yiypxfifAim, iya^ifAMi xaSru-irclidKKa. 'H y5roj.g«<)>»'
2a)T»g/;^05 o' nxvrnjyavo;." TRANSLATION.
"I agree with the holy synod herein, that the sacrifice now to be offered up, and

314 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
call it) of the great sacrifice for us, all the other parts are to be present,
and applied to us : in this last part of the objective sacrifice, the latter
becomes subjective and appropriated to us. Christ on the cross is stiU
an object strange to us : Christ, in the Christian worship, is our pro
perty, our victim. There He is the univer.sal victim — here He is the
victim for us in particular, and for every individual amongst us ; there
he was only the victim ; — here He is the victim acknowledged and
revered : there the objective atoneraent was consuraraated ; — here the
subjective atonement is partly fostered and promoted, partly expressed.
The Eucharistic sacrifice, in conformity to its declared ends, may be
considered under a two-fold point of view. The Church, in general,
and every particular Community within her, being founded by the sacri
fice of the Son of God, and by faith in the sarae, and thus owing their
existence to Hira, the Eucharistic sacrifice must, in the first place, be
regarded as one of praise and thanksgiving. In other words, the
Church declares that she is incapable of offering up her thanks to God
in any other way, than by giving Him back who became fhe victim
for the world ; — as if she were to say : "Thou didst, O Lord, for
Christ's sake, look down, with graciousness and compassion, upon us as
Thy children ; so vouchsafe that we, with grateful hearts, may revere
Thee as our Father in Christ, thy Son, here present. We possess
nought else that we can offer Thee, save Christ ; be graciously pleased
to receive our sacrifice." WhUe the community, in the person of the
priest, performeth this, it confesses perpetually what Christ became,
and still continues to be, for its sake. It is not however the interior
acts of thanksgiving, adoration, and gratitude, which it offers up to
God, but it is Christ himself present in the sacraraent. These emotions
of the soul are indeed excited, unfolded, kept up, and fostered by the
presence and the self sacrifice of the Saviour ; but of theraselves they
are deeraed unworthy to be presented to God. Christ, the victim in
our worship, is the copious inexhaustible source of the deepest devotion ;
but, in order to be this, the presence of the Saviour, sacrificing Him
self for the sins of the world, is necessarily required — a presence to
which, as to an outward object, the interior soul of man must attach it
self, and must unbosom all its feelings^
The community, however, continuaUy professes itself as a sinner,

once offered up the only-begotten and incarnate Word, was once offered up, and
IS now offered up, because it is one and the same. To him who doth not so believe,
anathema : and if any thing hath been found written in refutation hereof, I subject
it to the anathema. (Signed.) " Soterichus Panteuqonus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 315
needing forgiveness, and striving, ever more and more, to appropriate
to itself the merits of Christ. Now the sacrifice appears propitiatory,
and the Redeemer present enables us to be entirely His own children,
or to become so in an ever-increasing degree. The present Saviour,
in a voice audible to the spiritual-minded, incessantly addresses His
Father above : " Be graciously pleased to behold in me the believing
and repentant people :" and then He crieth to His brethren below :
" Come to Me, all you that labour and are heavy laden, and I wiU re
fresh you : each one, who returneth to Me with aU his heart, shall find
mercy, forgiveness of sins, and every grace." . Hence, in the liturgy of
the Latin, as weU as of the Greek Church, it is rightly said, that it is
Christ, who, in the holy action, offers Himself up to God as a sacrifice ;
He is at once the victim and the high-priest. But we, recognizing, in
the Eucharistic Christ, that same Christ, who, out of love for us, deliv
ered Himself unto death, even the death of the cross, exclaim, at the
elevation of the Host, wherever the Catholic Church extends, with that
lively faith in His manifest mercy, from which humiUty, confidence,
love, and repentance spring — " O Jesus ! for Thee I Uve ; for Thee I
die I 0 Jesus ! Thine I am, Uving or dead." ''
It is now evident to all, that the beUef in the real presence of Christ
in the Eucharist, forms fhe basis of our whole conception of the mass.
Without that presence, the solemnity of the Lord's Supper is a mere
reminiscence of the sacrifice of Christ, exactly in the same way as the
celebration by any society of the anniversary of some esteemed indivi
dual, whose image it exhibits to view, or some other symbol, recalls to
mind his beneficent actions. On the other hand, with faith in the real
existence of Christ in the Eucharist, the past becoraes the present — all
that Christ hath merited for us, and whereby he hath so merited it, is
henceforth never separated from his person : He is present as that
which He absolutely is, and in the whole extent of His actions, to wit,
as the real victim. Hence the effects of this faith on the mind, the
heart, and the will of man, are quite other than if, by the mere stretch
of the human faculty of memory, Christ be caUed back from the distance
of eighteen hundred years. He Hiraself manifests His love. His bene
volence, His devotedness to us : He is ever in the midst of us, full of
grace and truth.
Accordingly, the Catholic mass, considered as a sacrifice, is a so
lemnization of the blessings iraparted to huraanity by God in Christ
Jesus, and is destined, by the offering up of Christ, partly to express in
praise, thanksgiving, and adoration, the joyous feelings of redemption
on the part of the faithful ; partly to make the merits of Christ the sub-
ject of their perpetual appropriation. It is also clear, why this sacrifice

316 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
is of personal utility to the believer ; naraely, because, thereby, pious
sentiment.s, such as faith, hope, love, huraility, contrition, obedience,
and devotion to Christ, are excited, proraoted, and cherished. The
sacrifice presented to God, which, as we have often said, is not sepa
rated frora the work of Christ, merits internal grace for the culture of
these sentiments, which are psychologically excited from without, by
faith in the present Saviour, whose entire actions and sufferings are
brought before the raind. As, according to CathoUc doctrine, forgive
ness of sins cannot take place without sanctification, and a fitting state
of the huraan soul is required for the reception of grace, as well as an
active concurrence towards the fructification of grace, the reflecting
observer may already infer, that it is not by a mere outward or bodily
participation, on the part of the community, that the mass produces
any vague indeterminate effects.
The sacrifice of the mass is likewise offered up for the living and the
dead ; that is to say, God is iraplored, for fhe sake of Christ's oblation,
to grant to all those who are dear to us, whatever may conduce to their
salvation. With the mass, accordingly, the faithful join the prayer,
that the merits of Christ, which are considered as concentrated in the
Eucharistic sacrifice, should be applied fo all needing thera and sus
ceptible of them. To consider merely himself is a matter of impossi
bility to the Christian, how rauch less in so sacred a soleranity can he
think only of hiraself and omit his supplication, that the merits of
Christ, which outweigh the sins of the whole world, may Ukewise be
appropriated by all 1 The coraraunion with the happy and perfect
spirits in Christ is also renewed ; for they are one with Christ, and His
work cannot be contemplated without its effects. Lastly, aU the con
cerns of inward and outward life, — sad and joyful events, good and ill
fortune, — are brought in connexion with this sacrifice ; and at this
coraraeraoration in Christ, to whora we are indebted for the highest
gifts, we pour out to God our thanksgivings and lamentations, and in
Hira, and before Hira, we iraplore consolation, and courage, and
strength, under sufferings ; self-denial, cleraency, and raeekness, in pros
perity. Hitherto, however, we have considered the mass merely as a sacri
ficial oblation ; but this view by no means embraces its whole purport.
The assembled congregation declares, from what we have stated, that
in itself, wilhout Christ, it discovers nothing — absolutely nothing —
which can be agreeable to God : nay, nothing but What is inadequate,
earthly, and sinful. Renouncing itself, it gives itself up to Christ, fuU
of confidence, hoping for His sake forgiveness of sins and eternal life,
and every grace. In this act of self-renunciation, and of entire self-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 817
abandonment to God in Christ, the believer has, as it were, thrown off
himself, excommunicated himself, if I may so speak, in his existence,
as separated from Christ, in order to live only by Him, and in Him.
Hence he is in a state to enter into the raost intimate fellowship with
Christ, to comraune with Him, and with his whole being to be entirely
absorbed in Him. For the unseemliness of the congregation no longer
communicating every Sunday (as was the case in the! primitive Church,)
and of the priest in the mass usually receiving alone the body of the
Lord, is not to be laid to the blame of the Church (for all the prayers
in the holy sacrifice presuppose the sacramental communion of the en-
tire congregation,) but is to be ascribed solely to the tepidity of the
greater part of the faithful. Yet are the latter earnestly exhorted to
participate, at least spiritually, in the comraunion of the priest, and, in
this way, to enter into the fellowship of Christ.*
Who will not name such a worship most Christian, most pious, and
real : — a worship wherein God is adored in spirit and in truth ? In
deed, how can a carnal-minded man, who will not believe in the incar
nation of the Son of God,- — for the most powerful obstacle to this be
lief is in the fact that man clearly perceives, he must be of a godly
way of thinking, so soon as he avows that God has become man — how
can such a man look upon the raass as other than mere foolishness ?
The raass coraprises an ever-recurring invitation to the confession of
our sins, of our own weakness and helplessness. It is a Uving repre
sentation of the infinite love and corapassion of God towards us, which
he hath revealed, and daily still reveals, in the delivering up of His only
begotten Son : and therefore it contains the most urgent exhortation
to endless thanksgiving, to effective mutual love, and to our heavenly
glorification. Hence an adversary to such a worship must be one
whose thoughts creep exclusively on the earth, or of the whole act un
derstands nought else, but that the priest turns sometimes to the right,
sometiraes to the left, and is clothed in a raotley-coloured garment. On
the other hand, he who misapprehends the wants of man, and the high
objects of our Divine Redeeraer, in the establishment of the sacra
ments ; he who, like the Manicheans, rejects the sacraments as coarse,

* L. e. Sess. xm. c. viii. " Quoad usum autem, recte et sapienter patres nostri tres
rationes hoc sanctum sacramentum accipiendi distinxerunt. Quosdam enim docue
runt sacramentahter duntaxat id sumere, ut peccatores, alios autem spmtualiter, illos
nimirum, qui, voto propositum iUum coelestem panem edentes, fide viva, qua; per di.
lectionera operatur, fructum ejus et utilitatem sentiunt ; tertios porro sacramentahter
simul et spirituahter : hi autem sunt, qui se prius probant et instruunt, ut vestera nup-
tialem induti," etc.

3l8 EXPOSITION or DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
sensual institutions, and follows the track of a false spirituality, Wilf
regard the Catholic dograa as incomprehensible. In the opinion of
such a man, a worship is in the same degree spiritual, as it is untrue.
He lays before his God tbe lofty conceptions that have sprung out of
the fulness of his intellectual powers, his holy feelings and inflexible
tesolves ; these have no reference to the outward historical Christ, but
only to the ideal one, which is merged in the subjectivity of these feel.
ings and ideas ; whUe yet, by the fact of the external revelation of the
Logos, internal worship must needs obtain a perpetual outward basis,
and, in truth, one representing the Word delivered up to suffering, be
cause it was under the form of a self-sacrifice for the sins of the world
that this maifestation occurred. How, on the other hand, any one who
has once apprehended the fuU meaning of the incarnation of the Deity,
and who with joy confesses that his duty is the reverse — namely, to
pass from seeming to real and divine existence, and has accordingly
attained to the perception that the doctrine of a forgiveness of sins in
Christ Jesus, of an exaltation of man unto God, and of a comraunica'
tion of divine Ufe to him, through our Lord, must remain unprofitable
untU it be brought before us in concrete forms, and be made to bear on
our most individual relations-— how any one, I say, who clearly per
ceives aU this, can refuse to revere in the Catholic mass a divine in
stitution, I am utterly at a loss to conceive.
After this exposition, we are probably now enabled to give a satis
factory solution to the chief objection which the Protestant communites
have urged against the Catholic sacrifice of the mass. It is argued,
that by the raass the sacrifice of Christ on the cross is abolished, or that,
at any rate, it receives a detriraent, since the latter is considered as
incomplete, and needing a supplement. Now, it is self-evident, that
the sacrifice of the mass, by keeping the oblation of Christ on the cross,
or rather his whole rainistry and sufferings, eternally present, presup
poses fhe same, and in its whole purport raaintains the same ; and so
far from obliterating, it stamps them more vividly on the minds of
men ; and, instead of supplying the bloody sacrifice of the cross with
eome heterogeneous element, it brings that sacrifice in its true integrity
and original vitality to bear the most individual application and appro
priation throughout aU ages. It is one and the same undivided victim,
' — one and the same High Priest, who on the raount of Calvary and on
our altars hath offered Himself up an atonement for the sins of the
world. But, as this view is so obvious, and as fhe Reformers neverthe*
less constantly repeated their objections, and impressed them so strongly
on the minds of their foUowers, that, down to the present day they are
repeated, something deeply rooted in the constitution of Protestantism

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. Bl§
itself seems to lurk under these objections, and requires to be dragged
to Ught. The decisive, conscious, undoubting faith, that Christ before
our eyes offers himself up for us to his eternal Father, is quite calcula
ted fo produce an effect piercing into the inmost heart of man-^far be-*
low the deepest toots of evil* so that sin in its inmost germ should be
plucked from the will, and the believer be unable to refu|g. to conse
crate his life to God."' This ordinance of divine compassion neces-"
sarily leads, along with others, to the doctrine of internal justification ;
as, on the other hand, the mass must be rejected With a sort of instinct^
wherever that doctrine is repudiated. If such great and Uving mani-i
festations of the Redeemer's grace be unable thoroughly to purify the
heart of man ; if they be incapable of moving us to heartfelt gratitude
and mutual love, to the most unreserved self-sacrifice, and to fhe sup-'
plication, that God would accept the oblation of ourselves ; then we
may with reason despair of our sanctification, and abandon ourselves to
a mere theory of imputation. Now, perhap% we may understand the
* Luther (de captivit. Bab. opp. ed. Jen. tom. ii. p. 279, b. and 280) still express.
es the glorious reminiscences of his Catholic education, whieh, however, became al--
Ways feebler, till at last they were totally extinguished. " Est itaque missa, sed ae.
cundum substantiam suam, proprie nihil aliud, quara verba Christi prEedicta : ' acci-
pite et manduCate,' etc. Ao si dicat : ecCe o homo peccator et damnatus, ex merS
gratuitaque charitate, qua diligo te, sic volente raisericordiarum patre, his verbis pro^
mitto tibi, ante omne meritum et votum tuum, reraissionem omnium peccatorum tuo^
rum et vitam eeternam. Et ut ccrtissimus de hac me^ promissione irrevocabili sis, cor.i
pus meum tradam et sanguinem fimdam, morte ipsi hac hanc promissionem confirmaj
turns, et utrumque tibi in signum et memoriale ejusdem promissionis relicturus. Quod
cum frequentaveris, mei memor sis, hanc meara in te Charitatera et largitatera prsedices
et laudes et gratias agas." (Here, however, it is merely the subjective, and not the objec
tive part Whidh is brought forward.) " Ex quibus vides, ad missam digne habendam aH.<
ud non requiri quara fidem, qua huic promissioni fideliter nitatur, Christura in suis verbis
Veracera credat, et sibi hffiC immensa bona esse donata non dubitet. Ad hanc fidem
mox sequetur sua sponte dulcissiraus affectus cordis, qua dilatatur et impinguatur
spiritus hominis (hceo est charitas, per Spiritum Sanctura m fide Christi donata,) ut
in Christura, tara largura et benignura testatorem, rapiatur, fiatque penitus alius et
novus homo. Quis enim non dulciter lacrymetur, imo prse gaudio in Christum pene
exanimetur, si credat fide indubitata, hanc Christi promissionem insestimabilem ad se
pertinere ? Quomodo non diliget tantum benefaotorem, qui indigno et longe alia
merito tantas divitias et hereditatera hanc tetemara preeyeniens offert, promittit et
donat ?" Compare Sancti Anselmi orationes n. xxv.-xxxv. opp. edit. Gerberon. Par.
1791, p 964, seq. But at page 981 of this work Luther says : " Ita possum quoti
die, imo omni horft, missam habere, dum quoties voluero, possum mihi verba Christi
proponere et fidem meam m illis alere," etc. This is indeed true, but to overlook
every other consideration, such an idealism would render the sacraments utterly un
necessary, and public worship useless, since something external muW always form
the foundation of the latter.

320 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
full sense of the above-cited prayer, which the Catholic at the eleva
tion of the host utters to his Saviour ; " To thee let my whole life be
consecrated!" Yet it ought not to be overlooked, that the Reforraers might be led
into error through various, and some extremely scandalous, abuses, espe
cially an unspiritual, dry, mechanical performance and participation in
this most inysterious function. Moreover, in default of historical learn.
ing, the high antiquity and apostolic origin of the holy sacrifice was un
known to them. If it cannot even be denied, that their whole system,
when regarded from one point of view, should have led them rather
zealously to uphold, than to disapprove of the sacrificial worship ; yet
they instinctively felt that, in that worship, there lay something in
finitely more profound than all the doctrinal foundations of their own
theological system ; and, accordingly, they were driven by an uncon
scious impulse into a negative course.
There are now some particulars which remain to be considered. The
doctrine of the change of bread and wine into the body and blood of
Christ occupies an important place in the Catholic system of theology.
Who doth not immediately think of that true, moral change which
must take place in man, so soon as he enters into communion with
Christ, when the earthly raan ceases, and the heavenly ono begins, so
that not we, but Christ Uveth in us ? In the Lord's supper Luther
could not find Christ alone, — bread and wine ever recurred to his
mind, because, in the will of those regenerated in Christ, he saw a
perraanent dualism, a perpetual co-existence of a spiritual and a carnal
inclination, so that the latter — evil principle in man — could never be
truly converted into the former. Moreover, the doctrine of transub
stantiation is the clearest representation of the objectivity of the food
of the soul offered to us in the sacraments ; and, if we may dare to
speak of the internal motions of the Divine econoray, we should affirm
that, by this transubstantiation, wrought through a miracle of God's
omnipotence, the strongest barrier is raised against any false subjective
opinion. This doctrine, which most undoubtedly was at all times
prevalent in the Church,*' though at one tirae more clearly, at another

* In the Liturgy of St. Chrysostom (Goar Eucholog. p, 77) we meet with the
foUowing forms of prayer: " EyMj.scov J-itrTmei rev ayicv SjToy," "Bless, O Lord,
the holy bread," saith the deacon ; hereupon the priest saith : " vroiimv tov /uev ajTO»
Toi/Toy t/^/ov truftx tou X^fmo (rov." " Make this bread the venerable body of thy
Christ." Then the deacon calls upon the priest to bless the wine ; whereupon the latter
saith : " To J's iv 5roT»j/.f toi;tij> tifjim tufjix toS Xjio-tou irov" " Make what is con
tained in this chalice the venerable blood of thy Christ." Then over both the priest

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 321
less clearly, expressed, according as occasion seeraed to require, was,
in the Middle Age, laid down as a formal dogma, at a period, when a
false pantheistic mysticism, which we have elsewhere described, con-
founded the distinctions between the human and the divine, and identi
fied the Father with the world, the Son of God with the eternal idea of
man, and the Holy Ghost with religious feelings. Several Gnostic
sects, and afterwards, Amalrich of Chartres, and David of Dinant, in
culcated these errors. They regarded the historical revelation of God
in Christ Jssus as a self-revelation of man, and the sacraments were,
therefore, in the eyes of these people nought else than what man chose
of hiraself to attribute to them. Hence, they rejected them as useless ;
and, identifying with God the energies of the world, they conceived it
singular that those powers, which in themselves were thoroughly divine,
should receive, from any external cause, a divine nature or property.
In this conjuncture of time, it appeared necessary to point out more
clearly than had been done at any previous period, the primitive doc
trine that had been handed down, and to set it in the strongest light
with all the consequences deducible from it. The doctrine of a change
vf substance in created powers, to be applied as a divine and sanctifying
nourishment of the spilit, most clearly established the opposition of
Christianity to the fundamental tenet of these sects, which took so

Gaith: " Converting thera through thy Holy Spirit," "(««T«,8«A,iy tJ mtu/Axri o-oy
tJ ti-yi'tf." The Liturgy of St. Basil has the same forms, with even a verbal coinci
dence, (p. 166.)
In Renaudot's Collectio Liturgiarum Orientalium (tora. i. p. 157.) we read as fol
lows in the Liturgy of the Alexandrine Church : " ''Et/ fi s^' «^at xil M tou; aprovc
TOWToyf, xx) i-t) Ta -ffurnptx TctyTfit TO wyey^a <rou to a.ym, ha Taijrx ayid^ii, xx) nXilJitrv,
if TTxvro^uvxfAOi &i5f. Kal irc/uVj,, Toy jusy ogToy o-Zjua . . . . to iTe ff:T«g/iy ciifia rtis
xuvit; (T/jtS-^H^f iUTOy Toy x-jgiau xj.) S-soiJ xx) truT'i^-i;, xx) 7rxju/ixa-t\ea; ^/uZu. 'lua-ov
Xfio-Toy," " Send down upon us, and upon these breads, and upon these chalices,
thy Holy Spirit, that he may consecrate and consuramate these as the omnipotent
God ; and that he may raake the bread the body, and the chalice the blood, of the
New Testament of hira our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and universal King, Jesus
Christ." The so-called universal canon of the Ethiopians says, loc. cit. p. 504 : " Ostende
faciem tuam super hunc panem et super hunc calicem, quos proposuiraus super hoc
altare spirituale tuura : benedie, sanctifica, et purifica illos ; et transmuta hunc pa
nem, ut fiat corpus tuum purum, et quod mistum est in hoc calice, sanguis tuus pre-
tiosus." Hereupon Renaudot observes (p. 597 :) '• Veram mutationera significat vox
^thiopica, rei scilicet unius in aliam, ut agnoscit ipse Ludolfus in lexicis suis, mul-
tique scripturEE loci in quibus usurpatur, palam faciunt. Si vel levissiraa de ejus
significatione esget dubitatio, vox Coptica, cui respondet, et versiones Arabicae illam
plene discuterent." 21

322 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
much pleasure in the world as to confound it with the divinity ; failing
to observe that, through the creative energy of the Redeemer only could
a new world be caUed into existence, and that, consequently, it was
irapossible for him to be engendered by the world. Moreover, out of the
general movement of the age sprang a peculiar form of the most solemn
adoration of the Eucharist (festum corporis Christi,) so that it should
be no longer possible to confound the internal acts of the huraan mind
with the historical Christ ; for, by the very nature of the festival, Christ
was represented as extraneous to raan, and neither as one in himself
with us, nor as evolved out of us, but as coming to us only from with
out.'* In fhe doctrine of transubstantiation, Christianity with its en
tire essence exhibits itself as an external, iraraediate divine revelation.
At the period of the Reforraation, therefore, it was the raore necessary
to bring out this doctrine, and the ecclesiastical rites connected with it,
in the most prominent form ; as an empty, erroneous spirituaUty was
everywhere manifesting itself
Lastly, in the Catholic Church fhe custora prevails of receiving com
munion only under one kind : — a raatter, as is evident, belonging to
discipline, and not to doctrine. f It is well known that this custora was
not first established by any ecclesiastical law ; but, on the contrary, it
was in consequence of the general prevalence of the usuage, that this
law was passed in approval of it. It is a raatter of no Ics.s notoriety,
that the monasteries in whose centre this rite had its rise, and thence
spread in ever wider circles, were led by a very nice sense of delicacy
to impose on themselves this privation. A pious dread of desecrating,
by spilling and the like, even in the most conscientious ministration, the
form of the sublimest and the holiest, whereof the participation can be
vouchsafed to man, was the feeUng which swayed their minds. Some
may hold this opinion for superstitious ; and, according as they see in
the consecrated elements but mere material species, the more easily

" That it was not in the Middle Age, as a frivolous ignorance has often asserted,
that the adoration of the Eucharist first arose, numberless authorities can prove.
For example, to pass over the testimonies of the much more ancient Origen, we
read in the Liturgy of St, Chrysostom (Gear's Eucholog, p, 81,) at the elevation of
the Host, the following words : " eiTct tt^oo-xuvu o iggeu?, xx) o J/cutoyoc, cy i^ ctTTiy toVJ,'
M-yoms [iva-TtxZi Tgi'c o fls« iKd(ybml jjui Ty a/ixpric>,!f. Kai o Mtoc l/Aoitet -rxitK /jin
ih\A^\ix.t Trsptrxv-iaZatv ." tkanslation.
" Then the priest and the deacon worship, each in the place where he stands, say
ing in secret three tiraes : ' O God ! be propitious to me a sinner.' And the people
in like manner all worship with reverence."
t Concil. Trident. Sess. xxi. Can. i-iv, Sess. xxii. Decret. sup. conccss. caUcis.

Between catholics and protestants. 323
wlU such an opinion occur to their minds. But the Catholic who, even
in this formality, proves that it is not with hira a mere matter of form
when he abstains from the consecrated chalice> and who, taught by ex
amples in Scripture, or, at any rate, by the authority of the primitive
Church, thinks himself justified in so abstaining, without becoming
alienated from the spirit of Jesus Christ, or losing any portion of his
Eucharistic blessings ; — the Catholic, we say, rejoices that, though in
his Church there may be men of a perhaps exaggerated scrupulosity,
yet none are found so carnal-minded as to desire to drink in the com
munion not the holy blood, but the mere wine, and often, on that ac
count, protest, among other things, against what they call a mutUation
of the ordinance of Christ. We regret the more to be obUged to call
the attention of our separated brethren to this abuse in their Church, as
we must add, that the number of those in their coraraunion is not less
considerable, who forego the partaking of the sacred blood, not from
any spiritual dread of desecrating it by spilling, but frora a mere sen
sual feeling of disgust at the uncleanliness of those with whom they
are to drink out of the same cup. When even the Zuinglians complain
of this mutilation, — they who have taken away the body with the blood
of Christ, and left in room of them mere bread and mere wine,^it is
difficult not to think of that passage in Holy Writ, wherein the Re
deeraer reproaches the Pharisees, that they strain at gnats, but swallow
caraels, However, we should rejoice, if it were left free to each one to
drink or not of the consecrated chalice : and this perraission would be
granted, if with the sarae love and concord an universal desire were
expressed for the use of the cup, as, from the twelfth century, the con
trary wish has been enounced.
§ xxxv, — Doctrine of the Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Calvinists, on the Eucharist.
The Reformation, had run its course but for a few years, when
there arose araong its partisans, in relation to the holy Eucharist, very
important points of difference. Luther taught a real and substantial
presence of the body and blood of Christ in the holy communion, with
out, however, adhering to the doctrine of transubstantiation, which he
rejected, not on exegetical grounds, but on account of an expression ac
cidentally thrown out by Pierre d^Ailly."' But we have already observed

'•' Even the tenth article of the Augsburg Confession teaches : " De coeni
Domini docent, quod corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint et distribuantur
vescentibus in coena. Domini, et improbant secus docentes." The words " sub
^ecie panis et vini," were origmally inserted, but, as early as the year 1531,

824 EXPOSITION OP DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
that Carlstadt, a colleague of Luther's inWittemberg, drew from thOJc
very opinions which Luther and Melancthon had put forth, upon the
nature of the sacraraents, conclusions which, according to the princi
ples of those Reforraers, could not be easily invalidated. The exegetic
proofs, on the other hand, which Carlstadt adduced in support of his
views, were most feeble, nay, perfectly contemptible: but what he was
unable to accomplish, Zwingle and CEcolampadius, who hastened to his
assistance, attempted with much dexterity to effect. If the first Swiss
Reformers in more than one respect evinced a shaUowness without ex-
ample, this Was here more pre-eminently the case. They saw in the
holy Eucharist a raere remembrance of Christ, of his sufferings and his
death ; at least, whatever traces of a deeper signification they raight
yet find in this mystery, were so feeble as to be rarely discerned by any
one.'" Moreover, Zwingle and (Ecolampadius variously interpreted the
well-known classical passage in Matthew, though they agreed in the
result. The former maintained that ea-n (is) was the same as " sig
nifies :" the latter took et^-ri in its proper sense, but asserted that oS/ut
(body) was put raetaphorically for "sign of my body.'* Luther had
then indeed already rejected the doctrine of transubstantiation ; but he
still continued, with his accustomed coarseness and violence, yet with
great acuteness and most brilliant success, to defend against Zwinglius
the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist. For, whenever the doc-

Melancthon suppressed them. See Salig's complete History of the Augsbtirg
Confession (in German,) vol. iii. c, 1, p, 171. In the copy of the Confes
sion presented to the Emperor Charles V, in the year 1530, {lie tenth article
ran thus : " Touching the Lord's supper, it is taught, that the true body and blood of
Christ are, under the form of bread and wine, truly present, given, distributed, and
taken in the Eucharist. On which accoimt the contrary doctrine is rejected,"
* " Huldrichi Zwinglil Op, t. ii. In the essay (lUustrissimis Germanise Princip, in
Conciliis Aug, Congreg, p. 546, b.), he gives an explanation not unworthy a Ration.
alist of our time, how it came tb pass that Christians said, Christ is present in the
Eucharist : " Quo factum est, ut veteres dixerint corpus Christi vere esse in ccent i
id autem duplici nomine, cum propter istam, quse jara dicta est, certara fidei contem-
plationem, quae Christum ipsu.m in cruce propter nos deficientera nihil minus prae-
scntem videt, quam Stephanus camalibus oculis ad dexteram Patris regnantem vide
ret. Et adseverare audeo, hanc Stephano revelationem et exhibitionera scnsibiliter
esse factam, ut nobis exemplo esset, fidelibus, cura pro se paterentur, eo semper modo
fore, non scnsibiliter, sed contemplatione et solatio fidei." P. 549 : "Cum pater.
famihas peregre profecturus nobilissimum annulura suura, in quo imago sua exptessa
est, conjugi raatrifarailise his verbis tradit : En me tibi maritum, quem absentem
teneas, et quo te oblectes. Jam ille paterfamilias Domini nostri Jesu Christi
typum gerit. Is enun a'biens ecclesiae conjugi suse imaginem suam in coeniE sacra
mento reliquit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 325
trinal truth is in any degree on his side, he is always an incomparable
disputant ; and what he put forth on this subject in his controversial
writings is still weU deserving of attention.
Between the Saxon and the Helvetic opinions, Capito and the pliant
Bucer attempted to steer an untenable middle course, without being able
to reduce their ideas to clear, simple forras of expression.* More suc
cessful was Calvin in holding such a raiddle course : and his acuteness
would not have failed finding the most fitting expression for his ideas,
had he not purposely preferred a certain obscurity. He taught that the
body of Christ is truly present in the Lord's Supper, and that the be
liever partook of it. But he only meant that, siraultaneously with the
bodily participation of the material elements, which in every respect
remained what they were, and merely signified the body and blood of
Christ, a power, emanating from the body of Christ, which is now in
heaven only, is communicated to the spirit.f He had the pleasure of
seeing his opinion adopted in the " Agreement of Zurich" by the Swiss
Reformed ; and the later Calvinistic formularies of faith in like manner
all adhere to it.:j:

* Confess. Tetrapolitan, c. xviii. p. 352. " Singulari studio hanc Christi in suos
bonitatem semper depr^dicant, qui is non minus hodife, quam in novissima ilia, cosna,
omnibus qui inter illius diseipulos ex animo nomen dederunt, cum hanc ccenam, ut
ipse, instituit, repetunt, veram suum corpes veruraque suura sanguinem verfe eden-
<lum et bibendura, in cibura poturaque aniraarum, quo illee in fietemam vitara alan-
tur, dare per sacramenta dignatur ut jara ipse in illis, et illi in ipso vivant et perma-
neaut, in die novissiraa in novara et immortalem vitara per ipsum resuscitandi," etc.
But as even Zwinglius made use of the expression, " Christ is truly present in the
Lord's Supper," and the cities of Upper Gerraany were in close connexion with him,
no one confided in this declaration of the formulary. Compare Salig's complete his
tory of the Augsburg Confession (in German,) vol. ii. c, 12, p. 400 : " The praise,"
says he, "cannot be refused to the Confession of the four cities, that on many points
it has a good and Christian bearing ; but in the article of the Lord's Supper, it was
very ambiguously worded, so that it might be interpreted in favour of Zwingle's, as
well as of Luther's doctrine  Hence must the aforesaid article of this Confession
be understood and explained frora the previously cited correspondence between Bucer
and Melancthon."
t Calvin. Instit. lib. iv. m. 17, fol. 502 j Consens. Tig. Calvin, opp. tom, viu.
p. 648.
X Confess. Helvet, ii, art. xx. xxii. p. 99, et seq. " Ccenam vero mysticam," it is
said (art, xxu,,) " suis vere ad hoc offert, ut magis magisque in illis vivat, et illi in
ipso : non quod pani et vino corpus Domini et sanguis vel naturaliter uniantur, sed
quod panis et vinum ex institutione Dommi symbola sunt, quibus ab ipso Domino, per
ecclesiae ministerium, vera corporis et sanguinis ejus communicatio, non in periturum
ventris cibum, sed in cetemae vitas ahmoniara, exhibeatur. Hoc sacro cibo ideo saepe
aitimur, quoniam hujus monitu in crucifixi mortem sanguinemque fidei ocuhs intuen.

S26 EXPOSI'nON OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
We must however examine this subject more nearly. The disputes
prevaihng between the Wittemberg and Helvetic Reformers could, for
many reasons, be viewed only with the greatest pain by the advocates
and friends of the ecclesiastical revolution. Independently of the fact,
that, frora the existence of such disputes, the Catholics not unsuccess
fully drew conclusions against important principles of the Reforraers,
these controversies prevented the union of all the protestant Churches
in one coraraon struggle against their adversaries, — a struggle which
threatened ever more and raore to terminate in a bloody civil war ; and
of what importance in the latter case must not concord prove ! Most
critical was the situation of the Sacraraentarians — such was the name
given by Luther to disciples of Zwingle, Carlstadt and others ; for their
party was confined to only four cities within the whole corapass of the
Gerraan erapire ; and therefore, abandoned to themselves alone, they
could raake no vigorous resistance. Hence, at the celebrated diet of
Augsburg, in the year 1530, they exerted every imaginable effort, and,
under the guidance of Bucer, employed every subterfuge of equivoca
tion, in order to bo received into the association of the German Protes
tants. But all their endeavours failed, especially through the Gerraan
honesty of Luther, who expressed himself in the harshest strain against
their evasions. Even in the religious peace of Nuremberg, it was

tes, ac salutera nostrara non sine ccelestis vitce gustu ct vero vitce aetemte sensu medi-
tantes, hoc spirituali, vivifico intimoque pabulo incffabili eum suavitate rcficimur, ac
incnarrabili verbi la^titii propter inventam vitara exultamus, totique ac viribus omnino
nostris omnibus in gratiarum actionem, tam pro adrairando Christi erga nos beneficio
effimdimur," etc. This forra belongs properly to the category of the Tetrapolitana.
Confess. Gall. art. xxxvi. p, 123 : " Affirraaraus sanctara ccenam Domini, alterum vi
delicet sacramentum, esse nobis testimonium nostrae cum Domino nostro Jesu Christo
iraitionis, quoniam non est duntaxat mortuus semel et eicitatus a mortuis pro nobis,
sed ctiam vere nos pascit et nutrit carne sua ct sanguine, ut, unum cum ipso facti,
vitam cum ipso comraunera habeamus. Quamvis enira nunc sit in coelis, ibidem
etiara raansurus, donee veniat raundurajudicaturus; credimus tamen eum arcana et
incoraprehensibili spiritus sui virtute nos nutrire et vivificare sui corporis et sanguinis
substantia, per fidem apprehensa. Dicimus autem hoc spirituahter fieri, non ut efiSca-
ciae et veritatis loco imaginationem aut cogitationera supponaraus, sed potius, quo-
niara hoc mysterium nostra; cum Christo coalitionis tara sublirae est, ut omnes nos
tros sensus totumque adeo ordinem nature superet : denique quoniam cum sit divi
num ac cQ;leste, non nisi fide percipi et apprehend! potest." Confess. Anglic, art.
xxxviii. p. 137 : " Coena dommi non est tantum signum mutuae benevolentiae Chris
tianorum inter sese, verum potius est sacramentum nostrae per mortem Christi re-
demptionls, Atque adeo rite, digne, et cura fide suraentibus panis, quera frangimus,
est communicatio corporis Christi : similiter poculum benedictionls est commimicatio.
sanguinis Christi,"

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 327
only to the adherents of the Augsburg Confession that final quiet was
granted. If the middle opinion respecting the Eucharist, framed under these
circumstances, was originally far more the result of political embarrass
ment, than the fruit of a sincere conviction obtained by earnest inves
tigation, it now began to make its way, and include an ever greater
number of Lutherans among its supporters. Even Melancthon, who
was not entirely a stranger to it, had the complaisance to make, in the
later editions of the Augsburg Confession (that appeared subsequent to
the year 1540,) some important changes in its favour ; just as if his
having composed this public formulary of faith gave him the right to
dispose of it according to his good pleasure !* As the advocates of
this new opinion employed without hesitation the expression, that Christ
is really present in the Eucharist, and his body and blood given to be
lievers for participation, and as the altered edition of the Augsburg
Confession favoured a certain indefiniteness of meaning, it was unhes
itatingly asserted after Luther's death, that the opinion of the innova
tors was, even according to the principles of the Saxon Reforraation,
perfectly orthodox. If John a Lasko, who was so ill-treated by the
English, Danish, and German Protestants, deserves to be forgiven
for having, contrary to all the laws of historical interpretation, affixed
his own meaning to the original formulary delivered to the emperor,
because, by this expedient, he thought to insure his teraporal safety ;
the two-faced conduct of Melancthon, on the other hand, will reraain
an eternal stigma on his meraory ; and all the apologies attempted in
his behalf can proceed on no other principle than that his pretended
good intention sanctified the moans eraployed. With the most touch
ing confidence did the remotest communities apply to him, to learn with
certainty from his own lips the true Lutheran doctrine ; and yet he
could bring himself to meet that confidence with crafty and evasive re
plies, that were perfectly inconsistent one with the other. A few months
only before his death, when he had nothing more to fear for his own

* The following is the difference between the unchanged and the changed Augs
burg Confession ; but what we shall have occasion to relate subsequently will best
illustrate this difference. The unchanged edition : " De coBna Domini docent, quod
corpus et sanguis Christi vere adsint et distribuantur vescentibus in coena Domini,
et improbant secus docentes." It is to be observed, that even here the " sub specie
panis et vini '' is already wanting, but which, as Salig says, was no change in realibus.
(Vol. iii. c, i, p, 477,) The changed edition: " De coena Domini docent, quod cum
pane et vino vere exhibeant-ur corpus et sanguis Christi, vescentibus in ccenJi Do
mini."

328 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
personal safety, he declared himself decidedly for Calvin's view. This
hypocrisy of Melancthon was imitated by his disciples, the professors
of theology in Wittemberg, as well as many others ; and we might caU
the fate which, on discovery of their undoubtedly shameful deception,
they met with at the hands of the elector of Saxony, a merited chas-
tiseraent, had it not been in sorae respects too severe.
Il was now the object of the Lutherans not only to assert against the
Crypto-Calvinists the original doctrine of their Church, but to express
it in the most definite forms. This occurred in the following raanner :
Calvin having spoken indeed of a true partaking of the body of Christ,
but acknowledging only a certain spiritual reception of it, which, at
the sarae moment when the bread is taken in by the mouth, is by means
of faith enjoyed by the soul, and having, accordingly, connected only
by time the spiritual food with the participation of the raaterial ele
raents, the orthodox Lutherans decreed in the " Forraulary of Con
cord," that the body of Christ is adrainistered in, with, and under the
bread. Further, it is well known that, according to Calvin's theory, it
is only the justified who are in a communion of life and faith with
Christ, — in other words, the elect only that can receive the body of the
Lord, while the unbeliever receives only bread and wine. Against this
theory the " Forraulary of Concord" teaches, thaf the unworthy cora-
municant also receives the body of the Lord, yet to his own judgraent.
Lastly, an arguraent was answered, which the Calvinists had constantly
alleged as one in itself of great weight. Against the bodily presence
of Christ in the sacraraent of the altar, they observed that the doctrine
which inculcated that, frora the moment of his ascension up to heaven,
Christ sat at the right hand of God, was incompatible with the one, ac
cording to which he was at the same time present on earth in the Eu
charist, In conformity with this, Beza, at the religious colloquy of
Poissy, which the Lutheran theologians, in the course of their disputes
on the sacraraent, often adverted to, had declared that Christ was as far
removed frora the Eucharist as heaven from earth. In answer to this
objection, Luther and his disciples had long asserted that Christ, even
according to his humanity, was everywhere present (ubiquitas corporis
Christi,) This strange opinion, which the inhabitants of Wurtemberg,
in defiance of those of the Palatinate, had, at the instigation of the
Reforraer Brentius, already admitted into their confession of faith, was
now consecrated by the "Forraulary of Concord," and raised to a for
mal article of faith. The objection of the Calvinists was raet by ob
serving that, in reference to God, there could be no question of a right
or left side, since he was everywhere present ; and that, in the sarae
way, Christ, even according to his humanity, was in every place.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 329
With this was closely connected the much-handled doctrine of the
communicatio idiomatum, which had long been a subjec^of strife : for
the Calvinists brought the charge of Monophysitism against the Lu
therans, and were by the latter in turn accused of the heresy of Nes
torius.* ¦¦

* SoUd. Dedar. pp. 659, 691, 724.

CHAPTER V.
DIFFERENCES IN EESPECT TO THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHlIKCH.

^ XXXVI. — Notion of the Church. Combination of Divine tmd human elements
in her. InfallibiUty of the Church.
It has, undoubtedly, excited surprise, and it has even been made a mat
ter of reproach against us by well-raeaning readers, that we have not,
prior to all the subjects here discussed, treated of the article of Church
authority. For it appears a matter of self-evidence, that any discus
sion respecting the doctrines of a confession, should be postponed fo
the inquiry into the authority which that confession follows, and the
sources from which it derives its tenets. In fact, this appears indeed
to be self-evident, if we merely look at the matter from without ; and
such an appearance has misled many. But, as we have made it our
duty everywhere to trace the inward bond of connexion pervading all
the details of the subject treated by us, and forming them into one
living connected whole, we saw ourselves corapelled to accord the pre
cedence to fhe raatter giving light before that which receives it, and to
the inwardly determining principle before that which is determined ;
and precisely for this reason we here insert the article on the Church,
and the authoritative sources of the different confessions. History
teaches us, that out of the pale of the Church, from the earliest
Egyptian Gnostic, down to the two general superintendents of Weimar
and Gotha,* Messrs. Roher, and Bretschneider,"}" Holy Writ never en-

* See Rohr, Letters on Rationalisra, p. 15. The writer, after asserting that in
raatters of faith and in the adoption of religious doctrines, reason alone decides, goes
on to say, " The Bible is, m his estimation, nothing raore than any other book. He
holds its declarations to be valid only when they are in accordance with his own con.
victions ; and these declarations do not constitute the ground of determination, for
these depend on their own rational proofs, but serve merely as an illustration, that
others also, 'wise men of antiquity, have so thought and believed."
f See Bretschneider's " St. Simonianism and Christianity, or Critical Exposition
of the St. Simonian religion, its relation to the Christian Church, and of the state of
Christianity in our times." Leipzig, 1832. As the result of the progress of intelU
gence in theological matters, in modem times, we are told by this author, " Not only

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 331

joyed the authority, which it raust lay claim to among Christians, of
determining by its purport their modes of thinking. On the contrary,
they were always preconceived opinions — opinions derived from sources
extraneousijj^thristianity, that were made the standard for estimating
the authori|^B Scripture, the extent of that authority, and the mode
of its use, alThough this might not always be so openly and candidly
confessed, as in the case of the two above-mentioned rationalists. Se
veral of fhe smaller religious sects, — the Anabaptists, the Quakers,
the Swedenborgians, and others, — are in modern times irrefragable
vouchers for the truth of what is here asserted. As regards Luther, he
by no means first abandoned the faith in the Catholic doctrine of the
Church, and of the relation of the same to Holy Writ, and then changed
what he found reprehensible in the dogmas of the Church. Still less
did he raake use of the principles, according to which he formed his
theory of the Church, to deduce from them his other doctrines. On
the contrary, the very reverse took place in both respects. In regard
to the first assertion, it is well known that the earliest attacks of Luther
were by no means directed against the principle of the Catholic Church
and her authority ; nay, he declared himself at the outset ready to subrait
his peculiar doctrines to the judgraent of the Church, and he had to
endure a grievous struggle with his conscience, whereof he hiraself has
given us a raost interesting description, until he at length obtained a
melancholy victory, and until the troubled spirit departed from him.
Had the Catholic Church agreed to recognize his doctrine, he in his
turn would ever have acknowledged her authority. And assuredly, as
far as he was concerned, he would have found no difficulty in iti ng
two things so contradictory, as his dogma, and ihe Catholic Church ;
and, as he had often succeeded in coupling, as a peaceful pair, two
things inwardly opposed to each other, so he would have made the at
tempt here. But, with sound perception, the organs of the Church ob
served, that deleterious raatter was infused by him into ecclesiastical
life. Summoned now, either to renounce as erroneous his peculiar doc
trine of Justification, together with the propositions determining the
same or determined by it, or no longer to flatter himself with the title

is the interpretation of Scripture to be abandoned to science, but even the contents
of Scripture discovered by such interpretation are to be estiraated according to the
sciences.'" This assertion, more closely analyzed, would signify that the sum total
of all the truths, which the sciences in general, metaphysical as well as empirical,
had brought forth, or raight yet bring forth, as common property, are the standard
for estimating the contents of the Bible. What then is the Deity in the opinion o
Mr. Bretschneider ? And what will he be yet ?

332 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
of a son of the Church, he felt necessitated, as he was the parent of
a new doctrine, to become the father of a new Church. Hence, it
appeared to hira raore honourable to execute what his own spirit sug
gested — rather to coraraand as a father, than to obey Jp^ son. He
now laid the foundations for another Church to be erecBpkj/ himself;
— whether on a rock, or in the sand, the sequel wiU show.
Yet that Luther had forraed a pecuUar theory of Justification, before
he entertained the clear idea of founding a new Church, is only a
subordinate raotive for our setting forth the exposition of doctrine, be-
fore the explanation of the article on the Church. For it not rarely
happens, that what is raerely an effect, is already clearly recognized,
while its cause, though long busy in the back-ground of huraan con
sciousness, exhibits itself only later in its full light, and with entire
clearness. Accordingly, it is perhaps possible, that Luther's other
tenets may stand in relation of internal dependence on his view of the
Church, although he may have been clearly conscious of his doctrine
of Justification by faith alone, prior to his doctrine on the Church, and
consequently may have given utterance to the former tenet, previously
to the latter. The principal point is, consequently, which of fhe two
furnishes a scientific explanation of the other ? We must thus adhere
to the latter of the two above-stated propositions. In the course of our
inquiries it wiU be made manifest, that Luther's, as well as Calvin's
and Zwingle's general moral views, especially their conception of the
relation of the believer to Christ, entirely pervade their theory of the
Church and of Scripture, and constitute the foundation of the same.
As, moreover, we consider the Catholic doctrines only in their opposi
tion to the peculiar tenets of Protestantisra, and the latter must accord
ingly determine what Catholic doctrines are to be here discussed, so
they raust also regulate the mode of the discussion. As thus the
Catholic doctrines are in a purely passive relation, and the Protestant,
if we are to pursue a scientific course, assign the present place to the
article on the Church ; so our method, quite independently of fhe rea
sons assigned in the first section, is in every way justified.
By the Church on earth, Catholics understand the visible comraunity
of beUevers, founded by Christ, in which, by means of an enduring
apostleship, established by hira,' and appointed to conduct aU nations, in
the course of ages, back to God, the works wrought by hira during
his earthly life, for the redemption and sanctification of mankind,
are, under the guidance of his spirit, continued to the end of the
world. Thus, to a visible society of men, is this great, important, and mys
terious work entrusted. The ultimate reason of the visibilitv of the

fiETWfiiJN CATMoLtdS AND PROTESTANTS. §33
Church is to be found in the incarnation of the Divine Word. Had
that Word descended into the hearts of men, without taking the form
of a servant) and accordingly without appearing in a corporeal shape,
then only an internal* invisible Church would have been established*
But since thirWord became jffies^, it expressed itself in an outward, per^
fceptible, and huraan manner ; it spoke as man to man, and suffered,
and worked after the fashion of men, in order to win them to the king-i
dom of God ; so that the means selected for the attainment of this ob-*
ject, fully corresponded to the general method of instruction and
education determined by the nature and the wants of man. This
decided the nature of those means. Whereby the Son of Godj even after
He had withdrawn hiraself from the eyes of the world, wished still to
work in the world, and for the world. The Deity having raanifested
its action in Christ according to an ordinary human fashion, the form
also in which His work was to be Continued, was thereby traced out*
The preaching of his doctrine needed now a visible, human mediumj
and must be entrusted to visible envoys, teaching and instructing after
the wonted method ; men must speak to men, and hold intercourse with
them, in order to convey to them the word of Godi And as in the
World nothing can attain to greatness but in society ; so Christ estab
lished a comraunity ; and his divine Word, his living will, and the love
eraanating frora him, exerted an internal, binding power upon his foU
lowers ! so that an incUnation implanted by him in the hearts of be^
lievers, corresponded to his outward institution. And thus a living
well-connected, visible association of the faithful sprang up, whereof it
might be said, — there they arej there is his Church, his institutiouj
wherein he continueth to live, his spirit Continueth to work, and the
Word uttered by him eternally resounds. Thus, the visible Church,
I from the point of view here taken, jijhe Son of God _himself, everlast
ingly manifesting hiraself among raen in a huraan form, perpetually
(renovated, and eternally young — 'the permanent incarnation of the
sarae, as in Holy Writ, even the faithful are called " the body of
Christ." Hence it is evident that the Church, though coraposed of men,
is yet not purely huraan. Nay, as in Christ, the divinity and the hu
manity are to be clearly distinguished, though both are bound in unity ;
so is he in undivided entireness perpetuated in the Church. The Church,
his permanent manifestation, is at once divine and human — she is the
union of both. He it is Who, concealed under earthly and human forms,
works in the Church ! and this is wherefore she has a divine and a hu
man part in an undivided mode, so that the divine cannot be separated
from the human, nor the huraan from the divine. Hence these two
parts change their predicates. If the divine-— the living Christ and

834 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
his spirit — constitute undoubtedly that which is infallible, and eternally
inerrable in the Church ; so also the human is infallible and inerrable
in the same way, because the divine without the huraan has no existence
for us : yet the huraan is not inerrable in itself, but only_as the organ,
and as the raanifestation of the divine. Hence, we are enabled to con
ceive, how so great, important and mysterious a charge could have even
entrusted to men.
In and through the Church the redemption, announced by Christ,
hath obtained, through the mediura of his spirit, a reality ; for in her his
truths are believed and his institutions are observed, and thereby have
becorae living. Accordingly, we can say of the Church, that she is
the Chiistian religion in its objective forra — its living exposition. Since
the word of Christ (taken in its widest signification) found, together
with his spirit, its way into a circle of raen, and was received by them,
it has taken shape, put on flesh and blood ; and this shape is the Church,
which accordingly is regarded by Catholics as the essential forra of the
Christian Religion itself. As the Redeemer by his word and his spirit
founded a community, wherein his word should ever be living, he in
trusted the sarae to this society, that it might be preserved and propa
gated. He deposited it in the Church, that it might spring out of her
ever the same, and yet eternally new, and young in energy ; that it
might grow up, and spread on all sides. His word can never raore be
separated from the Church, nor the Church from his word. The more
minute explanation, how in the comraunity established by Christ, this
word is maintained and propagated, and each individual Christian can
attain to the undoubted true possession of Christian doctrine, is accord
ingly the first and most iraportant matter, to which we must direct at
tention. But as the Church is connected with the apostleship estab
lished by Christ, and can by this only maintain itself; so this, in the
second place, must come under consideration. But it is necessary to
premise a closer examination of the leading propositions, on which all
others turn— a more detailed exposition of the ultiraate reasons for that
high reverence which Catholics pay to this Church.

tj XXXVII, — More detailed exposition of the Catholic 'view of the Church ,
When the time appointed by Christ for the sending down of the
Spirit was come, he coraraunicated himself to the apostles and the other
disciples, when gathered together in one place, and all of " one accord "
(nftofiufca^ov,) they were longing for his coraing. It was not while one
here, the other there, abode in some hidden place : nay, they were ex-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 33S
pressly commanded (Acts, i. 4) to wait for him, while assembled in
Jerusalem. At last the Holy Spirit, that had been promised, appeared .-
he took an outward shape — the form of fiery tongues-^— an iraage of his
power that cleansed hearts frora all wickedness, and thereby united
thera in love. He wished not to come inwardly, as if he designed to
uphold an invisible coraraunity ; but in the same way as the Word was
becorae_^esA, so he came in a manner obvious to the senses, and amid
violent sensible coraraotions, like to " a rushing mighty wind." If indi
viduals were filled with power from above in such a way, that, only in
as far as they constituted an unity, could they become participators of
the sarae ; and if the hallowing of the spirit took place under sensible
forms ; so, according to the ordinance of the Lord for all times, the
union of the interior man with Christ could take effect only under out
ward conditions, and in communion with his disciples. Under outward
conditions : for independently of outward instruction, what are the sa
craments but visible signs and testimonies of the invisible gifts con
nected with thera ? In communion : for no one by the act of baptism
sanctifies himself ; each one is, on the contrary, referred to those who
already belong to the community. Nor is any one but momentarily
introduced into fellowship with the members of the Church — to remain
only until, as one might iraagine, the holy action should be consummat-
ed ; for the fellowship is formed in order to be permanent, and the
communion begun, in order to be continued to the end of life. Baptism
is the introduction into the Church — -the reception into the comraunity
of the faithful, and involves the duty, as well as the right, of sharing for
ever in her joys and her sorrows. Moreover, the adrainistration of the
sacraments, as well. as the preaching of the word, was intrusted by the
Lord to the Apostolic College and to those commissioned by it ; so that
all believers, by means of this Apostolic College, are linked to the com
munity, and in a living manner connected with it. The fellowship
with Christ is accordingly the fellowship with his community — the in
ternal union with him a comraunion with his Church. Both are 'in
separable, and Christ is in the Church, and the Church in him. (Eph.
V. 29-33.)On this account, the Church, in the Catholic point of view, can as
little fail in the pure preservation of the word, as in any other part of
her task : — she is infallible. As the individual worshipper of Christ is
incorporated into the Church by indissoluble bonds, and is by the same
conducted unto the Saviour, and abideth in him only in so far as he
abideth in the Church, his faith and his conduct are determined by the
latter. He must bestow his whole confidence upon her ; and she must
therefore merit the same. Giving himself up to her guidance, he ought

m& EXPOSITION OE DOCTRINAL DIPPERENCES
in consequence to be secured against delusion : she must be inerrable,
To no individual, [considered eis such, doth infaUibiUty belong ; for the
CathoUc, as is clear from the preceding observations, regards the indi
vidual only as a raeraber of the whole ; — as living and breathing in the
Church, When his feelings, thoughts, and will, are conformable to her
spirit, then only can the individual attain to inerrability. Were the
Church to conceive the relation of the individual to the whole in an
opposite sense, and consider hira as personally infallible, then she would
destroy the very notion of coraraunity ; for Comraunion can only be
conceived as necessary, when the true faith and pure and solid Chris
tian life cannot be conceived in individualization.
Hence, it is with the profoundest love, reverence, and devotion, that
the Catholic erabraces the Church. The very thought of resisting her,
of setting hiraself up in opposition to her will, is one against which his
inmost feelings revolt, to which his whole nature is abhorrent ; and to
bring about a schism — to destroy unity — is a crime, before whose hein*
ousness his bosom trembles, and from which his soul recoils. On the
other hand, the idea of coraraunity, in the first plaCe, satisfies his feeb
ings and his iraagination, and, in the second place, is equally agreeable
to his reason j while, in the third place, the living appropriation of this
idea by his will, appears to him to concur with the highest religious
and ethical duty of humanity. Let us now consider the first of these
reeisons. No more beautiful object presents itself to the imagination of
the Catholic-^^none more agreeably captivates his feelings, than the
image of the harmonious inter-workings of countless spirits, who, though
scattered over the whole globe, endowed with freedom, and possessing
the power to strike off into every deviation to the right or to the left ;
yet, preserving still their various peculiarities, constitute one great
brotherhood for the advancement of each other's spiritual existence, — '
representing one idea, that of the reconciliation of men with God, who
on that account have been reconciled with one another, and are become
orfe body. (Eph. iv. 1 1-16.) If the state be such a wonderful work
of art, that we account it, if not a pardonable, j'et a conceivable act,
for the ancients to have made it an object of divine worship, and almost
everywhere considered the duties of the citizen as the most iraportant ;
— if the state be soraething so sacred and venerable, that the thought of
the criminal, who lays on it a destroying and desecrating hand, fills
us with detestation ; — what a subject of admiration must the Church
be, which, with the tenderest bonds, unites such an infinite variety ;
and this unimpeded by every obstacle, by rivers and raountains, deserts
and seas, by languages, national manners, customs, and peculiarities
of every kind, whose stubborn, unyielding nature defies the power of

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 337
the mightiest conquerors ? Her peace, which cometh down from Hea
ven, strikes deeper roots into the human breast, than the spirit of earth-
ly contention. Out of all nations, often so deeply divided by political
interests and temporal considerations, the Church builds up the house
of God, in which all join in one hyran of praise ; as, in the teraple of
the harmless village, all petty foes and adversaries gather round the
one sanctuary with one mind. And as often here, on a small scale, the
peace of God wiU bring about earthly peace, so there, on a larger scale,
the same result will frequently ensue. But who can deem it a matter
of astonishraent, that Catholics should be filled with joy and hope, and,
enraptured at the view of the beautiful construction of their Church,
should conteraplate with delight, that grand corporation which they
form, since the philosophers of art declare, that the beautiful is only
truth manifested and embodied ? Christ, the eternal truth, hath built
theChurch: in the communion of the faithful, truth transformed by
his spirit into love, is becorae living among men : how could then the
Church fail in the highest degree of beauty 1 Hence, we can compre
hend that indescribable joy, which hath ever filled the Church, when
existing contests have been allayed, and schisms have been termi
nated. In the priraitive ages, we may adduce the reunion of the Nova-
tian coramunities with the Catholic Church, so movingly described by
Dionysius of Alexandria, and Cyprian of Carthage ; the termination
of the Meletian schism, and the rest. From a later period, we may
cite the event of the reunion of the Western and Eastern Churches,
which occured at the Council of Florence. Pope Eugenius IV, ex
presses what feelings then overflowed aU hearts, when he says, " Re
joice ye heavens, and exult, O earth : the waU of .separation is pulled
down, which divided the Eastern and the Western Churches ; peace
and concord have returned ; for Christ, the corner-stone, who, out of
two, hath made one, unites with the strongest bands of love both walls,
and holds them together in the covenant of eternal unity ; and so
after long and melancholy evUs, after the dense, cloudy darkness of a
protracted schism, the light of long-desired union beams once more
upon all. Let our raother, the Church, rejoice, to whora it hath been
granted to see her hitherto contending sons return to unity and peace ;
let her, who, during their division, shed such bitter tears, now thank
Almighty God for their beautiful concord. AU believers over the face
of the earth, aU who are oaUed after Christ, raay now conoratulate
their mother, the Catholic Church, and rejoice with her " &c.*

• Hard. Acta, Con, tom. ix. fd. 985. Eugenius spoke m the same strain, when
he informed the Christian princes and universities of the reconciUation m question, fol.
22

338 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
II. Yet it is not merely the imagination and the feelings of the Ca
tholic which are contented by his idea of the Church, but his reason
also is thereby satisfied, — and, indeed, because the idea which he has
conceived of the Church, alone corresponds to the notion of the Chris
tian Church, and to the end of revelation. It corresponds, in the first
place, to the notion of the Christian Church, as is clear from what fol
lows. Truth we cannot conceive other than as one, and fhe same
holds good of Christian truth. The Son of God, our Redeemer, is a
distinct being : he is what he is, and none other, eternaUy like unto
himself, constantly one and the same. Not in vain do the Holy Scrip
tures connect all with his person : the more they do this, the more im
portant is it to conceive him exacti}' as he really was. Certain it is
that every error, in relation to his person, exercises a more or less
injurious influence on the piety and virtue of its possessors ; whereas a
right knowledge of his person forras the surest and most solid basis of
a holy and happy life. In like manner will the pure appropriation of
his work, by, and in our souls, produce the richest, raost substantial, and
fairest fruits.; while any falsification of that work, in any one respect,
is sure to be attended with injurious consequences to practical Ufe.
As Chiist, therefore, is one, and his work is one in itself, as accordingly
there is but one truth, and truth only maketh free, so he can have
willed but one Church ; for the Church rests on the basis of belief in
him, and hath eternally to announce him and his work. On the other
hand, the human mind is every where the same, and always, and in all
places, created for truth and the one truth. Its essential spiritual
wants, amid all the changing relations of time and place, amid all the
distinctions of culture and education, reraain eternally the same : we
are all sinners, and stand in need of grace ; and the faith which one
has embraced in the filial siraplicity of his heart, another cannot out
grow, though ho be gifted with the subtlest intellect, and possess all the
accuraulated wisdora which the genius of man, in every zone, and in
every period of his history, may have produced. Thus, the oneness of
the human spirit, as well as the oneness of truth, which is the food of
spirits, justifies, in the view of the reflecting Catholic, the notion of the
one visible Church.
But secondly, the end of revelation requires a Church, as the Catho..
lie conceives it ; that is, a Church one, and necessarily visible. The
manifestation of the eternal Word in the flesh, had the acknowledged

1000. At the same tirae, the Arraenians and Jacobins, as the docuraents style
them, meaning the Jacobites and Copts, renounced their errors and united with fhe
Latins, fol. 1015-1025,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. SS9
'¦end to enabfe man (who by his own resources was capable neither of
Dbtaining, with full assurance, a true knowledge of God and of his own
nature, nor of mastering that knowledge even with the aid of old sur
viving traditions,) to enable man^ we say, to penetrate with undoubting
certainty into reUgious truths. For those truths, as we stated above,
will then only give a vigorous and lasting impulse to the will in an up
ward direction, when they have first taken strong hold of the reason,
whence they can exert their effects. The words of Archimedes, ^ii fw-e
TOt/ a-ra, are here applicable, and in an especial degree. The divine
truth, in one word, must be embodied in Christ Jesus, and thereby be
bodied forth in an outward and living phenomenon, and accordingly
become a deciding authority, in order to seize deeply on the whole
man, and to put an end to pagan SGepticism,^that sinful uncertainty
of the mind, which stands on as low a grade as ignorance.'*
But this object of the divine revelation in Christ Jesus, would, ac
cording to fhe conviction of Catholics, either have wholly faded, or in
any case have been very imperfectly attained, if this bodying forth of
the divine truth had been only momentary, and the personal manifes
tation of the Word had not had sufficient force to give to its sounds the
highest degree of intensive movement^ and to impart to them the utmost
efficacy, or in other words, to breathe into them the breath of life, and
call into existence a society, which, in its turn, should, be the living-
exposition of the truth, and remain unto all times a derivative, but ade
quate authority ; that is, should represent Christ hiraself.
This sense Catholics give to the words of the Lord, " As the Father
hath sent me, so I send you ;" " whoso heareth me, heareth you ;" "I
shall remain with you all days, even to the consummation of the
world ;" " I will send the Spirit of truth, who will lead you into all
truth." Man is so rauch a creature of sense, that the interior world—-
the world of ideas — raust be presented to hira in the form of an image,
to enable hira to obtain a consciousness, or to gain a true and clear ap"-
prehension of it, and to hold by it firmly as the truths and, indeed, the
image must be permanent, that, being present to every individual
through the whole course of human history, it may constantly renew
the prototype. Hence, the authority of the Church is necessary, if
Christ is to be a true, determining authority for us. Christ wrought

'• How beautiful are those words in the Preface for the Christmas mass,  " Vere
dignum et j ustum est, asquum et salutare, nos tibi semper et ubique gratias agere,
Domine Sancte, Pater omnipotens, ffiterne Deus. Quia per incarnati 'Verbi myste-
Tium nova mentis nostra oculis lux tua claritatis infulsit ; ut dum visibiliter Deum
¦cognoscimus, .per hv,nc in invisibilium amorem rapiamur,'" &c. &c»

340 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
miracles; nay, his whole life was a miracle, not merely to establish the
credibility of his words, but also immediately to represent end symbolize
the most exalted truths ; to wit, God's oranipotence, wisdom, love, and
justice, the immortality of man, and bis worth in the e)'es of God. If
we adopt the idea of an invisible Church, then neither the incarnation
of the Son of God, nor his m'lraclcs, nor in general any outward, posi
tive revelation can be conceived ; because the} compromise authorita
tive proofs, outward visible manifestations of eternal ideas ; and, accords
ingly they are by force of an internal necessity there gradually reject
ed, where it is assumed, that Christ has founded a mere invisible Chuich,
since the members of such a Church need only invisible internal
proofs to obtain certitude. On the olher hand, the authority of the
Church is the medium of all, which in the Christian religion resteth on
authority, and is authority, ihat is io say, ihe Cliristian religion itsclj ;
so thai Christ himself is only in so far an iniihority, as the Church is an
authority. We can never arrive at an external authority, like Christ, by purely
spiritual means. The atterapt would involve a contradiction, whicb
could only be disposed of in one of two ways ; either we must renounce
the idea, that in Christ God manifested himself in history, to the end,
that the conduct of mankind might be permanently determined by him,
or we raust learn the fact through a living, definite, and vuueliing fact.
Thus authority raust have authority fcr its medium. As Christ wislied
to be the adequate authority for all ages, ho created, by virtue of his
power, something homogeneous to it, and consequently something at
testing and represent'ing the sarae, eternally destined to bring his au
thority before all generations of men. lie established a credible insti
tution, in order to render the true faith in liimself perpetually possible.
Immediately founded by him, its existence is the de facto proof of what
he really was ; and in the same way as in his life he made, if [ may so
speak, the higher truths accessible to the senses, so doth his Church ;
for she hath sprung immediatelj' out of the vivid intuition of these sym
bolized truths. Thus, as Christ, in his life, repre,sented under a visible
typical form the higher order of the World, so the Church doth in like
manner ; since what he designed in his representation, hath through
the Church and in the Church been realized. If the Church be not
the authority representing Christ, then all again relapses into darkness,
uncertainty, doubt, distraction, unbelief, and superstition ; revel nt ion be
comes null and void, fails of its real purpose, and must henceforth be even
called in question, and finally denied.
The truth which the Catholic here expresses, can be, in another
way, made evident by occurrences in every-day life, and by great his-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 341
torical facts. The power of society in which raan lives, is so great, that
it ordinarily staraps its image on him, who coraes within its circle.
Whether it serve truth, or falsehood ; whether it direct its efforts to
wards higher objects, or follow ignoble pursuits ; invariably will it be
found to fashion the character of its merabers after its own model.
Hence, where scepticism has spread in a comraunity, and has impressed
its iraage on its bosom, it is a work of infinite difficulty for the indi
vidual to rise superior to its influence. Faith on fhe other hand, when
man sees it firraly estabUshed, like a rock, about him, and the comrau
nity, which presents a great and lively image of attachment to the Re
deemer and of happiness in hira — the coraraunity, we say, whose ira-
perishable existence is faith in hira, and accordingly himself, — necessa
rily seizes and fills up the whole mind of the individual. Accordingly,
should the religious man not live in a community, which hath the inde
structible consciousness of possessing the truth, "and which hath the
strongest internal and external grounds for that belief, such an indivi
dual would necessarily become a prey to the most distracting doubts,
and his faith would either take no root, or soon again wither.
Let us once raore recur to the miracles in the history of the Chris
tian religion, but regard the subject frora a different point. A certain
view of divine things, which hath once obtained full consistency among
any people, or any nuraber of nations, takes so strong a hold on the in
dividual man, that without some higher extraneous interposition, any
essential phange for the better, that is to say, any transition from false
hood to truth, is utterly irapossible. Had Christ not wrought rairacles ;
had the labours of the apostles not been accompanied with signs ; had
the Divine power to work such wonders not been transmitted to their
disciples, never would the Gospel have overcome the heathenism of the
Greek and Roman world. Error had usurped the rights which belong
to truth alone ; and man, who by his very nature is compelled to re
ceive the worship of the social state in which he has been fixed, as the
true expression, the faithful image of religious truth, as it is in itself,
needed, of course, extraordinary external proofs for the new order of
things ; and, indeed till such tirae as this order had been consolidated
into a vast social organisra. These high attestations, in favour of
truth, appear most strikingly and most frequently in the life of the Re
deemer hiraself; because the yet concentrated power of fhe old world
was first to be burst asunder, and those who were destined to be the
first fruits of the new kingdom of God, were to be torn from its magic
circle. In proportion as the boundaries of the Church were extended,
and fhe idea of redemption and the power of the cross were embodied
in a more vigorous social form, miracles declined, till at last they had

342 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES?
completely fulfilled their destination, and had caused the recognition of
the authority that was to supply their place. In this authority, as we
said above, they always continue their attestation, because that autho
rity is their own production ; and the Church is consciou.s of owing hei
very existence to those miracles, and without them cannot at all eon
ceive herself. Hence the fact again, that together with the authority
founded by these extraordinary works of God, faith, too, in these works
ever siraultaneously disappears.
Henec, what a whimsical — wc cannot say wonderful — race are tho
idealists of our time ! St. Paul, who had such a spiritual, but at fhe
sarae time ecclesiastical conception of all things, instituted so living a
relation between his faith and the conviction of the Lord's resurrection,
that he expressly declared, " If Christ be not risen from the dead, then
is our faith vain." And how was it otherwise possible, since in Chris
tianity, which is a divine and positive revelation, tho abstract idea and
the historical fact — the internal and the external truth are inseparably
united 1 Our idealists and spiritualists have no need of rairacles for the
confirmation of their faith ! Yes, truly, for that failh is one of their on-n
making, and not the failh in Chrisi ; and it would be indeed singular, if
God were to confirm a faith so fabricated by men. No less false and
idle is that idealism 'ivhich separates the authority of the Church from
fhe authority of Christ. Even in this point of view, the reverence
which the Catholic bears for his Church, is fully justified by rensen. As
from the beginning, the abstract idea and positive history, doctrine and
fact, internal and external truth, inward and outward testimony were
organicaUy united ; so raust religion and Church be conjoined, and this
for the reason, thai God became man. Could Satan succeed in annihi
lating the Christian Church, then the Christian religion would be at the
same time annihilated, and Christ hiraself would be vanquLshed by him.
III. The third point in which the Catholic finds his view of the
Church so coraraendablj, is, the influence which it has exerted on the
cultivation and direction of the will, on the religious and moral ame
lioration of the whole man. We speak here no longer of the influ
ence of a clear and firm belief, of the truth on the will — a firm-
ness of belief which only the recognition of an outward and
permanent teaching authority can produce — (of this we have al
ready spoken) — but of a direction given to the wiU by a living mem
bership, with an all-embracing, religious society. An ancient philoso
pher has, with reason, defined man to be a social aniraal. However
little the peculiarity of man's nature is here defined (for his peculiar
kind of sociabiUty is not pointed out,) yet, a deep trait of what deter
mines the civUization of man by means of man, is, in this definition,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 343
undoubtedly indicated. They are only races which, groaning under
fhe destiny of some heavy curse, have sunk into the savage state, that
becorae from the loss of their civilization seclusive, and with the most
Umited foresight faU back on their own resources, feel no want of an
intercourse with other nations, or of an exchange of ideas, of which
they possess nothing more, or of a communication of the products of
their industry and art, that have entirely disappeared. These produc
tions, which are already in themselves symbols of the intellectual cha
racter of their authors, flow into foreign countries, dressed, as it were,
in the mental habits and characteristics of their horae. Traces of the
spirit of all the nations through which these productions pass are im.
pressed upon them in their course ; so that they always arrive at the
place of their destination, with a wealth of a far higher kind, than that
which they intrinsically possess. From all these currents of civiliza
tion is the savage withdrawn ; for, because he is all-suflicient to hira
self, is he a savage, and because he is a savage, he suffices for himself*
When the foreigner (hostis) was synonymous with the enemy ; when
one's country, (Iran,) included all that was absolutely good, and abroad,
(Turan,) all that was absolutely evil ; when the gods in the east and the
west, in the land of the Colchians, the Cretans, and the Egyptians, re
joiced in the blood of foreigners, what a gloomy, ferocious existence
must have circumscribed nations, in this their seclusion and mutual in
dependence ! For the divinity of the nation was regaled with such
blood, only because the nation itself found therein a horrible gratifica
tion, and raade its own delight a standard for the joys of its deity.
The maintenance of intercourse and communion with foreigners, and ac
cordingly, ihe voluntary establishment of relation of dependence on ihem,
is thus an absolute condition to the general civilization of man ; so that
the more this coraraunion and mutual dependence is extended, that is
to say, the raore the notion of what is foreign disappears, the more is
humanity exalted. With this general relation of dependence, the de
pendence of man on the domestic relations of law and government,
keeps equal pace. The more polished and civilized the merabers of a
state, the more are they bound together by wise ordinances, holy laws,
venerable customs and manners, which wisely determine the mutual

* Persius says, " With pepper and other productions of the South, science came to
the Romans." A sarcasra undoubtedly, whereby he meant to stigmatize the luxury
that was at the same tirae diffused ; sapientia cum saporis mercibus invecta. But in
this fact lie truths exalted above all satire, although as hi every thing great, much that
was deplorable, every kind of vice, despotism, &,c,, were intermingled with this
blessing.

344 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
relations of rights and duties ; so that, in fact, with every higher de
gree of internal freedom, the outward bonds are proportionably strait
ened. On the other hand, the greater the state of barbarism, the greater
is the external independence ; so that the wildest savage is, in a mate
rial point of view, the most free.
What do these facts import, but a wonderful, mjsterious, inexplica
ble, connexion of the individual man with the human race ; .so that
he comprehends himself better, the more he seems to be absorbed in
his kind, and it is only in humanity that raan is understood ? Yet, this
internal eraancipation by means of outward restraints, of which we have
hitherto spoken, is not that which is the most interior ; and serves
only as a similitude or illustration of something higher. The true eraan
cipation from low-mindedness and self-seeking, is a problem, which, as
is avowed, religion alone can solve. In the same way as civilization is
deterrained by political life, and by obedience to the institutions of the
state, yea, even by the dependence, though naturally looser, on other
nations; so is true religiousness promoted by subjection to the Church.
For it is an incontrovertible maxim of experience, that the individual
who is unconnected with any ecclesiastical community, has either no
religion, or a very meagre and scanty one, or is given up to a distem
pered fancy, and a wild fanaticism ; so that in none of the three cases,
can religion exert her blessed influences. On the other hand, the more
stable the ecclesiastical coraraunity to which we belong, the more will
the true, interior qualities of raan expand, and bloora forth in freedom ;
so that he who will lead a righteous life in the Catholic Church, whereof
the very principle is the real unity and vital communion of aU believers,
he, we sav, wdl attain to the highest degree of moral and religious per
fection. It is no insane conception — -no idle phantom — no illusion of a
distempered raind, which he embraces, and to which he surrenders his
obedience ; but it is a reality, and a holy reality, wherein true faith,
and love manifesting it.self in deeds, coupled with humility and self-de
nial in the strongest and most comprehensive sense of the words, are
nurtured. The more widely diffused the community, to which the
Catholic belongs, the more defined and the more manifold are the rela
tions wherein he stands, the more multiplied the bonds wherewith he is
encompassed. But, as we said above, those very bonds, which exhibit
the reality of the coraraunity, produce a result the very reverse of re
straint, and establish the internal freedora of man, br promote the purest
humanity ; for this expression raay be used, since God becarae raan.
Without external bonds, there is no frue spiritual association, so that
the idea of a mere invisible, universal community, to which we should
belong, is an idle, unprofitable phantom of the imagination and of dis-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 345
tempered feelings, destitute of all influence on raankind. In'^propor-
tion only as a religious society approximates to the Catholic Church,
doth it exert a raore efficacious influence on spiritual life. Here, in
deed, we raay observe, as shall be afterwards proved, that it is only ac
cording to Catholic principles, that a Church can be consistently forraed ;
and, where out of her pale anything of the kind exists, the truth of what
we assert is confirmed, to wit, that where a ray of true Christian light
doth fall, it will have the effect of binding and uniting, whereby all the
doctrines tending to schism and division are, practicaUy at least re
futed. And what the Catholic, in the way described, feels and thinks, wishes
and strives for, he finds clearly laid down in Holy Writ. The divine
founder of the Church, in the following important words, enlarges,
araong other things, on the oneness and visibility of the community,
into which those, who were to take his narae, were to be received : —
" And not for thera only do I pray, but for them also who through their
word shall believe in me, that they all raay be one, as thou Father in me,
and I in thee : that they also may be one in us ; that the world may
beUeve that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou hast given
me, I have given to them, that they raay be one, as we also are one.
I in thera, and thou in me, that they raay be made perfect in one : and
the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as
thou hast also loved me." (John xvii. 20, 24.) What fulness of
thoughts we find here I The Lord putteth up a prayer for the gift of
unity, and the union of all who shall beUeve ; and for an unity, too,
which finds its model only in the relation existing between fhe Father
and the Son of Man. " In us shaU they be one :" that is to say, the
unity of those believing in me is of so exalted a nature, that it is only
by the comraunication of a higher Ufe, by a divine principle, it can be
brought about by the one faith, the sarae hope, and love, which are of
divine institution. In the same way as the living foundation of this
unity is divine, so shall it be attended with divine effects : by this unity
the world shall recognize the heavenly mission of Christ. The unity
must be a visible unity, — obvious to the eyes, perceptible by the iden-
tity of doctrine, by the real rautual relations and comraunion of all the
followers of Christ with each other; for otherwise the consequences ad
verted fo could not be deduced from it. Thus the true vital commu
nion of aU attests the dignity of Christ, as every work vouches for its
master. On the other hand, in the schisms and dissensions among be
Uevers, the dignity of Christ is lost sight of; strangers are brought not
to the faith, and even those already believing are delivered up to doubt
and unbelief.

346 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
In expressions a Uttle altered, but stiU more energetic, the Saviour
now repeats the same prayer, whose mighty theme are the conditions
of the prosperity, the growth, and the duration of God's kingdom upon
earth. He saith ; — " The glory, which thou hast given me, I have
given to them : that they raay be one, as we are one. I in them, and
thou in me; that they may be made perfect in one." Or, in other
words, he would say : — The glorious destination, the mission which as
the Son of Mau I received from thee, for the glorification of thy narae,
to the end that I raight enter into the inmost fellowship with thee (I in
thee,) I have transferred to them also, that I might contract the most
Uving feUowship with them, in order that they might thereby attain unto
perfect unity. " And that the world may know that thou hast sent me,
and hast loved them, as thou hast also loved me," that is to say, their
oneness in aU things, — a oneness not to be brought about by human
powers, — oneness in believing, thought and will ; and every effort shall
be to unbelievers a sign that I have worked according to thy commis
sion, and with divine plenipotence; and that the believers are thy
chosen people, to whom, out of love, thou hast revealed thyself, as out of
love thou hast constituted me thine envoy. So speaketh the Lord hira
self. Paul the apostle is adrairable, when, in siraple words, he expounds
the relation between the law and grace, between the works of the law,
and faith : when he instructs us respecting the series of divine revela
tions, and the education of the human race by God, and respecting the
laws which govern the world's history. But his philosophy, ifl may
be allowed so to speak, his philosophy on man's social relations gene
rally, and on his ecclesiastical ones in particular, is, in depth, and raa
jestic simplicity, inferior to none of his other expositions. Our reason
feels itself irresistibly compelled to accede to his judgments, whether he
enlarge in general on the infirmity of the individual man, and the abso
lute necessity of aiding it, by attachment to a comraunity ; or whether
he point to the Umited powers of individual reason, and show how they
are dilated and improved, preserved, and rescued from destru&tion by
means of society ; or whether he remind us of the one spirit, that should
pervade all diversities, or of the diversities that are permitted in the one
spirit ; or, lastly, represent the idea, which he spirituaUy contemplates,
under the iraage of the relations of the members of the body. (1 Cor.
xii.) And how doth not our bosom swell, when he calls the attention
of his readers to the living foundation, out of which the new comrau
nity, that had appeared in the world, and was destined to unite all na
tions, had arisen. It is at tiraes, as if we felt the infinite power stirring
within us, which gave existence to that society. (Eph. iv. 16.) In

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 347
Christ, national distinctions, in a reUgious point of view, are obliterat
ed (Eph. xi. 15 ;) the enmities of people he hath destroyed, — he is be
corae our peace, and "by breaking down the raiddle wall of partition,"
hath made one out of two. All men, in a like degree, have in him access
to God ; but as in Christ they all becorae one, so they are united with
each other in one body and one spirit. (Eph. iv. 4.) All invites to this
unity ; the one Lord, the one baptisra, the one faith, the one God and
father of all. (Eph. iv. 5, 6.) The oneness of faith, and of the know
ledge of the Son of God, is at once the reality, and the suprerae ideal,
which should be aimed at ; and without this unity, in which the indivi
dual is strong, he is given up to every wind of doctrine, and to the
craftiness of men. (Eph. iv. 14.)
These, and similar passages are the foundations whereon the Catho
lic theory of the Church has been constructed. Hence flowed the in
spired eloquence of Cyprian ; hence Augustine drew his reflections on
the Church, which in depth of feeling and vigour of thought, contain by
far the most splendid things that, since the time of the apostles, have
been written on this subject. Hence, too, in later times came the
glow that warmed the iron bosoms of the chilly north, and melted thera
into a heat, whereby all the gold and silver of our modern European
civiUzation were by degrees purified from dross.
To the Catholic, it appears the most trivial proceeding, when such
pictures of the Church, as we have atterapted to trace, are ridiculed
as ideal representations, which have never had in past, nor ever will have
in all future tiraes, a perfectly corresponding reality. In fact, little is
told hira but what he already knows ; to wit, that the idea is not the vul
gar reality, and vice versa : but he knows likewise, that where there is
no fundaraental idea to any reality, there is as little fruth as where no
reality corresponds to the idea. He feels convinced that if, in the above-
mentioned manner, the doctrine of his Church is to be seriously assailed,
the gospel itself would be open to the same attacks ; for one might say,
" all is indeed exceUent and wonderful, which is there prescribed touch
ing the pious sentiraents and holiness of conduct which should distinguish
Christians : but do these sentiraents, and this conduct, really distinguish
thera ? This is the question at issue." Every thing must Uve accord
ing to an ideal, to which the vulgar reality is not equal ; for how else
could it be vulgar ? The wordu of the Lord, " Be ye perfect, as your
heavenly Father is perfect," wiU not therefore be vain, because no man
is like to God. No, wo to him who shall reject the ideal, because he
finds it not perfectly represented among raen.
Even the fact that at all tiraes, from our Lord and his apostles down-
wards, in the midst of whom a Judas was found, there has been much

348 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
evil in the Church, nay, that the evil seemed at tiraes to exceed the good,
cannot impair the reverence of Catholics for their Church. The Churrh,
as the institution of Christ, hath never erred, hath never becorae wicked,
and never loses its energy ; which is constantly evinced, though the
proof may not always be so obvious to the eye. To exhibit the king
dom of God on earth, and also to train mankind for the same, she has
had to deal with men who were all born sinners, and were taken frora
a raore or less corrupt raass. Thus she can never work out of the sphere
of evil, nay, her destination requires her to enter into the very raidst of
evil, and to put her renovating power continually to the test. The Ca
tholic Church, has, moreover, experienced a long, and often arduous,
history ; she has passed through periods of time wherein all the ele
ments of life were unbound, and in wild uproar seemed arrayed one
against the other. The anterior civilization, and the social institutions,
under which Christianity had hitherto flourished, were really destroyed
by savage and semi-barbarous hordes ; and they were not civilized
Greeks and Romans, but wild, untamed natures, who now entered into
the Church, which henceforth assumed quite another forra. As her
priests and bishops fall not frora the skies ; as she must take them out
of the description of men that the age can furnish ; she could indeed
for a succession of centuries boast of no Clemens of -Alexandria, no
Origen, no Cyprian, no Basil and Gregory of Nazianzen, no Hilary,
Jerome and Augustine, who were trained up in all the art and science
of ancient Greece and Rorae, before they becarae priests, or anywise
attached theraselves to the Church. And yet it is impossible to esti
mate the great and splendid things which the Church achieved in those
troublesome times ! Upon the foundation of the sarae doctrine, which
in raore flourishing ages had been developed into a systematic form,
universally received, the Church displayed her educating power. Nay,
aU the fulness of energy, which Christianity had raanifested in the fipst
centuries, it now again unfolded, though in quite another forra ; for the
raatter to be wrought was totally different. Under such circurastances,
there sprang up from the twelfth century a variety of sects, born of
yesterday, without any historical ancestry, consisting of a sraall nura-
ber of elect, to whora was vouchsafed the privilege of drearaing a
Church, and who ventured to urge against the existing Church, that
had passed through so many storms and revolutions, the reproach that
she had failed to fulfil her destination : and with the learning which
they had received from the Church, they resisted her on account of the
ignorance to be found within her. Had these creations of fancy and
selfishness, which they are certainly to be considered, even if we should
not deny the better eleraents they contained, borne the burden of ages

BETV^EEN CATHOLICS AND fHOTESTANTS. U9
liBposed on the Catholic Church, they would in the first moment have
sunk back into the original nothingness, from which they had emerged.
Doubtless, examples enough can be alleged of priests, bishops, and popes,
who, in the raost unconscionable and unjustifiable manner, have failed
to discharge their duty, when it was quite in their power to bring about
a reform of morals ; or who* by their own scandalous conduct and
lives, have extinguished the still glimmering torch, which they ought
to have kindled. Hell hath swallowed them up. Avowals of this
kind Catholics must not shrink from, and never have shrunk from : it
Would be even idle to atterapt to elude them, for the Protestants themi
selves furnish an irrefragable proof of the state of manifold neglect into
which the people had fallen during the fifteenth century. Never would
a system of doctrine like theirs have sprung up, still less have obtained
such wide diffusion) had individual teachers and priests been faithful to
the duties of their calling. Truly, the ignorance could not have been
slight, on which a system of faith, like that of the Refoiraers, was ira
posed as worthy of acceptance ; and thus Protestants raay learn to esti*
mate the raagnitude of the evU, which then oppressed the Church, by
the raagnitude of the errors into which they themselves have fallen.
This is the point at which Catholics and Protestants wUl) in great mul
titudes, one day raeet, and stretch a friendly hand one to the other.
Both, conscious of guUtj must exclaim, " We all have erred — it is lhe
Church only which cannot err ; we all have sinned — ^the Church only
is spotless on earth." This open confession of mutual guilt wiU be fol
lowed by the festival of reconcUiation. Meanwhile, we still smart under
the inexpressible pain of the wound which was then inflicted, — a pain
which can be aUeviated only by the consciousness that the wound has
become an issue, through which all the irapurities have flowed off, that
men had introduced into the wide compass of the dominions of the
Church ; for she herself is ever pure and eternally undefiled.
In thus stating the view which CathoUcs take of their Church, with*
out pretending to any completeness of detail, we think we have duly
prepared our readers for understanding the following section.
§ XXXVIII. — The Chureh as teacher and instructress. Tradition. The Church
as judge in matters of faith.
The main question, which we have now fo answer, is this ; how doth
man attain to possession of the true doctrine of Christ 5 or, to express
ourselves in a more general, and at once more accurate manner, how
doth man obtain a clear knowledge of the institute of salvation, proffered
in Christ Jesus ? The Protestant says, by searching Holy Writ, which

350 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
is infallible : the Catholic, on the other hand, replies, by the Churchi
in which alone man arrives at the true understanding of Holy Writ.
In a more minute exposition of his views, the Catholic continues i
doubtless the sacred Scriptures contain divino communications, and,
consequently, the pure truth: whether they contain all the truths,
which, in a reUgious and ecclesiastical point of view are necessary, or
at least very useful to be known, is a question which does not yet come
under consideration. Thus, the Scripture is God's unerring word : but
however the predicate of inerrability may belong io it, u-e ourselves are
not exempt from error ; nay, we only become so when wc have unerr'
ingly received the word, which is in itself inerrable. In this reception
of the word, huraan activity, which is fallible, has necessarily a part.
But, in order that, in this transit of the divine contents of the Sacred
Scriptures into possession of the huraan intellect, no gross iUusion or
general misrepresentation may occur, it is taught, that tho Divine
Spirit, to which are intrusted the guidance and vivification of the
Church, becomes, in its union with the human spirit in the Church,
a peculiarly Christian tact, a deep sure-guiding feeling, which, as it
abideth in truth, leads also into all truth. By a confiding attachment
to the perpetuated Apostleship, by education in the Church, by hearing,
learning, and living within her pale, by the reception of the higher
principle, which renders her eternally fruitful, a deep interior sense is
formed that alone is fitted for the perception and acceptance of tho
written Word, because it entirely coincides with the sense, in which the
Sacred_ Scriptures themselves were composed. If, with such a sen,se
acquired in the Church, the Sacred volume be perused, then its general
essential import is conveyed unaltered to the reader's mind. Nay,
when instruction through the apostleship, and the ecclesiastical educa
tion in the way described, takes place in the individual, the Sacred
Scriptures are not even necessary for our acquisition of their general
contents.'"

* We can see from Irenasus, adv. Haer. lib. iii, c, 3, how ancient the above laid
down doctrine is. With the clearest conviction it was pointed out, in the earliest
controversies in the Church ; and, in fact, if Christ hath founded a Church, nothing
can be more strikingly manifest than this view of the matter. Ircnseus says : " Tra-
ditionem apostolorum in toto ratmdo manifostatam, in omni ecclesia adest perspicerc
omnibus, qui vera velint audire ; et habemus annumerare eos, qui ab apostolis inslituti
sunt episcopi in ecclesiis, et successores eorum usque ad nos, qui nihil talc docuerunt,
neque cognoverunt, quale ddiratur ab his, . . . Tantas igitur ostensionis quura sint
hffic, non oportet adhuc quajrere apud alios veritatem, quara facile est ab ecclesia
sumere ; quum apostoli quasi in depositorium dives plenissime in eam detulerint omnia
quae sint veritatis ; ut omnis, quicunque velit, sumat ex ea potum vitae, Hffic est enim

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTEsTANTS. S51
This is the ordinary and regular course. But errors and misunder..
standings, more or less culpable, will never fail to occur ; and, as in the
times of the apostles, the word of God was corabated out of the word
of God, so this combat hath been renewed at all tiraes. What, under
such circumstances, is the course to be pursued ? How is the Divine
Word to be secured against the erroneous conceptions that have arisen ?
The general sense decides against particular opinion-^the judgraent
of the Church against that of the individual : the Church interprets the
Sacred Scriptures. The Church is the body of the Lord : it is, in its
universality, His visible form — -His perraanent, ever-renovated, human-
ity^His eternal revelation. He dwells in the community ; all His
proraises, all His gifts are bequeathed to the community^-but to no
individual, as such, since the tirae of the apostles. This general sense,
this ecclesiastical consciousness is tradition, in the subjective sense of
the word.* What then is tradition 1 The peculiar Christian sense ex-

vitse introitus : omnes autem reliqui fures stmt et latrones, propter quod oportet devi-
tare quidem illos : quae autem sunt ecclesiae cum summa dihgentia diligere, et appre
hendere veritatis traditionem  Quid autem, si neque apostoli quidem scriptra'as
reliquissent nobis, nonne oportebat sequi ordinem traditionis, quam tradiderunt iis,
quibus committebant ecclesias ? Cui ordinationi assentiunt multfe gentes barbarorum,
quorura qui in Christura eredunt, sine charta et atramento scriptum habentes perSpi.
ritum Sanctum in cordibus suis salutera, et veterera traditionera diligenter custodi.
entes, in unura Deura credentes. . . . Hanc fidem qui sme literis crediderunt, quan
tum ad sermonera nostrum, barbari sunt, quantum ad sententiara, et consuetudinem,
et conversationem, propter fidem, perquam sapientissirai sunt, et placent Deo, con-
versantes in omni justitia, et castitate, et sapientia. Quibus si aliquis aununtiaverit
ea, quae ab hefetiois adinventa sunt, proprio sermone eorum cdloquens, statim, con-
cludentes aures, longius fugient, ne audire quidera sustinentes blasphemum alloqui-
Um. Sic per iHam veterem apostolorum traditionem ne in conceptionem quidem
mentis admittunt, quodcunque eorura ostentiloquium est."
* Euseb. Hist, eccles. lib. v. c. 27; txtlK-ri'rtxa-Tixav <^p'rinfAX', Coraraonitor. Vin
cent. Lerins. c. 2, ed. Klupf, 1809, p, 90. " Hoc forsitan requurat aliquis : cum sit
perfeetus scripturarum canon, sibique ad omnia satis superque sulEciat ; quid opus est,
ut ei ecclesiastica intelligentia jungatvur auctoritaa ? Quia videlicet scripturam sa-
cram, pro ipsa sua altitudine, non uno eodemque sensti universi accipiimt ; sed ejusdem
eloquia aliter atque aliter alius atque alius interpretatur, ut pane quot homines sunt, tot
tllinc sententiae erui posse videantur,.., Atque idcirco multum necesse est, proptertantod
tam varii errorisanfractus, ut propheticae et apostolicae interpretationis linea secundum
ecclesiastici ei catholici sensds normam dlrigatur," These words occur immediately
after the conclusion of the first chapter, wherein he says, there are two ways whereby
the Catholic doctrine can be distinguished from the heretical : " Primum scilicet di-
vlnas legis auctoritate : tum deinde ecclesias Cathohoe traditione." By the Council
of Trent (Sess. iii. c, 2) tradition is called, " Universus ecclesia sensus," Sess, ivi
Decret, de editione et usti sacroram librorura : " Ut nerao su^ prudentiae iimixus, in
rebus fidei et morum ad aedificationem doctrlnte Christlanffi pertinentium, sacras

352 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
isting in the Church, and transmitted by ecclesiastical education ; yo(
this sense is not to be conceived as detached frora its subject-matter—"
nay, it is forraed in, and by this matter, so it may be called a full sense.
Tradition is the living word, perpetuated in the hearts of believers. To
this sense, as the general sense, the interpretation of Holy Writ is en
trusted. The declaration, which it pronounces on any controverted
subject, is the judgment of the Church ; and, therefore, the Church is
judge in matters of faith (judex controversiariim.) Tradition, in the
objective sense, is the general faith of the Church through all ages,
manifested by outward historical tcstiraonies ; in this sense, tradition
is usually terraed the norma ; the standard of Scriptural interpretation
- — the rule of faith.
IMoreover, the Divine Founder of our Church, when He constituted
the comraunity of believers, as His perraanent organ, had recourse to
no other law than that which prevails in every departraent of human
life. Each nation is endowed with a peculiar character, stamped on
the deepest, most hidden parts of its being, which distinguishes it from
all other nations, and manifests its peculiarity in public and domestic
life, in art and science, in short, in every relation. It is, as it were,
the tutelary genius ; the guiding spirit transraitted from its progenitors ;
the vivifying breath of the whole community ; and, indeed, tlie nations
anterior to Christianity, personified this their peculiar character, re
vered it as their national divinity, deduecd from it their civil and reli
gious laws and customs, and placed all things under its protection.
In every general act of a people, the national spirit is infallibly
expressed : and should contests, should selfish factions occur, the ele
raent destructive to the vital principle of the whole, will most certainly
be detected in thera, and the coraraotion, excited by an alien spirit,
either raiscarries, or is expelled, as long as the community preserves its
own self-consciousness, as long as its peculiar genius yet lives, and
works within it. If, on the other hand, things have come to such an
extremity, that the living bond. Which connects the present with the

scripturas ad suos sensus contorquens, contra eura sensum, quem tcntiit et tenet sane-
ta mater ecclesia, cujus est judicare de vero sensd et interpretatione scripturarum
sanctarum."  Decret, de canon. Script,. " Perspiciena hanc veritatem et dis-
ciplinam contineri in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus, quae ipsius Christi ore
ab apostolis acceptEB — traditiones ipsas, tum ad fidem, tum ad mores pertinentes,
tanquam vel ore tonus a Christo, vel a Sancto Spiritd dictatas, et continua succcs.
Bione in ecclesia Catolica conservatas, pari pietatis affectfi ac reverentia suscipit et
veneratur." Compare Melchior. Cani loc, theol. (lib. iii. c. 3, p. 179, seq. ed. Venet.)
on Tradition ; et. lib. iv. C. 4, p. 234, on the authority of the Church.

V. BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTa S53
ipasl, is dissevered ; that no concurrent national effort can be caUed
forth ; that all faUs into a state of confusion ; that struggle and oppo
sition totally efface the common characteristics of fhe community, or
reveal them only in the opposition, which is boasted of as Ufe ; then
there is no doubt that such a people is near its downfall, that its peculiar
plastic principle is already paralyzed, and its Divinity has ceased to
live. — '.' Pan is dead," did seamen hear resounded from every quarter,
at the period of the birth nf Christ.
To confine our attention, more particularly, to religious communi
ties, we need only look to the Chinese, and the Parsi, or to the Moham
medans, and we shall be astonished to observe how consistently,
throughout the course of their history, the principles, established at the
outset, were applied to details, how consistently the latter were con
ceived and modelled by the standard of the former. Let us investigate
the Hellenic Heathenisra also, and the raost perfect agreement between
the various religious phenoraena that have risen up in succession, and
the primitive fundaraental view cannot escape observation. Lastly,
let us contemplate the religious sect founded by Luther himself. The
developed doctrines of his Church, consigned as they are in the sym
bolical books, retain, on the whole, so much of his spiriti that on the
first view, they raust be recognized by the observer as genuine produc
tions of Luther. With a sure vital instinct, the opinions of the Ma-
jorists, the Synergists and others, were rejected as deadly ; and, indeed
(frora Luther's point of view,) as untrue, by that community whose soul,
v/hose living principle he was ; and the Church, which the Reformer
of Wittenberg established, proved herself the unerring interpretess of
his word.
Let us now, for a moraent, suppose the case, that the progenitors of
nations, and the founders of the above-mentioned religions, had been
real envoys from above : then must we consider the movement, that
emanated from them, as divine, yet as one which, by its transmission
to those attracted by its fundamental principle, had become human :
and the later collective actions, whereof we said, that they had retained
the spirit of the founder, would then be at once divine and human acts
and deeds. They would be divine, because they only worked out what
was originally given, and applied it to occurring relations and circum
stances ; human, because this development was carried on through the
agency of men ; lastly, an unerring standard of thought and action for
aU those who follow such a founder ; for the breath of life, which pro
ceeded from him, guides, like a natural impulse, the movements of the
whole community. According to this type hath the infallibility of the
Church also, in its interpretation of the Divine Word, been formed, and
23

364 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
by this standard we are to judge it. All the developments of its dog
raas and its raorality, which can be considered as resulting frora formal
acts of the whole body, are to be revered as the sentences of Christ
himself, and in these his spirit ever recurs. Here, indeed, subsists be
tween the Church and the above-naraed religiofis cominunilies tho
great difference, which must ever be maintained between Jesus Christ
and mere men. The institutions of the latter, even after the most con-
sistent expansion of their vital principles, advance to an inevitable end;
and their productions, however much they may have worked, according
to their original spirit, possess no greater value than that spirit itself,
and both, in an equal degree, sink by degrees into nothing.

§ XXXIX. — The Church as interpreter of Holy Writ, and the doctrine on Tradition
continued.
On these subjects. Scripture and tradition, and the relation of the
Church to both, we must now enter into fuller and clearer explanations.
Undoubtedly, on this raost important matter, the records of ecclesi
astical history will serve to throw the clearest light. If we except some
Jewish parties, which did not so much spring out of Christianity, as
wish to encumber it, in its infancy, with Judoeo-national observances,
the earliest sect were the Gnostics. Their doctrines on the eternal co
existence of an evil matter with God — on the creation and government
of the world, by an inferior spirit, the Deraiurgos — ^their principle of
Docetism and the rest, are too well known to be detailed here. How
ever decidedly, ia the opinion, perhaps, of all who now profes.3 Chris
tianity, these doctrines are adverse to its nature ; did the Gnostics, on
that account, suffer themselves to be convinced out of Scripture, of the
perversity of their views ? So far from it, they preferred to reject the
Old Testament, and to declare the Gospels to be falsified !* Tbere are
certainly few who have studied the Gnostic errors, that are not seized
with the deepest astonishment, how their partisans could possibly deem
their whimsical opinions, the fantastic forms of their demonology, &c.

* Even Tertullian, in his work (de Prajscript. c, xvii,) against heretics, lays down
some remarkable observations, which the experience even of the second century had
fumished him, " Ista hteresis non recipit quasdam scripturas ; ct si quas recipit, non
recipit integras, adjeetionibus et detractiunibus ad dispositionem instituti sui inter-
vertit, et si aliquatenus Integras prffistat, nihilominus diversas expositiones commen-
tata convertlt. . • • Quid promovebis, excrcitatissime scripturarum, quum si quid
defenderis, negetur ; ex diverse, si quid negaveris, defendatur ? Et tu quidera nihil
perdea nisi vocem in contentione : nihil consequeris, nisi bilem de blasphematione."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 355
to be Christian apostolic doctrines ; and many among us perhaps be
heve, that we could in a single hour confute thousands of them by the
Bible, and bring them back to pure Christianity. So confident did they
feel in their superiority, that they were even disposed to accuse their
then opponents of a want of dexterity, because they did not succeed.
But, when once a peculiar system of raoral life hath been caUed into
existence, should it even be coraposed of the raost corrupt eleraents, no
ordinary force of external proofs, no conclusions of ratiocination, no
eloquence, are able to destroy it : its roots lie mostly too deep to be per
vious to mortal eye : it can only perish of itself, becorae gradually ex
hausted, spend its rage, and disappear. But, as long as it flourishes, all
around is converted into a demonstration in its favour : the earth speaks
for it, and the Heavens are its warranty. Meanwhile, a new age, with
another spirit and other elements of life, springs up : this, without any
points of internal contact with the past, is often at a loss to comprehend
it, and deraands with astonishraent how its existence had been possible.
But should Divine Grace, which can alone enkindle the opposite true
life, succeed in delivering one individual from such errors, then he ex
presses the incoraprehensible and inconceivable nature of his forraer
state, by saying, that he had been, as it were, enchanted, and that sorae
thing, like scales, has fallen frora his eyes !
As the irapossibiUty was now raanifest of convincing the Gnostics of
the truth out of Holy Writ, must the Catholic Church declare, that the
questions whether God created the world, whether Christ were a true
man, should reraain in abeyance, till these doctrines were raade evident
to them by the testiraony of Scripture ? By no raeans. They were
directed to tradition — to the living world ; they were told that, if even
a doubt could arise as to the doctrine of Scripture, the announceraent
of the word perpetuated in the Church, since her first establishraent,
and the comraon faith of believers, decided the question clearly enouo'h •
and that to this decision, all who wish to attach themselves to Christ,
and choose hira for the Shepherd of their souls, ought not to refuse obe
dience. The teachers of the Church, indeed, by no raeans oraitted to employ
Scripture for the refutation of the Gnostics, and to appeal to its testi
mony in detailed expositions. But herein, one learned investigation was
but opposed to another : man stood against man, and the Bible on both
sides.* By adherence to Scripture, the individual Christian could un-

* This fact misled Dr. Lucke, in his writing, " On the authority of Scripture, and
its relation to the rule of faith in the Protestant and the ancient Church ; three theo.
logical epistles to Dr. Delbruck, from Dr. Sack, Dr. Nitzch, and Dr. Lucke ;" pp.

3S6 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
doubtedly convince himself, that the Gnostics were involved in grievous
errors. Of this he was subjectively certain : but as the adversary had
the Uke subjective conviction, that the true Christian view of the world
was to be found on his side, the objectivity of Christianitj' would have
necessarily disappeared, if, besides the Bible, there had not been a rule
of faith, to wit, universal Tradition.* Without this rule, it would ever
be irapossible to deterraine with positiveness, safety, and general obli
gation, the peculiar doctrines of Christianity. The individual, at best,
could only hazard the assertion, this is my view, my interpretation of
Scripture ; or, in other words, without tradition there would be no doc
trine of the Church, and no Church, but individual Christians only ; no
certainty and security, but only doubt and probability.
Scarcely had the struggle of the Catholic Church with Gnosticism
reached its highest point, when, in the most decided contrast with the
latter, the one class of Unitarians arose ; for these, and not, as Nean
der thinks, the Montanisfs, forra the contrary extreme to the Gnostics.
If the Gnostics saw in Christianity nothing hut what was divine, and in
Christ recognized merely the divine reason, so that they attributed to
the Redeeraer only an apparent body, represented him as merely put
ting on an iUusive form of man, but not taking the real nature of man,
and regarded raoreover the visible world as thoroughly evil ; these Uni
tarians on the other hand, discovered in the Saviour a raere man, en
lightened by Heaven ; and consistently with this doctrine, denied the
descent of the Divine Spirit upon the apostles and the Church, and the
high supernatural aids of grace ; which they the less needed, as they
acknowledged the existence of no deeply implanted corruption in human
nature. Did the former look upon the Gospel as a plastic impulse, a

V25, 141, 142, 145. Not only Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Novatian, Origen, and others,
prove the Catholic dogmas out of the Bible also, but in all ages, down to tho present
day. Catholics adduce the scriptural proof,
• Tertullian, in the work first cited, c, 18, makes the following luminous obaerva-
tions, drawn fresh from life : " Si quis est, cujus causa in congressum dcscendis
scripturarum, ut eum dubitantem confinnes, ad veritatem, an magis ad haereseB di.
verget 1 Hoc ipso motus, quod te videat nihil promovisse, aequo gradu negandi et
defendendi adversA parte, statu certe pari, altercatione incertior discedet, nesciens
quam hsresim judicet." . , , C, 19 : " Ergo non ad scripturas provocandum est :
nee in his constituendum eertamen, in quibus aut nulla aut incerta victoria est, aut
par incertae. Nam etsi non ita evaderet coUatio scripturarum, ut utrumque partem
parem sisteret, ordo rerum desiderabat, prius proponi, quod nunc solum disputandum
est : quibus competat fides ipsa 1 Cujus sint scripturis ? A quo, et per quos, et
quando, et quibus sit tradita disciplina, qua. fiunt Christiani 1 Ubi enim apparuerit
esse veritatem et disciplinae et fidei Christianae, ilHc erit Veritas scripturarum et expo-
aitionura et omnium traditionum Christianarum."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. .'157
divine gerra of life, a celestial energy ; so the latter regarded it as a law
of formation, a dead rule, an abstract notion, a pure ethical system, by
application whereof the defects to be found in our otherwise excellent
moral nature, may be totally eradicated. The Unitarians of this class
(after falsifying Holy Writ), appealed to the sarae, and by the rejection
of tradition, relied exclusively on its authority.* What course, under
these circumstances, was the Church to be advised ? Was she to de
clare that every one was provisionally to follow his own views, until
results, satisfactory to each individual, could be raore surely obtained
from the study of Holy Writ ? Most undoubtedly, if the Church had
been a mere historico-antiquarian association ; if she had had no con
ception of herself, of her foundation, of her essence, and of her task,
and no sense of the power of faith. But, as she enjoyed the possession
of these, she acted otherwise, and frora her conduct clearly resound the
words : " eternally certain is the doctrine of the Redeemer to his disci
ples — the written word is one with the living — that which is inscribed
on paper and parchment, with that which is engraven on hearts by the
power of the Holy Spirit ; and the doubts, which raay arise out of the
forraer, are dispelled by the latter." The faith existing in the Church,
frora the beginning throughout all ages, is the infallible standard to de
terraine the true sense of Scripture ; and accordingly it is certain, be
yond the shadow of doubt, that the Redeeraer is God, and hath filled
us even with divine power. In fact, he who grounds his faith on Scrip-
f ture only, that is, on the result of his exegetical studies, has no faith,
can have none, and understands not its very nature. Must he not be
always ready to receive better inforraation ; raust he not admit the pos
sibility, that by mature study of Scripture, another result may be ob
tained, than that which has already been arrived at ? The thought of
this very possibility precludes the establishment of any decided, perfect
ly undoubting, and unshaken faith, which, after all, is alone deserving
of the name. He who says, " this is my faith," hath no faith. Faith,
unity of faith, universality of faith, are one and the same ; fhey are but
different expressions of the sarae notion. He who, if even he should
not believe the truth, yet beUeves truly, believes at the sarae time that
he holds fast the doctrine of Christ, that he shares the faith with the
Apostles, and with the Church founded by the Redeeraer, that there is
but one faith in all ages, and one only true one. This faith is alone
rational, and alone worthy of man ; every other should be called a mere
opinion, and, in a practical point of view, is an utter impotency.

* Euseb. Hist. Eed. lib. v, c 27.

35S EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Ages passed by, and with them the ancient sects: new tiraes arose,
bringing along with them new schisms in the Church. The formal prin
ciples of aU these productions of egotism were the sarae ; all asserted
that Holy Writ, abstracted frora Tradition and frora the Church, is at
once the sole source of religious truth, and the sole standard of its
knowledge for the individual. This formal principle, common to aU
parties, separated frora the Church ; to the Gnostic of the second
century, and the Albigensian and Vaudois of the twelfth, to the Sabel-
Uan of the third, the Arian of the fourth, and the Nestorian of the
fifth century — this principle, we say, led to the most contradictory
belief. What indeed can be more opposite to each other, than Gnosti
cisra and Pelagianisra, than SaboUianisra and Arianisra ?* The very
circumstance, indeed, that one and the same formal principle can be
applied to every possible mode of belief ; or rather that this belief, how
ever contradictory it may be in itself, can still raake use of that formal
principle, should alone convince every one, that grievous errors must
here lie concealed, and that between the individual and the Bible a
raediating principle is wanting.
What is indeed more striking than the fact, that every later reUgious
sect doth not deny that the Catholic Church, 'in respect to the parties
that had previously seceded frora her, has in substance right on her

* With respect to the Arians, compare Athanasius de Synodo, § 1 3-1 4, 40, 43, 47 ; "
Basil de Spirita Sancto, c. 10. " Id quod impugnatur fides est, isque scopus est com-
raunis omnibus adversariis et sanie doctrinae inimicis, utsohditatcm fidei in Christum
concutiant, apostolicara traditionem solo aequalem abolendo. Ea propter, sicut solent,
qui bonae fidei debitores sunt, probationes c Scriptura clamore exigunt. Patrum tes-
tiraoniura, quod scriptum non est, velut nullius momenti rejicientos." Corapare c.
27, Augustin. lib. i. contra Maxlmin : " Si quid de divinis protuleris," says the Arian ;
" quod coraraune est cura omnibus, necesse est ut audiamus. Hie vero voces, qute
extra scripturam sunt, nuUo casa k nobis suscipiuntur. PraBterea quum ipse Domi-
nus raoneat nos, et dicat : sine causa colunt me, docentes raandata et prtecepta ho
minum." In August, de Nat. et grat. t. 39, Pelagius thus expresses himself: "Cre.
damus igitur quod legimus, et quod non legimus, nefas credamus adstruere." Etu
tyches, act I. Concil. Chalced. in Hard. Act. Concil. tom. ii. p. 186: ""Eto/^ov jaj
cant mxt s<f stirxs Txi; IxS-tTiTi ,tZv ayim Trx.'ripm, tZv ts h tiixxlcf xx) ev 'E<f sir^ th oi/W»y
-jr-nyiTXfx^ym, a-oyri^i'^xt, xx) v-^aypdpuv rxig ipfxijuixtg xurZv l/uchcya- uSiTrtiu Tvyjiitt
TCx^ olutZv tv ria-t Ki'^iTi H ^ixT<^xK^h, M S-txTrKxvii^iv , TOyTo y.mi ^ixfidwiiv, fJLtii-i xxrx-
U-^ti^xi. fj.ovxg Si Tlie ypx<fas ipiovfv, i,; /li/ixtoTifxc Cfucras T»t T,;v -rrxiipav 'ix^iaUK «.. t.
\." " He said that he was ready to receive the decrees of the holy fathers assem
bled in the Councils of Nice and Ephesus, and he promises to subscribe to their de
finitions. But, if in their declarations any thing by chance should be found either
unsound or false, he says that he will neither reject nor approve of it ; but search the
Scripture alone, as being more sohd thau all the decrees of the fathers."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 359
side, and even recognizes in these cases her dograatic decisions ; while
on the other hand, it disputes her formal principles ? Would this
ecclesiastical doctrine, so formed and so approved of, have been pos
sible, without the peculiar view the Church entertained of herself?
Doth not the one deterraine fhe other ? With joy the Arian recognizes
what has been decided by the Church against the Gnostics ; but he
does not keep in view the raanner in which she proceeded against
them ; and he will not consider that those dogmas on which he agrees
with the Church, she would not have saved and handed down to his
time, had she acted according to those forraal principles which he
requires of her, and on which he stands. The Pelagian and the Nes
torian, erabrace also, with the raost undoubting faith, the decisions of
the Church against the Arians. But as soon as the turn coraes to
either, he becoraes as it were stupified, and is inconsiderate enough to
desire the raatter of Christian doctrine without the appropriate ecclesi
astical forra — without that form, consequently, by .the very neglect
whereof those parties, to which he is most heartily opposed, have faUen
on the adoption of their articles of belief. It was the sarae with Luther
and Calvin. The pure Christian dograas, in opposition to the errors
of the Gnostics, Paulicians, Arians, Pelagians, Nestorians, Menophysites
and others, they received with the most praiseworthy firraness and
fervency of faith. But, when they took a fancy to deliver their theses
on the relations between faith and works, between free-will and grace,
or however else they may be called, they trod (as to forra) quite in the
footsteps of those whom they execrated, and when they were able to
obtain possession of their persons, even burned them.*

* The observation of Chemnitius (in Exam. Cone, Trident. P. i. p. 118, and still
raore further on,) is very remarkable. He says, Ireneeus and Tertullian, who ap
pealed to tradition, wished only to show that tradition agreed with Scripture. " Non
video, si integra disputatio eonsideretur, quomodo alia inde possit erui sententia, quam
quod ostendat consensum traditionis apostolicffi cum Scriptura, ita ut eadem sit doc
trina, quara Scripture tradit, et quam priraitiva ecclesia ex apostolorura traditione ac-
ceperat. P. 22 1 : Et omnia sunt sacris Scripturis consona, quae nos et recipiraus et profi-
teraur." Hence, he draws the conclusion, that tcstiraonies for tradition from the se
cond, third and fourth centuries, could not be tumed against the Protestants, because
they receive all which was then decided through tradition against the heretics. But
Chemnitius did not place himself in the right point of view. He ought to have con
sidered, that if in the matter under discussion, Catholics appeal to Tertullian and
others, the question is not respecting any particular doctrine, but about the very prin
ciple of tradition. Chemnitius, indeed, for the most part agrees with Catholics in
their doctrinal decisions against the Gnostics; but, as regards tradition, in a formal
point of view, he stands quite on the side of the latter. He must have learned from

360 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
This accordingly is the doctrine of Catholics. Thou wilt obtain the
knowledge full and entire of the Christian religion, only in connection
with its essential form, which is the Church. Look at tbe Scripture
in an ecclesiastical spirit, and it wUI present thee an iraage perfectly
resembling the Church. Contemplate Christ in, and with his creation
—the Church ; the only adequate authority ; the only authority repre
senting Him, and thou wdt then stamp His image on thy soul. Should
it, however, be stated, in ridicule of this principle, that it were tho
sarae as to say — '' Look at the Bible through the spectacles of the
Church," be not disturbed, for it is better for thee to contemplate the
star by the aid of a glass, than to let it escape thy dnU organ of 'Vision,
and be lost in mist and darkness. Spectacles, besides, thou must
always use, but only beware lest thou get them constructed by the first
casual glass-grinder, and fixed upon thy nose.

§ XI- — Formal distinction between Scriptural and Ecclesiastical Doctrine.
If we have hitherto shown that, conformably to the principles of
CathoUcs, the doctrine of Scripture is one and the same with the doc
trine of the Church, since the Church hath to interpret the Scripture,
and in this interpretation cannot err ; so this unity appUes to the sub
stance only, and not to the form. In respect to the latter, a diversity
is found inherent in the very essence and object of the Church ; s(}
that, indeed, if the divine truth must be preserved and propagated by
human organs, the diversity we speak of could not possibly be avoided,
as will appear from the following observations. The conduct of the
Redeeraer, in the announcement of His Word, was corresponded to by
that of the apostles, and the Word becarae immediately in them faith
— a human possession — and after his ascension, existed for the world in
no other form than in this faith of the Lord's disciples, whose kernel in
Peter he therefore called the rock, whereon his Church was, in such a
way, to be built, that the powers of hell should never prevail against it.
But, after the Divine Word had become human faith, it must be subject
to all mere human destinies. It must be constantly received by all

the writings of Irenteus and Tertullian, that the most simple and fundamental doc
trines of Christianity could not even be established by Scripture. Then he proceeds
farther (p. 128.) " Veteres daranaverunt Samosatenum et deinde Arimn. Judex
erat verbum Dei, id est, testimonia ex Evangelio... quae convincunt non ealumniose
judicantem." Certainly, and the judges of doctrine at the Council of Nice were
incapable of convincing, out of Holy Writ, the Arians of their error, precisely be.
cause these were the " ealumniose judicantesj'

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 361
fhe energies of the human mind, and imbibed by the same. The pre
servation and communication of the Word were, in like manner, at
tached to a human method. Even with the evangelists, who only
wished to recount what Christ had spoken, wrought, and suffered, the
Divine Word appears subject to the law here described ; a law which
manifests itself in the choice and arrangement of fhe matter, as well as
in the special plan, which each proposed to himself, and in the general
conception and execution of his task.
But, the Divine Word becarae still more subject to this law, when
the apostles were fulfilling their mission — executing the divine charge,
which they had received ; for, various questions of dispute arose, the
settleraent whereof could not be avoided, and on that account clairaed
huraan reflection, and required the forraation of notions, judgments,
and conclusions — things which were not possible to be effected, without
tasking the reason and the understanding. The application of the
energies of fhe human mind to the subject-matter, received from fhe
Lord, necessarily caused the Divine Word, on one hand, to be analyzed,
and, on the other hand, to be reduced to certain leading points ; and the
raultiplicity of objects to be contemplated in their mutual bearings, and
resolved into a higher unity, whereby the human mind obtained, on
these raatters, greater clearness and definiteness of conception. For,
every thing, that the huraan raind hath received from an external j
source, and which is destined tg become its property, wherein it must s
find itself perfectly at home, must first be reproduced by the human
mind itself. The original doctrine, as the huraan raind had variously
elaborated it, exhibited itself in a much altered form ; it remained the
original, and yet did not; it was the same in the substance, and yet
differed as to form. In this process of the development of the Divine
Word, during the apostolic age, we may exalt as high, and extend as
wide as we please the divine guidance, given to the disciples of Christ ; '
yet certainly, without huraan co-operation, without the peculiar activity '
of raan, it did not advance of itself. As in the good work of the /
Christian, free-will and grace pervade each other, and one and the/
sarae undivided deed is at once divine and huraan, so we find this to
be the case here.
The sarae could not fail to hold good, even after the death of the
apostles, even after the Gospels and the Epistles were written ; and
whatever else we include in the canon of the New Testament, were
already in the hands of the faithful. When, in the manner described,
the Church explains and secures the original doctrine of faith against
raisrepresentations, the apostolic expression is necessarily changed for
another, which is the most fitted alike clearly to set forth and reject

362 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
the particular error of the tirae. As little as the apostles thcmsi Ives, in
the course of their polemics, could retain the forra, wherein the .Saviour
expounded his divine doctrine; so Uttle was the Church enabled to
adhere to the sarae. If the evangelical doctrine be assailed by a de
finite theological systera, and a terrainology peculiar to itself ; the false
notions cannot by any means be repelled in a clear, distinct, evident,
and intelligible raanner, unless the Church have regard to the form of
the error, and exhibit its thesis in a shape, qualified by the garb, wherein
the adverse doctrine is invested, and thus render itself intelligible to
all conteraporaries. The origin of the Nicene forraula, furnishes the
best solution to this question. This forra is in itself the huraan, the
teraporal, the perishable element, and raight be exchanged for a hun
dred others. Accordingly, tradition often hands down to later genera
tions, the original deposit in another forra, because that deposit hath
been entrusted to the care of men, whose conduct must be guided by
the circumstances wherein they are placed.
Lastly, in the sarae raanner as in the Apostolic writings, the truths
of salvation are laid open with greater clearness, and in all their mutua!
organic connexion ; so, in the doctrine of the Church, the doctrine oi
Scripture is ever progressively unfolded to our view. Dull, therefore,
as it is, to find any other than a mere formal distinction, between the
doctrine of Christ and that of his apostles ; no less senseless is it, tc
discover any other difference, between the priraitive and the later tra
dition of the Church, The blame of this formal difference arises fronr
overlooking the fact, that Christ was a God-Man, and wished to con
tinue working in a manner, conformable to his two-fold nature.
Moreover, the deeper insight of the human raind into the divine
revelations in Christ, seeras determined by the struggles of error agains
Christian truth. It is to the unenlightened zeal of the Jewish Chris
tians for the law, we owe the expositions of Paul touching faith ant
the power of the Gospel : and to the schisms in Corinth we are indebtec
for his explanation of principles, in respect to the Church. The Gnostii
and Manichean errors, led fo a clearer insight into the character o
evil, destitute of, and opposed to, all existence as it is, as well as to i
maturer knowledge of the value of God's original creation, (nature am
freedora,) and its relation to the nev> creation in Christ Jesus. Oui
of the Pelagian contest arose a fuller and more conscious recognitioi
of human infirmity, in the sphere of true virtue ; and so have matter!
gone on down to our days. It would be ridiculous, on the part o
Catholics, to deny as a foolish boast of Protestants (should the latte
be inclined to claim any merit in the case,) that the forraer had gainei
much from the controversy with them. By the fall of the Protestants

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 363
the Catholics necessarily rose ; and frora the obscurity, which over -
clouded the minds of the reforraers, a new light was cast upon the
truth ; and such indeed had ever been the case in all earlier schisms in
the Church. Assuredly, in Christian knowledge we stand one degree
higher than the period prior to the reformation ; and all the dogmas
that were called in question, received such an elucidation and con
firmation, that it would require no very diligent or long-continued
coraparison between the raodern theological works, and those written
prior to the Council of Trent, to see the important difference which, in
this respect, exists between the two epochs.
The fact that the deeper consciousness of Christian truth (in itself
eternally one and unchangeable,) is the result of contest and struggle,
and consequently raatter of history, is of too much importance not to
detain our attention for some moments. It explains the necessity of a
living, visible authority which, in every dispute, can, with certainty,
discern the truth, and separate it from error. Otherwise, we should
have only the variable — the disputed — and at last Nichilisra itself.
Hence it happens (and this we raay venture to preraise) that where
Holy Writ, without tradition and the authority of the Church, is de
clared to be the sole source and rule for the knowledge of Gospel
truth, all raore precise explanations and developments of Christian
dogmas are wUlingly left in utter ignorance, nay, are even absolutely
rejected. Guided by this principle, men can find no rational object to
connect with the history of believing intelligence in the Christian
Church, and must necessarily evince hostihty towards every thing of
this tendency, which hath occurred in the Church. Or, when they
lose all confidence and all hope of freeing themselves from the turmoil
of opinions, and of seeing a bright, steady light arise out of the dark
chaos, they cast, in their despair, upon the Bible the whole mass of
opinions, that ages have thrown up ; and of that which is, boldly assert
it could not have been otherwise, consequently exists of necessity, and
is inherent in the very essence of Christianity. They do not see that,
with that coraplaisance to acknowledge every variety of opinion, which,
in the course of time, raay have gradually been founded on Scripture,
a destructive principle, for the solution of aU the enigmas of Christian
history, is laid down : — to wit, the principle that its object is to show,
that the Scripture, as it includes every sense, hath consequently none.
But all charges against the CathoUc Church are reduced to this, that
she has been so absurd, as to suppose the Scriptures to contain one
sense, and consequently only one, and that definite, whereof the faith
ful, in the course of history, must ever obtain a clearer and more in
tuitive knowledge ; while, on the other hand, the refutation of the

364 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
above-mentioned prejudice, which raanifested itself soon after the origin
of the Church, hath' been, in the succession of ages, the peculiar task
of Christian science.

§ XI.I. — Tradition in a more liraited sense. The Canon of the Scriptures.
From that notion of tradition, which we have hitherto expounded,
another is to be distinguished, although both are intimately united with
each other. Tradition we have hitherto described as the consciousness
of the Church, as the living word of faith, according to which the
Scriptures are to be interpreted, and to be understood. The doctrine
of tradition contains, in this sense, nothing else than the doctrine of
Scripture ; both, as to their contents, are one and the same. But,
moreover, it is asserted by the Catholic Church, that many things have
been delivered to her by the apostles, which Holy Writ either doth not
at all comprise, or, at raost, but alludes to. This assertion of the Church
is of the greatest raoment, and partially, indeed, includes fhe founda.
tions of the whole system.* Among these oral traditions raust be
included the doctrine of the canonicity, and the inspiration of the Sacred
Scriptures ; for, in no part of the Bible do we find the books belonging
to it designated ; and were such a catalogue contained in it, its au
thority must first be made matter of inquiry. In like manner, the
testimony as to the inspiration of the biblical writings is obtained only
through the Church. It is from this point we first discern, in all its
magnitude, the vast importance of tbe doctrine of Church authority,
and can form a notion of the infinite raultitude of things, involved in
that doctrine. He can scarcely be a sincere Christian, who wdl not
attribute to a special protection of Divine Providence, the preservation
of the works of those apostles, and of such of their disciples, who have
raade a contribution to the biblical canon. But, in taking into con
sideration this special protection, he cannot set aside the Catholic
Church, and must, even in despite of dehberate repugnance, adrait that
it was that Church, which the Saviour eraployed as a mediura for pre
serving to all ages the writings, that had been penned under his pecu
Uar assistance. Every learned theologian is aware, that the Gnostics
* On that passage frora the Council of Trent, cited above (Sess, iv. u, 2,) " Hanc
veritatem et disciplinam contineri in libris scriptis et sine scripto traditionibus," Pal
lavicini remarks as follows : " Duo per illam sanctionem intendit synodus, alterum,
palam facere, fidei Cathdicae fundamenta non modo esse divinas literas, quod recen-
tes haeretici pertinaciter contendebant ; sed non minus etiam traditiones, a quibus
denique dependet, quidquid certi obtinemus de legitima ipsarum scripturarum aucto
ritate." — Lib. VI. c. viii. n, 7.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 365
as well as one class of anti-Trinitarians, in the second and third
centuries, rejected sometimes this or that gospel, sometiraes the Acts
of the Apostles, and sometimes the apostolic epistles ; nay, even brought
forward spurious gospels and acts of the apostles, and mutilated, in the
most criminal manner, fhe genuine apostolic works, which they re
tained. And yet no one can refuse to acknowledge, that the visible
Church, which these heretics assailed, in the same raanner as is usual
with Protestants, — the Church that the forraer, like the latter, con
tinually denounced as the corruptress of pure doctrine, as exerting a
tyranny over minds, as wicked beyond conception — that this Church,
we say, was selected and deemed worthy by Almighty God, to preserve
the most precious jewel of Christians ! What conclusions may not
hence be iraraediately deduced I On Luther himself, as we shall have
occasion later to see, this fact made a deep irapression ; and he brought
it forward at times, in a train of ideas, that can scarcely be reconciled
with fhe position which, in other respects, he had taken up against the
Catholic Church.
Moreover, in reference to fhe canon of the sacred writings, some
difference exists between Catholics and Protestants. Originally, in
deed, it seemed probable as if in this departraent very iraportant dif
ferences would have arisen ; as if the melancholy spectacle of the first
ages would have been renewed, in which, according to the suggestions
of caprice, or the interest of mere individual opinions, sometiraes one,
soraetimes another portion of the Bible was rejected. It is generally
known (and indeed in Berthold's and De Wette's Introductions to the
Sacred Books, the reader may in part see the passages on this matter
cited from Luther,) that the Reforraer called the Epistle of St. James an
epistle of straw, and was not disposed to acknowledge it as an apostolic
production : judged not more favourably of the Revelations of St. John,
and was wont to say of the first three Gospels, that in them the Gospel
was not to be found ; whereas the Gospel of St. John, the Acts of the
Apostles, and the Epistles of St. Paul, he exalted in peculiar strains
of eulogy. In this matter, the opposition between St. James's doctrine,
on the relation between faith and works, and Luther's exposition of the
sarae subject, exerted an undeniable influence. Luther preferred fhe
rejection of this valuable portion of Holy Writ, to the amendment of
his own opinions, and chose rather to question the -genuineness of a
canonical Scripture, than to doubt the truth of his own theory. As
suredly, if in the otherwise obscure apocalypse, there had not been
found passages of extrerae clearness, like the following : " Happy are
they who sleep in the Lord, for their works follow them ;" Luther
would have found less to offend him in this book. The remarkable

366 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
expression, "that in the Gospels the Gospel is not contained," may bo
explained from what has been said above, respecting the signification,
which the old Lutherans attached to the word Gospel, Luther's pre
judices, however, were not able to obscure the sounder sense of his
followers ; and so it came to pass, that they, as well as the Calvinists,
adraitted with the Catholic Church, the entire books of the New Testa
ment to be canonical. But, in regard to the Old Testaraent, doctrinal
prejudices prevailed ; and those Scriptures, which the Catholics call the
deutero-canonical,* were gradually expunged frora the Canon, yet more
decidedly on the part of the Calvinists, than of the Lutherans. Araong
tho modern Protestants, Clausen, at least, has not denied, that in this
matter regard was paid to other considerations, than tho.se of a merely
historical and critical kind.
<l XLii.— On the relation of the Ecclesiastical Interpretation of Holy Writ to the
learned and scientific exegesis. Patristic authority and free investigation.
As the notion of doctrinal tradition,! and of the ecclesiastical inter
pretation of Holy Writ, has been now fully unfolded, it is necessary, in
order to obviate sorae singular misconceptions, to state, in a few words,
the relation between the learned exegesis as applied to the sacred writ
ings, and that interpretation which eraanates frora the Church. The
interpretation of the Church does not descend to the details, which

* In the decree of the Council of Trent on the canonical Scriptures, Sess. iv. the
following is the catalogue of the Old Testament Scriptures ; " Sunt infrascripti :
Testament! veteris, quinque IVIoysis, id est. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numeri,
Deuteronomium : Josue, Judicum, Ruth, quatuor Regum, duo Paralipomcnon, Esdra
primus et secundus, qui dicitur Nehemias, Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, Psalterium
Davidicura centum quinquaginta psalmorum, ParaboliB, Ecclesiastes, Canticum Can-
ticorum, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias cum Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel,
duodccim Prophetae minores, id est, Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Micheas,
Naum, Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggseus, Zacharias, Malachias, duo Machabaeorum
primus et secundus."
The French Protestant confession of faith, called the Galilean Confession, 1. u. p.
Ill, gives the followmg canon of the writings of the Old Testament : " Quinque
libri Moysis, nempe .... Josue, Judices, Ruth, Sarauelis 1, 2, Regum 1, 2, Chroni-
con, sive Paralipomcnon 1, 2, Esdrs lib, i, Nehemias, Ester, Job, Psalmi, Prover-
bia, Ecclesiastes, Canticura Canticorum, Esaias, Jeremias cum Lament., Ezechiel,
Daniel, Minores Prophetae 12 nempe." There are here wanting Tobias, Judith,
Baruch, Sapientia, Ecclesiasticus, Machaba3orum primus et secundus.

N. B, The Scriptural canon of the Anglican Church is the same with that of the
French Protestants as here given — Trans.
t We do not speak here of disciplinary, liturgical, and other kinds of tradition.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 367
must claim the attention of the scientific exegetist. Thus, for example,
it does not hold it for a duty, nor include it in the compass of its rights,
to determine when, by whora, and for what object the Book of Job was
written ; or what particular induceraent engaged St. John to publish
his gospel, or the Apostle Paul to address an epistle to the Romans ;
in what order of time the epistles of this messenger of the Lord followed
each other, &c. &c. As little doth the Church explain particular words
and verses, their bearings one to the other, or the connexion existing
between larger portions of a sacred book. Antiquities, in the widest
sense of the word, fall not within the domain of her interpretation ; in
short, that interpretation extends only to doctrines of faith and morals.
Thus much as to the extent of her interpretation.
But now as to the nature and raode of the Church's interpretation ;
this is not conducted according to the rules and well-known aids of an
historical and gramraatical exegesis, whereby the individual seeks to
obtain scientific insight into the sense of Holy Writ. On the contrary,
the doctrinal contents of Scripture she designates in the general spirit
of Scripture. Hence, the earliest cecuraenical councils did not even
adduce any particular scriptural texts, in support of their dograatic de
crees ; and Catholic theologians teach with general concurrence, and
quite in the spirit of the Church, that even a Scriptural proof in favour
of a decree held to be infallible, is not itself infallible, but only the dog
ma as defined. The deepest reason for this conduct of the Church,
lies in the indisputable truth, that she was not founded by Holy Writ,
but already existed before its several parts appeared. The certainty
which she has of the truth of her own doctrines, is an immediate one,
for she received her dogmas from the lips of Christ and the apostles ;
and by the power of the Divine Spirit, they are indelibly stamped on
her consciousness, or as Irenaeus expresses it, on her heart. If the
Church were to endeavour, by learned investigation, to seek her doc
trines, she would fall into the raost absurd inconsistency, and annihilate
her very self. For, as it would be the Church that should institute the
inquiry, her existence would be presupposed ; and yet, as she would
have first to find out her own being, the thing, whereby and wherein
she absolutely consists, naraely. Divine Truth, her non-existence must
at the same time be presupposed ! She would have to go in search of
herself, and this a madraan only could do : she would be like the man,
that would examine the papers written by himself; in order to discover
whether he really existed ! The essential matter of Holy Writ, is eter-
nally present in the Church, because it is her heart's-blood — her breath
— her soul — her aU. She exists only by Christ, and yet she must have
to find him out ! Whoever seriously reflects on the signification of

368 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
J*
those u Olds of Chrisf, " I am with ye even to the consummation of the
world," wiU be able to conceive at least the view, which the Catholic
Church takes of herself.
What we have said involves the liraits prescribed to fhe freedom of
the Catholic scholar, in the interpretation of Holy Writ. It is evident,
of course, that we speak not here of that general freedora possessed by
every man, at the peril of his own soul, like tho Jew nnd the Heathen,
to hold the Bible as the work of impostors or dupes, as a raedley of
truth and error, wisdora and folly. This freedora the CathoUc pos
sesses, like the Protestant ; but wo speak of that freedom only which
the Catholic enjoys, when he will not renounce his character as Ciifho-
lic : for were he to entertain the above-mentioned view of the Sacred
Scriptures, he would thereby renounce all conne.xion with our Church.
As a Catholic, he is freely convinced, that the Church is a divine insti
tution, upheld by supernal aid,' "which leads her into aU truth;" that,
consequently, no doctrine rejected by her is contained in Scripture ;
that with the latter, on the contrary, her dograas perfectly coincide,
though many particulars may not be verbally set forth in Holy Writ,
Accordingly he has the conviction, that the Scripture, for example, doth
not teach that Christ is a mere man ; nay, he is certain, that it repre
sents him also as God. Inasmuch as he professes this belief, he is not
free to profess the contrary, for he would contradict himself; in the
same way as a man, who has resolved to remain chaste, cannot be un
chaste, without violating his resolution. To this restriction, which
every one most probably will consider rational, the Catholic Church
subjects her merabers, and consequently, also, the learned exegetists of
Scripture. A Church which would authorize any one to find what he
pleased in Scripture, and without any foundation fo declare it as unoc-
clesiastical, such a Church would thereby declare, that it believed in
nothing, and was devoid of all doctrines ; for the raere possession of the
Bible, no more constitutes a Church, than the possession of the faculty
of reason renders any one really rational. Such a Church would in
fact, as amoral entity, exhibit the contradiction just adverted to, which
a physical being could not be guUty of. The individual cannot at one
and the same time believe, and not believe, a particular point of doc
trine. But if a Church, which consists of a union of many individuals,
permitted every member, as such, to receive or to reject at his pleasure,
any article of faith, it would fall into this very contradiction, and woidd
be a monster of unbelief, indifferent to the most opposite doctrines,
which we might, indeed, on our behalf, honour with fhe finest epithets,
but certainly not denominate a Church. The Church must train up
souls for the kingdom of God, which is founded on definite facts and

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 369
iWlths, that are eternally unchangeable : and so a Church, that knows
no such immutable dogmas, is like to a teacher, that knows not what
9ie should teach. The Church has to stamp the image of Christ on
¦huraanity ; but Christ is not sometimes this, and soraetimes that, but
¦eternally fhe same. She has to breathe into the hearts of raen the
word of God, that came down from heaven ; but this word is no vague,
'empty sound, whereof we can raake what we will.
That, accordingly, the principles of the CathoUc Church agree with
the idea of a positive Church, and the claim is but natural, which she
¦exacts of her members, to recognize in the Bible, when they raake it
the subject of a learned exegesis, those doctrines of faith and morality,
which they themselves acknowledge to be biblical, we trust we have
¦now made sufficiently evident. In other respects, no one belonging to
fhe Catholic Church professes aught else, than her doctrines of faith
¦¦and morality. For, in this respect only, she expresses the sense of
Holy Writ, and indeed only in a general way ; so that the learned ex
positor, by the laws of his reUgious community, is bound to nothing
more ; and a wide field is ever open to him, whereon he may exert his
talents, his hermeneutical skill, his philological and archaeological learn
ing, and employ them usefuUy for the advancement of science.
But, if we should be reminded of the decree of the Council of Trent,
which directs the Catholic to interpret the Scripture, according to the
¦unanimous testimony of the holy fathers,* how can we escape the re
proach, that an absolutely sacred exegesis hath existed for centuries^
and that consequently all idea of progress in the understanding of the
Bible must be given up ? Before we lay down the Catholic view of
this subject, it may be proper to state, with the utmost succinctness,
the relation of patristic authority to learned investigation. Whoever
takes the pains to study the writings of the holy fathers, may without
much penetration discover, that while agreeing perfectly on all ecclesi-
^astical dogmas, they yet expatiate raost variously on the doctrines of
Christian faith and raorality. The raode and forra, wherein they appro-
.priate the one Gospel to themselves, demonstrate its truth to others,
tlevelope it in their own interior, and philosophize and speculate upon
its doctrines, most strikingly evince the individuality of each writer.
One manifests a deeper, the other a clearer and acuter view of his sub
ject ; one turns this, the other that talent to profit. While now all
Catholics gladly profess the sarae dogmas with the fathers of the
Church, the individual opinions, the raere human views of the latter,

* Cone. Trid. Sess. rv, decret. de edit, et usd sacror. libror. " Ut nemo .... con.
tra unanimen consensum Patrum ipsaa Scripturam saeram interpretari audeat."
34

370 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
possess in their estimation no further value, but as they present rea^
sonable grounds for acceptance, or as any peculiar affinity of mind may
exist between one father of the Church, and a Catholic of a subsequent
age. These principles, at aU periods of the Church, were openly pro
fessed, and brought into practice. Never did any father, not even the
most revered, succeed in imposing his own peculiar opinions on the
Church ; as of this fact, St. Augustine furnishes a remarkable proof.
What writer ever acquired greater authority than he t Yet, his theory
respecting original sin and grace, never became the doctrine of the
Church ; and herein precisely he showed himself a good Catholic, that
he gave us the permission to examine his private opinions,* and to re-

* Augustin. contra Faustum Manich. lib. ii, c, 5. "Id genus literarum, qua non
pracipiendi auctoritate, sed proficiendi exercitatione seribuntur a nobis, non cum
credendi necessitate ; sed cum judicandi hbertate legendum est ; cui tamen ne inter-
cluderetur locus et adimeretur postens ad qu;estiones difficiles tractandas, atque vcr-
eandaa, lingua ac stili saluberrimus labor, distincta est a postcrioribus libris exccl-
lentia canonicie auctoritatis V ct N, Tcstamenti quae apostolorum confirmata trin-
poribus, per succei-'siones cpiscoporum et prnpagationcs ecclesiarum tanquam in sede
quadara subliraiter constituta est, cui serviat omnis fidelis et pius intellectus. Ibi si
quid velut absurdum noverit, non heet dicere, auctor hujus libri non tenuit veritatem:
sed aut codex mendosns est, aut tnterprcs erravit, aut tu nx)n intelligis. in opuscu.
lis autcin posteriorum, quie libris innumcrabilibus contincntur, sed nullo modo illi
sacratissimiE canonicarum scripturarum cxcellentire coocquantiir, ctiain in quibus
cunque eorum invenitur eadem Veritas, longe tamen est impar auctoritas. Itaque in
eis, si qua forte propterea dissonare putantura vero, quia non ut dicta sunt intclligun-
tur" tamen Hberum ibi habet lector auditorve judicium, quo vel approbct, quod pia.
cuerit vel improbat quod offenderit. Et ideo cuiicta ejusmodi, nisi vd certa ratione,
vel CX ilia canonic^ auctoritate defendantur, ut demonstrctur sive omnino Ua esse,
sive fieri potuisse, quod ibi disputaiura est, vel narratum : ei cui displieucrit, aut cre
dere nolueril, non reprehendiiur. In ilia vero canonica cminentia ss. literarum,
etiamsi unus propheta, seu apostolus, aut evangelista, aliquid in suis literis pusuis^ie
ipsa canonis confirmalione declaratur, uon licet dubitare quod verum sit : alioquin
nulla erit pagina, qua humaiiis impcritiiE regatur infirmitas, si librorum salubcrrima
auctoritas aut conlemta penitus aboletur, aut intorminata eonfunditur." Thomas
Aquin, Sum. tot. theolog. P. i. q. 1, art. 8, edit. Caj. Lugd. 1580, p. 10. " Auctori.
tatibus canonicae Bcripturae utitur ^sacra doctrina) proprie ex necessitate argumcn-
tando : auctoritatibus autem aliorum doctorum ecclesiae quasi arguendo ex propriis,
sed probabiliter. Innilitur enim fides nostra revelationi apostolis et prophdis factae,
qui canonicos libros scripserc, non autem revelationi, si qua fuit aliis docturibus facta."
Unde dicit Augustinus in epistola ad Hieronymum (xix :) "Soils enim scripturaruna
libris, qui canonic! appellantur, didici hunc honorcm deferre, ut nullum auctorem
eorum in scribendo errasse aliquid firmissirae credam. Alios autem ita lego, ut
quantalibet sanctitate doctrinaquc praepollcant, non ideo vero putem, quod ipsi ila
senserunt vel scripserunt "
Catholics distinguish very well between the testimony of the father of the Church,
aa to the luuversal l>dief of his time, and his own philosophy or theological specula-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 371
tain Only what was sound. Moreover, the expression, " doctrine of the
fathers," is frequently synonymous with tradition : in this sense they
are considered as representatives of ihe faiih of antiquity — as channels
and witnesses of transmitted doctrine ; but by no means so when, upon
a thousand subjects, they lay before us their own peculiar views and
speculations. Frora this pojnt of view, where they do not speak, but
through ihem the belief of ihe universal Chureh is made known, they pos
sess, undoubtedly, a decisive authority : — an authority, however, which
belongs not to their persons, but to the tradition whereby they themselves
were regulated, and which they only reflect. In this respect, we must
needs agree with thera, because one doctrine of faith hath subsisted, and
must subsist, through the whole history of the Church. We will not
and cannot beUeve otherwise, than as our fathers have believed ; but
as to their peculiarities of opinion, we may adopt them or not, as we
pleeise. Besides, the truth, which we possess in comraon with them,
has, as we have already elsewhere had occasion to observe, by means
of the splendid intellects, which devoted (heir undivided energy to its
defence, been often more deeply investigated, or contemplated in all its
bearings, and viewed in a raore general connexion ; so that Christian
science raakes continual progress, and the raysteries of God are ever
more clearly unfolded. For, this subjective insight into the doctrines of
salvation, eternally irarautable in themselves, the fathers of the Church
have by no means laid down the standard, nor prescribed any pause in
the progress of inquiry."^

tions. In the latter respect, the views of the fathers are considered hy us as mere
views, and if all were to concur in the sanvj vicw, that concurrence would never con
stitute a dogma. Melchior Canus {loc. theol. lib vii. u 3, p. ¦1:2,5) observes : "Sanc
torum auctoritas, sive piucorum, sive plurium, cum ad eas facultates affiirtur, quiB
natural! lumine contincntur, certa argumenta non supped tat : sed tantum pellet,
quantum ratio naturjE cuns.ntanca persuaserit." P. 432, he continues: "Omnium
etiam sanctirum auctoritas in eo genere quajstionum, quas ad fi, em diximus minime
pertinere, fidem quidem probabilcm facit. certam non facit." Canus here means
as is clear from the developraent of his proposition, inquiries which have reference to
doctrines of faith. At page 43 I, he subjoins : " Auctorcs canonici, ut superni, cce-
lestes, divini purpetuara stabilernque constantiam servant, reliqui vero scriptores
sancti inferiores et huniani sunt, dcficiuntque interdum ae raunstrum quaudoque
pariunt, prieter convenientem ordinem institutumque nature."
« St. VinCDnt Lerineiisis expresses himself on this subject with incomparable beau
ty and truth. " Esto spiritualis tabernaculi Beseleel (Exad xxxi. 2) pretiosas divini
dogmatis gemmas exscuipe, fideliter coapta, adorna sapient r, adjice splendorcm
gratiam, venuslatem Intelligetur, te expimente, illustrius, quod ante obscuriuscre.
debatur. Per te p.jste itas intelleclum gratulctur, qu.-id ante vetustas non intdlec
tum venerabatur. Eadem tamen, quje didicisti, doce : ut, cu.ii dicas nove, non

372 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
The sarae principle holds good, with regard to their interpretation of
Scripture. Except in the explanation of a very few clas'^ical passages,
we know not where we shall meet with a general uniformity of Scrip
tural interpretation araong the fathers, further than that all deduce from
the sacred writings, the same doctrines of faith and morality, yet each
in his own pecuUar manner ; so that some reraain for all times distin
guished models of Scriptural exposition, others rise not above medio.
crity, while others again are, raerely by their good intentions and their
love for the Saviour, entitled to veneration. As in this raanner, among
the fathers themselves, one is superior to the other, and by his exege
tical tact, by the acuteness and delicacy of his perceptions, by an intel
lectual affinity with the writer expounded, by the extent of the philo
logical and historical knowledge brought to the task of interpretation,
holds a higher place ; so this may and will be the case in all ages. The
same dograas, the same raorality, all like the fathers, will find in Holy
Writ ; yet in another way : we will bring forward the same thing-i, bnt
oflen not in the sarae manner. More extensive philological acquire
ments, and fhe more abundant aids of every kind, which modern times
furnish, enable us, without in the least degree deviating frora the unani
mous interpretation of the fathers, to explain raany things in a better

dicas nova." c. xxviii. : " Sed forsitan dicit aliquis : nuUusne ergo in ecclesifl Christi
profectus ? Habeatur plane et maximus. Nam quis ille est lam invidus hominibus,
tam exosus Deo, qui illud prohibere conetur ? Sed ita tamen, ul vere profectus sit
ille fidei, non pcrmvlatio. Siquidem ad profectum pertinet, ut in semet ip.^a una.
quaquc res amplificctur, ad pcrmutationem vero, ut aliquid ex alio in ahud Iransvcr-
tatur. Crescat igitur oportet, et multum vchcracnterque proficiat tam Rincriilornm,
quam cranium, tam unius hominis, quam totius ecclesias letatum ac saeculorum gra-
dibus intelligentia, scientia, sapientia; sed in suo duntaxat genere, in eodum scilicet
dograate, eodera fcnsCi, eademque sententia." c xxix, : " Imitetur aniraarum reli
gio rationem corporum ; quae licet annorum processtt numeros suos evolvant, et ex.
plicent, eadem tamen, quae erant, permanent. Multum interest inter pueritiffi
florem et senectutis raaturitatera ; sed iidem tamen ipsi fiunt senes, qui fuerant
adolescentes ; ut quamvis unius ejusdem hominis status habitusque rautetur, una ta
men nihilominus, eaderaque natura, una eademque persona sit," etc. Commonito-
rium, ed. Klupfel, Vienn. 1809, <s. xxvii. p. 199 : " This explanation of St. Vincent
was occasioned by the Manicheans, who, as we gather from til. Augustine's works,
De utilitate credendi, De vera religione. Contra Faustum, &c., brought up the old
Gnostic charge against Catholics, that they were under a religious tyranny, that
among them was found no independent inquiry into doctrine, and no progress in
knowledge. How desirable it were, that we could everywhere find such clear no
tions of the progressive development of Christian dogmas, as arc here advanced by
Vincentius ! Now we think we have made a progress in Christian knowledge, when
we deny Christ to be what he declared himself to be \"

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 373
and more solid manner than they did.* The belter Catholic exegists
since the reformation, from Thomas de Yio, Contareni, Sadoletus, Ma-

* Cardinal Cajetan, in the Preface lo hia Exposition of Genesis, says : " Non aUi-
gavit Deus cxpositionem scripturarum sacrarum priscorum doctorum sensibus ; sed
Scripturae ipsi integrffi, sub Catholicae ecclesiae censura ; alioquin spes nobis et posteris
tolleretur exponendi scripturam saeram, nisi transferendo, ut aiunt, de libro in quin-
temura." The raeaning of the cardinal is, that, by a ^neral interpretation of Holy
Writ no tenet can be elicited contrary to Catholic doctrine, to the sense of the Church,
to the faith unanirauusly attested by the fathers ; although in details the interpretation
may differ from that of the fathers. When, for example, it is said of God, He har
dened the heart of Pharaoh, He will raise up false prophets, He hated Esau and loved
Jacob before they were born ; so no Cathohc exegist, like Calvin ami Beza, would
thence infer, that the Bible represents God as the author of evil, and would say the
Deity creates a portion of raankmd for sin, in order to be afterwards able to damn
them ; for such a raonstrous assertion would be contrary to the universal testiraony
of the fathers ; that is to say, to the constant doctrine of the Church. On the other
hand, the Catholic interpreter may, in his peculiar mode of explaining those passages
by the biblical phraseology, differ, if there be adequate grounds, from all the fathers
put together. Melchior Canus was not quite satisfied with the above-mentioned prin
ciple, because he deduced frora it those fanciful opinions, which are not unfrequently
met with in Cajetan's exegetical writings ; for what Canus, in the work alreadj' cited,
says, p. 437, is perfectly true : " IUud breviter dici potest, Cajetanura summis ecclesiae
ledlficatoribus parem esse potuisse, nisi  ingenii dexteritate confisus literas
demum sacras suo arbitratCi exposuisset, felicissime quidera fere, sed in paucis quibus.
dam locis acutius sane multo, quara felicius."
Pallavacini, on the other hand (in his Hist. Concil. Trident, lib. vi. c. 18, n. 9, p,
221,) takes Cajetan under his protection, and shows that he has not acted contrary
to the Council of Trent ; that rather Melchior Canus required from every writer
among the Dominicans, an exclusive adoption of the raaxiras of that Order, to
which he himself belonged, " Equidem hi primis affirmo," says Pallavicini, " Caje-
tanuin, quamvis a suis (Cajetan was also a Dominican) in hoc dicto licentiie nota,
reprehensum, nunquam protulisse sensa Tridentino decreto in hac parte adversantia,
Secundo, concilium neque praescripsisse, neque coartasse novis legibus rationera intel-
ligendi Dei verbura ; sed declarasse illicitum et hareticum quad sua-pte natura erat
hujusmodi, et prout semper habitura ac declaratura fuerat a patribus, a pontificibus, a
concihis  Prohibet quidera conciliura, ne sacris literis aptetur interpretatio re-
pugnans SS. patrum sententiae, idque in rebus tum fidei, tum morum ; et Cajetanus,
utut rem Canus intelligat, de his minime loquitur, neque unquam declarat, fas esse
adversus communes SS. patrum sententias obviara ire, sed fas esse deproraere scrip
turae expositionem prorsus novam, et ab oranibus eorum expositionibus diversara.
Etenim quemadmodum ipsi discrepartmt inter se in illius exphcatione sententiae,
adeoque singulas eorum explanationes per se ipsas dubititioni subjacent, ita, quan
tum conjicio, visum est Cajetauo, posse cunctas simul dubitationi subjacerc et quam-
dam aliam esse veram, quae ipsis baud in raentera venerit." Canus hiraself, how
ever, says p. 457 : "Spes inquiimt, nobis et posteris tollitur, exponendi sacras literas
nisi transferendo de libro in quintemum. Minime vero gentium. Nam, ut illud
praeteream, quod in sacris bibliis locr sunt multi, atque adeo libri integri, in quibus in-
terpretum diligentiam ecclesia desiderat, iu quibusque proinde juniores possent et

374 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
sius, Maldonado, Justinian, Estius, Cornelius a Lapide, down foour own
days, furnish a proof of what is here asserted ; and the Biblical re
searches of several critics, such as Richard Siraon, Hug, Jahn, Feilnio-
ser, and olhers, will cerlainly not show, that the earlier theologians have
left nothing to the later ones, but to edit their works anew. Accord
ingly, wherein consists the irapropriety that we should still revere in the
Holy Scriptures, the saqie miracles of divine wisdom and corapassion,
which our fathers revered fourteen and eighteen hundred years ago?
Doth the impropriety lie in the short-sightedness of our understanding,
which is unable to discover, that such simple writings as the Sacred
Books, should not have been understood as to their es.sential import in
the times wherein they were published, and in the communities to which
they were addressed ? Must we thus look for this impropriety, in our
inability to conceive how an age, which was nearest to the composition
of the Bible, should have been the furthest removed from the true un
derstanding thereof? Or, doth it consist in our regarding the opinion
as singular, that the Christian Church had not penetrated into the sense
of her own sacred records at a time, when she exerted a truly renova
ting influence over the world, when she conquered Judaism, destroyed
Heathenism, and overcame all tho powers of darkness ? Or, that we
should not be able to convince ourselves, that the night is dispersed by
darkness, and illutions by error ? Or, doth the impropriety consist in
the opinion, that Holy Writ could not possibly have been destined in the
course of every fifteen years, and even under tho hand of each of its
expositors, to receive, as if by a divine miracle, an essentially different
import than in former tiraes.
Lastly (and this is the principal point), since the Catholic Church
regards herself as that institution of the Lord, wherein His doctrines of
salvation and the knowledge of the sarae, have, by the iraraediate in
struction of the apostles, and the power of the Divine Spirit, been de
posited ; her claira to interpret, according to her rule of faith, the sacred
writings, in which the same doctrines of salvation, under the guidance
of the same Spiril, have been laid down, perfectly agrees with the claims
of a genuine historical and grammatical exegesis ; and it is precisely
the raost successful interpretation of this kind, that would, of necessity,
raost faithfully reflect her doctrines. Frora her point of view, it appears

eruditionis et ingenii posteris ipsi quoque suis monimenta relinquere, in illis etiam,
quae antiquorura sunt ingenio ac diligentia elaborata, nonnihil nos christiano populo,
si volumus, praestare et quidem utilissirae pos.sumus. Possumus enim vetustis novita.
tem dare, obsoletis nitonm obseuris lucem, fastiditis gratiam, dubiis fidem, omnibus
naturam suam et naturae suas omnia."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 375
accordingly quite unintelligible, how her claira should not be consistent
with the laws of a true exegesis, alone deserving of the name ; or, how
the, in other respects able interpreter, when supported by her rule, should
not be precisely the most distinguished. The Protestants, on the other
hand, starting from the prejudice, that the peculiar doctrines of the
Catholic Church are not conformable to Scripture, raust consequently
regard her principle of interpretation as one outwardly iraposed, and
therefore arbitrary and unnatural ; but this prejudice the Catholic repels
as idle, and totally devoid of foundation.
§ XLIU. — ^The Hierarchy.
It now remains for us to raake a few reraarks on the Hierarchy. The
priraary view of the Church, as a divine and human institution, is here
evinced in a very striking form. Accordingly, for the exercise of pub
Uc functions in the Church, for the discharge of the office of teaching,
and the administration of the sacraments, a divine internal calling and
a higher qualification are, above all things, required. But, as the divine,
invisible nature of the Church is connected with a human, visible form ;
so the calling from above raust necessarily be here below first discern
ed, and then acknowledged ; and the heavenly -qualification must ap
pear attached to an act obvious to the senses, and executed in the visi
ble Church. Or in other words, the authorization for the public exer-
cise of ecclesiastical functions is imparted by a sacrament — an outward
act to be performed by men according to the commission of Christ, and
which partly denotes, partly conveys an inward and divine grace.*
The introduction into an invisible Church, requires only a spiritual bap
tism ; the continuance in the same, needs only an internal nourishment,
we cannot say with the body of Christ (because " body " already re
minds us of an outward origin of the Church), but with the logos of
'God. An invisible Chureh needs only an inward purely spiritual sacri
fice, and a general priesthood.j But it is otherwise with a visible
¦* Concil. Trident Sess. xxiii. cap. 3. "Cum Scripturae testimonio. Apostolic^.
traditione, et patrum uaanimi conscnsd perspicuum sit, per saeram ordinationcra,
quas verbis et signis exterioribus perficitur, gratiam conferri ; dubitare nemo debet,
ordinem esse vere et proprie unura ex septem Sanctae Ecclesia Sacramentis; inquit
¦enim Apostolus : Admoneo te, ut resuscites gratiam, <juas est in te, per impositioneni
raanuum mearum."
't It is admirably observed by the Council «f Trent, cap. i. lib. 1 : " Sacrificium
-et sacerdotium ita Dei ordinatione conjunctasunt, ut utrumque in omni lege extiterit.
•Cum igitur in novo testaraento sanctura EuchuristiaB sacrificiura visible ex Domini
institutione Catholica ecclesia acceperit ; faleri etiam oportet, in el novum esse visi.

376 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
church. This requires that the baptism of fire, and of the Spirit, shoulu"
be likewise a baptism of water ; and that the nurture of the soul, which
Christ imparts, should be visibly represented by a bodUy food. In the
very idea of such a Church, an external sacrifice, also, is necessarily
involved. The same observation wdl apply to priestly orders ; the in
ternal and outward consecration go together ; the heavenly and the
earthly unction become one and the same. As the preservation of the
doctrines and institutions of Christ, hath been intrusted to the Church,
so it is impossible for her to revere as a priest, every individual who^
declares he hath been inwardly consecrated to the priestliood. On the
contrary, as he must previously be carefully and strictly bred up, and
instructed in the divine dogmas of the Church, in order to contribute
towards their further propagation ; so he receives through the Church,
through her external consecration, the inward consecration from God ;
or, in other words, he receives, through the imposition of the hands of
the bishops, the Holy Ghost. The visibility and the stability of the
Church connected therewith, require, accordingly^ an ecclesiastical or
dination, originating with Christ the fountain-head, and perpetuated in
uninterrupted succession ; so that as the apostles were sent forth by the
Saviour, they, in their turn, instituted bishops, and these appointed their
successors, and so on, down to our own days. By this episcopal suc
cession, beginning from our Saviour, and continued on without inter
ruption, we can especially recognize, as by an outward mark, which i&
the true Church founded by him.*

bile et externnm sacerdotium, in quod vetus translatum est. Hoc autem ab eodem
domino Salvatore nostro inslitutem esse, atque Apostolis, eorumque successoribus in
sacerdotio potestatcra traditam eonsecrandi, oflcrcndi et ministrandi corpus ct san
guinem ejus, nee non et peccata dimittendi et retinendi, sacrae literae ostendunt, et
EcclesiEB Catholicae traditio semper docuit." Hence, in an invisible Church onlythe
invisible forgiveness of sins and confession before God are necess-ary ; but it is other
wise in the 'visible Church.
* Irenaaussays tuthe heretics of his time (Adv, hasres, lib, iii, c. 3:) " Haec ordi.
natione et successione, eay quK est ab apostolis in ecclesia traditio et veritatis prtecon-
izatio pervenit usque ad nos. Et est plenissima h^ec ostensio unam et eandem vivifi-
catricem fidem esse, qtre in ecclesia ab apostoli j usque nunc sit conservata et tradita
in veritate." Lib, iv. u, 43, " Quapropter eis, qui in ecclesia sunt presbyteris obau-
dire oportet, his qui successionera habent ab apostolis, qui cura episcopates succes
sione charisma veritatis certum secundum placitum patris acceperunt." Tertullian
remarks against the sarae heretics : " Edant ergo originem ecclesiarara suarum :
evolvant ordinem cpiscoporum suorum ita per successiones ab initio decurrcntem, ut
primus ille episcopus aliquem ex apostolis, vel apostolicis viris, qui tamen cum apos
tolis perseveraverint, habuerit auctorem et antecessorem  Hoo enim modo
ecclesiae apostolicae census suos deferunt. Sicut Smyrnaeorum ecclesia haticns Poly-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 377
The episcopacy, the continuation of the apostleship, is accordingly
revered as a Divine institution : not less so, and even, on that very
account, the Pope, who is the centre of unity, and the head of the
episcopacy. If the episcopacy is to form a corporation, outwardly as
well as inwardly bound together, in order to unite all beUevers info one
harmonious life, which the Catholic Church so urgently requires, it
stands in need of a centr3, whereby all may be held together and
firmly connected. What a helpless, shapeless mass, incapable of all
corabined action, would the Catholic Church not have been, spread as
she is over all the kingdoras of the earth, over all parts of the world,
had she been possessed of no head, no suprerae bishop, revered by all.
She would, of necessity, have been split into an incalculable number
of particular churches, devoid of all consistency, had not a strong,
mighty bond, united all, had not the successor of Peter firmly held them
together. Had not fhe universal Church possessed a head instituted
by Christ, and had not this head, hy acknowledged rights and obliga
tions, been enabled to exert an influence over each of its parts ; those
parts, abandoned to themselves, would soon have taken a course of
development, contrary to each other, and absolutely determined by
local relations, a course which would have led to the dissolution of the
whole body. No one can be so weak-minded as not to perceive, that
then the whole authority of the Church, in raatters of faith, would have
vanished, since the several Churches opposed to each other could not
attest one and the sarae thing, nay, must stand in mutual contradiction.
Without a visible head, the whole view, which the Catholic Church
takes of herself, as a visible society representing the place of Christ,
would have been lost, or rather, never would have occurred to her. In
a visible Church, a visible head is necessarily included. The following
instances raay serve to evince, raore clearly, the truth of vvhat is here
asserted. If, in the appointraent of bishops to their particular districts,
the universal Church exerted no decisive influence; did not possess,
for exaraple, the right of confirraation, then views iniraical to the

carpum ab Johanne conlocatura refert : sicut Romanorum Clementem a Petro ordi-
natura edit ; promde utique ct caeterae exhibent. Confingant tale aliquid h^retici."
The Council of Florence gives tho following definition of the Papal power : —
" Itera definimus, sanctara apostolicara sedem et Romanum pontifieem in universura
orbem ten ere priraatum, et ipsum Pontifieem Romanura successorera esse beati Petri
principis Apostolorura, et verum Christi vicarium, totiusque ecclesiae caput, et omni
um Christianorum patrcm et doctorem existere ; et ipsi m beato Petro pascendi, re
gendi, et gubernandi universalem ecclesiam a domino nostro Jesu Christo plenam
potestatem traditam esse, quemadmodum etiam in gestis oecumenicorum conciliorum
et in sacris canonibus continetur." See Hardouin Acta Concil. tom. ix. p. 423.

378 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
interests of the Church, would infallibly raise to the episcopal dignify
men, who. in a short tirae, would venture fo destroy, or, at least, permit
the destruction, of the coraraon faith. The same would be the result,
if the universal Church did not enjoy the right of deprivation, in case
lhe pastor of a particular Church did not fulfil his essential duties, or
even acted in open violation of them. But, what could fhe universal
Church accomplish without her organ, or the organ itself, if no ono
were bound to obey it? Yet it is, of course, to be understood, that the
rights of the head of the Church are restricted to purely ecclesiastical
concerns ; and if, in the course of the Middle Age, this were otherwise,
the causes of this occurrence are to be sought for, in the peculiar cir-
cumstances and necessities of that period. With the visibility of the
Church — with the visible, regidar, and established reciprocal intercourse
of the faithful ; with the internal necessity of their very existence to
be members of one body, a visible head, with essential and inalienable
rights, was, accordingly, ordained. In addition to his essential ecclesi
astical rights, whose liraits raay be found traced out in the canonists,
fhe Pope, according to the different degrees of civilization in particular
ages, and araong particular nations, acquired the so-called non-essential
rights, admitting of various changes, so thaf his power appears some
times raore extended, soraetiraes more contracted. Moreover, it is weU
known, that, partly in consequence of the revolutions of time and of
disorders in the Church, partly through the internal development of
opposite ideas, two systems became prevalent, tho episcopal and the
papal system ; the latter whereof, without questioning the divine insti
tution of bishops, exalted raore particularly the central power ; while
the forraer, without denying the divine establishment of the Priraacy,
sought to draw authority raore particularly towards the circuraference.*
As each systera acknowledged the essence of the other to be divine.

* The raost general maxims of the episcopal system are coraprised in the Sy
nods of Constance (1414.) and of Basil (1431 ;) they assert, the Pope is subject to a
general Council lawfully convoked, representing the Church militant : — a one-sided
principle, which, when carried out to its legitimate consequences, threatened the
Church with annihilation. This coarse opinion may now be considered as obsolete.
Concil Const. Sess. iv. in Hardouin, lib. 1. tom vni. p. 252. " Ipsa Synodus in
Spiritti Sancto congregata legitirae generate Concilium faciens, ecclesiam Cathdioam
mihtantem representans, potestatem t Christo immediate habet, cui quilibet cujus.
cunque statCis vel dignitatis, etiamsi papalis existat, obedire tenetur in his quie perti
nent ad fidem et extirpationem dicti schisraatis, et reformationem generalem ecclesiae
Dei in capite et in raembris." In the fifth Session this is repeated, and the like is
added The Council of Basil, also, in its second Session, hath adopted both decrees
verbally. See Hardouin, hb. 1. p. 1121.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 379
they constituted an opposition very beneficial to ecclesiastical Ufe ; so
that, by their counteraction, the peculiar free development of fhe
several parts was, on one hand, preserved, and the union of these in one
living, undivisible whole, was, on the other, maintained.
The dogmatic decrees of the episcopacy (united with the general
head and centre,) are infalUble ; for, it represents the universal Church,
and one doctrine of faith, falsely explained by it, would render the
whole a prey to error. Hence, as the institution which Christ hath
estabUshed for the preservation and the explanation of His doctrines,
is subject, in this its function, to no error ; so the organ, through
which the Church speaks, is also exempt from error.
The Metropolitans (archbishops,) and patriarchs, are not, in thera
selves, essential interraediate grades between the Bishops and the
Pope; yet has their jurisdiction, the limits whereof have been deter
rained by general councils, proved very useful for maintaining a closer
connexion, and a more immediate superintendence over the bishops,
subject to their authority.
The priests, (taking the word in a more limited sense,) are, as it
were, a multiplication of the bishop ; and, as they acknov/ledge thera
selves his assistants, tbey revere in him the visible fountain of their
jurisdiction — their head and their centre. In this way, the whole body
is bound and jointed together in a living organism : and as the tree,
the deeper and wider it striketh its roofs into the earth, the raore goodly
a suramit of intertwining boughs and branches it beareth aloft unto the
sky, it is so with the congregation of the Lord. For, the more closely
the community of believers is established with hira, and is enrooted iu
hira, as the all-fruitful soil ; the raore vigorous and iraposing is its out
ward manifestation.
As to the remaining non-sacerdotal orders, the deacons were insti
tuted by the apostles, and, as their representatives, were charged more
immediately with the affairs of administration, not iramediately con
nected with the apostolic calling. The sub-deaconship, and the four
so-called minor orders, are restricted to a circle of subordinate, yet
indispensable rainistrations, and in former tiraes, forraed altogether (in
cluding the deaconship,) a practical scliool wherein the training for
higher ecclesiastical functions was acquired, and a test of quahfication
for their discharge was afforded. For, in the ancient Church, the pas
tors as well as believers, were formed in, and by the iraraediate experi
ence of life ; as the inferior ministers constantly surrounded the bishop
or priest, and attending hira in all his sacred functions, irabibed the
spirit which aniraated him, and qualified themselves to become one day
his successors. But, they rose only slowly and by degrees ; and every

380 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
new ordination, was but the recompense of services faithfully per
formed, and a period of probation for a still more important trust. At
present, these orders, frora the sub-deaconship downwards, are preserved
but as ancient custoras ; for, the educational systera of raodern times,
bears an essentially different character, and follows a decidedly theo
retical course. Hence, the duties, which the inferior members of the
clergy once performed, are now nearly everywhere discharged by lay
men, such as acolytes, sacristans, and the like.

LUTHERAN DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH.
§ XLIV. — The Bible the only source and arbitrcss in matters of faith.
Great importance has been attached by us to the proposition, that a
positive religion, if destined to act with a permanent and decisive
authority on mankind, must be ever imparted to successive generations,
through the medium of an authority. In the application of this trust,
however, an illusion may easily occur. Thus wo may imagine that
the ordinary raode, in which an historical fact is attested, may here
absolutely suffice ; and that thus, if credible eye and ear-witnesses have
delivered a written testiraony, respecting the divine envoy, their evi
dence should constitute an adequate and lasting authority for all times.
In the same way, as Polybius and Livy are our sources of information,
in respect to the second Punic war, and Herodian in regard to the
heroic deeds of the emperor Comraodus, so Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
John, are the standing authority for those who desire fo know Christ,
to surrender to hira their faith ; and thus the necessary claira, that the
authority of Chrisf should be represented by an authority, is fuUy
satisfied. But here, several extreraely important circurastances are completely
overlooked. The sacred historians the Christian, in fact, by no means
ranks in the same class with other writers of history, nor, on that
account, the readers of the Bible with those of any other historical
work. We hold it to be necessary, that, under quite special conditions,
the evangelical historians should have written down their narratives,
in order not fo be disturbed by the doubt, whether they had in reality
rightly heard, seen, and understood. For ihis very reason, from the
foundation of Christianity it has been deemed a matter of necessity,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 381
that only under certain pecuUar conditions could the right understand
ing of the sacred penmen be secured, in order that we raight have the
decided convicj;ion, that what they recorded, without falsification, we
apprehended, without confusion. As little, nay, from evident reasons
still less, can we trust alone fo the honest purpose and personal capacity
of the author of fhe apostolic epistles, when the question at issue is,
whether, in the application and further development of what they had
learned from and respecting Jesus, they have not erred ; but precisely,
because we do not wish, and cannot wish to bestow such confidence,
we are unable to rest satisfied with those ordinary means, which are
employed to discover the sense of an author. And this, because here
far other wants are to be satisfied than those, which the study of a
Greek or Roraan classic can gratify ; because raatters of far graver
moment, and unquestionably weightier influence on life, are involved,
than in the case of the latter ; to wit, the knowledge whereon depends
the salvation of immortal souls.
The following circumstance, also, was overlooked, the non-obser
vance whereof was likely to entail iraportant consequences. We have
two sources frora which we derive our knowledge of God and divine
things, — the natural and the supernatural revelation ; for brevity-sake we
wUl puf a part for the whole, and say, — the revelation of God within
us, and the revelation of God out of us in Christ Jesus. The revelation
of God within us, is likewise the organ, whereby we apprehend the out
ward revelation ; and it has, therefore, a twofold function, at once to
bear testiraony unto God, and our relation towards Hira, and also to
receive the testimony coraing from without. Accordingly, in behalf of
one and the same object, we directed to two witneses, quite distinct
one from the other ; and the matter of importance is, that the one wit
ness within us should not overvalue the worth of his evidence, and
mllinrly confess that his declarations stand in a subordinate relation
to ^those of the other ; for, otherwise, the necessity of another witness,
beside him, would be inexplicable. Precisely as historical criticism de
cides on the qualities of the witnesses, and seeks to discover, in each
particular case, whether they could rightly apprehend, and desired
faithfully to recount what they had learned, so must the witness in our
own interior be examined. But, this inward witness possesses a very
decided advantage, over the outward one. Being t'he organ for the lat
ter, he is too inclined, in his narrative, to substitute his own pretended
internal perceptions, for the testimony of the voucher, who stands by
his side ; and persuades himself that he is but faithfully relating what
he had learned from without, when he has been listening only to him
self, and in this wise has thrown every thing into confusion.

382 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
For this simple reason it is evident, that the attestation of the purport
of an external revelation can, by no nieans, be unconditionally ranked,
with the attesta.ion of any other fact ; nor, can it be afllrraed, that the
written testimony of credible eye and ear- witnesses, is an adequate au
thority in the one case, as it is in the other. What any informant re
lates, respecting the events of ordinaiy life, we can learn only from the
testimony of him and his Uke. That Carthage was taken by Scipio
iEniiliauus, is known to us only from the ancient historians ; and as
our own interior suggests not the slightest hint, as to such a fact, there
is no danger of confounding here our internal voice, with the narrative
of the historian. Religious truths, on the other hand, are attested in a
twofold manner ; and there is an eminent danger that what hath been
revealed to us from without, whUe we are but bringing it home to our
own conviction, might take the colour of our minds, and undergo a
greater or less change. Hence, besides Holy Writ, which objectively
is unerring, the living authority of the Church has been inslituted, in
order that we might obtainybr ourselves, subjectively, the divine word,
as it is in ilsel^. Between two persons, moreover, an absolute under
standing alone is possible ; between a person and a writing, on the
other hand, an absolute misunderstanding is but too possible.
Had we no innate, internal testimony of God, so that we were by
nature utterly godless ; then indeed, provided only we had s,till the
faculty of apprehending him, a mere book would have availed as suf
ficient authority. In that case, at least, our own interior, perhaps de
lusive, testimony could not possibly have been confounded, with tho
outward one ; still less, could a tacit preference have been given to the
former, if not the slightest tone of a divine voice came forth from our
bosoms. No fear then could have been entertained, that wc were
listening to ourselves, instead of to God, when all in man that could
point to heaven, were mute. This is the |ioint, where Luther's doc
trine, on Scripture and the Church,^coincides with his other errors, that
have been previously investigated. His doctrine touching original sin
inculcated, that nothing in man intimated and attested the Deiiy : His
doctrine on the absence of huraan free-will, and the exclusive operation
of God in the work of salvation, that the Divine Spirit alone engenders
failh in man. So next the proposition was advanced, that Holy Writ
is the soul fountain-head, standard, and judge in raatters of faith.*
¦» Epitome Comp § p. 543. " Credimus, confitemur, ct docemus, unicam regulam
et normam, ex qui omnia dogmata, omnesquedoctores judicare opcrteat, nullam om
nino aliam esse, quam prophttica et apustoliea, lum veteris, tum novi Teslamenti
Scripta." SoUd, declar. forma dijudic, controv. J ii, p, 605.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 383
While, therefore, the Catholic Church, in order to guard raan against
errors, in the reception of Christian truth, and to afford him the cer
tainty that he is in possession of the sarae, presents herself as the all-
sufficient, because divinely appointed, surety ; Luther, on the other
hand, seeks to obtain the sarae end, by not only exalting the raeasure
of the coramunicatlons of the Holy Spirit, but by annihilating aU hu-
man concurrence, and reserving to the Deity an exclusive agency : he
says, the Holy Spirit readeth in the Scriptures, not thou.
As accordingly the Reformers represented aU human concurrence in
the work of salvation, not only as unnecessary, but as impossible, and
held that, where huraan eagerness ventured an intrusion into this work,
an abortion was unavoidably engendered ; so, they indulged in the
idea, that whoever addressed himself immediately to Holy Writ, ob
tained an immediate knowledge of its contents. They rejected the
mediating authority of the Church, which guided the inteUectual activity
of each individual, because they wished to avoid every thing human,
without apprehending that thesubjectivity of the beUever, would, thereby,
be set in the most unrestrained movement, and be confounded vvith tae
objective revelation ; nay, without fearing, that any huraan aUoy were
possible in this work, because such had been discarded frora their own
imagination. This view often breaks out with singular naivete ; as for instance, in
the oft-repeated assertion, that the Bible is the judge in matters of faith.
The reader of the Scripture is, unhesitatingly, confounded with tiie
Scripture itself, and the immediate conveyance of its contents to his
mind, most childishly assumed. It is one thing to say, "the Bible is
the source of the doctrine of salvation ;" and another tosay, "it is the
judge to deterraine what is the doctrine of salvatiun." The latter it
can as little be, as the coda of civil law can exercise the functions of
the juJge: it forms indeed the rule of jud^mant, but it doth not itself
pronounce judgment. But, as Luther originally quite overlooked ttie
concurrence of human energies, and bald all his thoughts, juJgnients,
and conclusions, in regard to the kingdom of God, to be as inuc.i the
effects of an exclusive divine operation, as his wdl in reference to the
kingdom of God ; so all conceptions of Scripture, and of the readers of
Scripture, floated indiscriminately in his mind ; and the proposition was
then advanced, that the Bible is the judge in contiovertiies of faith.* In

* We know indeed that the opinion, the Bible is the judge in doctrinal disputes,
is made to signify as rauch, that the Bible best explains itself; that thus the context,
parallel pass'dgcs, &c. remove obscurities, and allay controversies. But, this is lar
from completely meeting the view of the first Reforraers, aud, abstractedly considered,
is historically quite false.

384 EXPOSITION DF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
numerous passages of the writings of the Reforraers, as, for exaraple, lu
the following sentence of Zwinglius, this confusion recurs. In wishing
to explain what Church cannot err, and how it cometh that it cannot
err, he says, "The sheep of God follow the word of God alone, which
can in nowise deceive : it is accordingly clear, which is the inerrable
Church, the one, to wit, which rests on the word of God aloi^e."* In
other words, he who holds to the infalUble Word of God alone, is re
garded, in the most unqualified manner, as infallible ; just as if it were
one and the same to read the inenable Scripture, and to bo forthwith
inerrable : and, as if a vastly important intermediate step were not here
overleaped. On the other hand, the Reformers concluded, that Catho
lics are in error, because they interpret Holy Writ, according to the au
thority of the Church.
That the union which we have pointed out between the modo,
wherein, according to the Reibrmois, raan, in his inward sentiraents
and his powers of wiU, is converted to God, and the mode, wherein the
reUgious thoughts and conceptions of the believer are formed, is based
on no arbitrary assumption, may be irroi'iagably (uoved by numerous
passages, frora Luther and Zwinglius, when, even tiic general connexion
of their doctrines did not clearly iraply it. In his writings io the Bohe
mians, on the institution of Church iiiinisteis,"]" Luther expressly de
clares, that the believer is the freest judge of all his teachers, .since 'he is
inwardly instructed by God alone. Excellently well doth Ztvinglius
illustrate the sense of his colleague iu Wiitenberg ; and we may the
more confidently sumraon him, as a witness to Luther's original view,
as he nowhere manifests a productive genius, has not, perhaps, in all
his writings, expressed one original, progiiant idea, and almost always
pushes Luther's opinions to an extreme, albeit, he ofteu ridiculously
puts in claims to originality. Zwinglius compares, v ithout scruple, the
word of Scripture to the Word of God, whereby all nings ^l'ere created
out of nothiug — with that word, in vii tue whereof Hght arose when the
* Zwingl, de vera et fals. rehg, comment, Opp, tom. ii. fol. 192. " Haec tandem
sola est ecclesia labi et errare nescia, quas solam Del pastoris vocem audit, nam hffiC '
sola ex Deo est. Qui enim ex Deo est, verbum Dei audi' ; et rursus, vos non auditis,
qui ex Deo non estis. Ergo qui audiunt, Dei oves sunt, Dei ecclesia sunt, errare ne.
queunt : nam solum Dei verbum sequuntur, quod fallere uull^ ratione potest. Habes
jam, quaenara sit ecclesia, quse errare nequeat, ea niraur'om sola, quae solo Dei verbo
nititUT." t Luther de Instit. rainist. eccles. Opp. tom. ii. fol. 584. " His et eimllibus mul
tis locis, tum evangelii, tura totius Scripturae, quibus admonemur, ne falsis doctoribus
credamus, quid aliud docemur, quara ut nostrae propriae quisquis pro se salutis ration
em habens, certus sit, quid credat et sequatur, ac judex hberrimus sit omnium, qui
docent eum, intv,s d Deo solo doctus." Other passages we shall cite below.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 336
Lord spake : " Let there be light."* To explain the mode of operation
of the Divine Word, he appeals, moreover, to that internal word, which
carae to the prophets of the old covenant, and which, although it ex
acted what was most extraordinary, and promised what was raost raar-
vellous, yei -without ihe aid of human refaction and menial activity, took
possession of those to whora it was addressed, and brought them under
subjection.")" MingUng truth with falsehood, and deducing the latter
frora the forraer, he concludes that no man can instruct another, since
Christ saith, " No one cometh to Hira, unless the Father draw him."
That no man can implant faith in another — that, without the internal
attraction of the Father, without the mysterious opening of the internal
sense by the Holy Spirit, no one can believe, is undoubtedly quite cer
tain. But the opinion, that on this account, human co-operation is un
necessary, rests on the very same false conclusion, which the Refor
mers drew, when fhey represented the conversion of the will, as the
exclusive work of God.^
Here, raoreover, we can clearly discern the cause, why the Reforraers
were originally such decided adversaries to all philosophy and specula
tion — why Carlstadt, who was a confederate of Luther's, in the faraous
disputation at Leipzig, required the candidates of theology to apply
themselves to sorae handicraft, rather than to study, in order that the
huraan raind raight not be filled with things, which only irapeded the
entrance of the Divine Spirit. Accordingly he himself gave up the
* Zwingl. de. certitud. et clari. verbi. Dei. c. 11. Opp tom. i, fd. 165. " Tantat
verbi Dei certitudo et Veritas, tanta etiara ejusdem virtus et potentia, ut quaecunque
velit moxjuxtanutura illius eveniant. Dixit et facta mandavit et creata sunt 
Dixit Deus, fiat lux, et facta est lux. Ecce quanta sit Verbi virtus," etc,
t Loc. cit. u. 111. p. 168. seq.
} Loc cit p. 169. " Cum Deo docente discant pii, cur non eam doctrinam ; quam
divinitus accipiunt, iis liberara perinittitis 7 Quod vero Deus piorum animos in^titu-
Bt, Christus eodem in loco non obscure innuit, dicens: omnis qui audiverit a patre
et didiceret, ad rae venit. Nemo ad Christum pervenit, nisi cognitionera illius a pa.
tre acceperit, Jamne ergo videtis et auditis, quis sit magister fidelitim ? Non patres,
non doctores titulo superbi, iion magistri nostri, non pontificum coetus, non sedes, non
scholae nee concilia, sed pater Domini nostri Jesu Christi. Quid ergo, objicitis, an
horao horainem docere non potest ? Nequaquam, Christus enim dicit : nemo venit
ad me, nisi pater traxerit eum  Verba spiritus clara sunt, doctrina Dei clara est,
docet et hominis animum sine uUo humaniE rationis additaraento, de salute certiorem
reddit," etc. In Zwinglius, the doctrine of absolute predestination, and of the ex
clusive agency of the Deiiy, evidently exerted a great influence in the fraraing of this
article ; naraely, that what man, in the reading of the Bible and so forth, performs
by reflection, Ae seems only so to do, Loc cit p 171. "Quod vero hie in re opus
tamen esse credis, non tuum sed Spiritus sancti ret, qui occulte in te et per virtutem
suam operatur." 25

386 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
scientific investigation of the Scriptures, in order that, from siraple arti
sans, who had not disqualified theraselves by indulging in human re
flections, he might learn immediately, through God, the my.steries of
His kingdom, and be initiated in fhe true sense of Holy Writ. Melanc.
then went as an apprentice to a baker, not only to learn how to under-
stand the Bible, but to apply it, when understood in the manner we
have raentioned ; for, the passage " by the sweat of thy brow," &c. he
conceived to be a divine precept, imposing the duty of manual labour.
We are, indeed, aware, that Luther himself very much modified this
his original view, which, on the part of the Lutherans and Calvinists,
had been made to undergo a still greater change. But, when we wish
to exhibit to view, fhe internal genesis of the Protestant theory of fhe
Church, we should not hold up the later phase as the earliest, nor, in
general, confound one with the other. The later conceptions of Luther,
which were meant to be an iraproveraent on his earlier opinions, brought
into his systera contradictions, which raust theraselves be accounted
for. It was also only outward phenoraena that induced Luther to pur
sue another course — to wit, the rise of the Anabaptists. As the authors
of this sect, like Luther, appealed to the interior teachings of the Di
vinity, and as he felt utterly incapable of raeeting their objections on
this ground, he saw hiraself forced to insist anew, on the indispensable
necessity of huraan efforts, for the right understanding of Scripture. In
general, the fanatical coraraotions, excited by the so-called heavenly
prophets, gave a very different turn to Luther's raind, than he previous
ly had ; and this fact, Adolphus Menzel, in his " Modern History of the
Gerraans," has observed with great penetration. But, at all events,
those are far from duly appreciating Luther's views and spirit, who
imagine, that he absolutely believed that he could discover the frue
sense of Scripture, by an historico-grararaatical interpretation. Nothing
was more alien to him — nothing more at variance with his whole sys.
tera : the very notion that, by huraan exertions, we can win and appro
priate to ourselves the knowledge of divine things, he held to be the
acrae of ungodliness. Learned interpretation was, by no raeans, his
method for discovering the sense of the Bible, but only for obtaining
for himself and others, an exegetical explication of the sense, engender
ed in man by the iraraediate and exclusive operation of the Deity — an
explication, which, according to his principles, should have appeared
quite unnecessary. Zwingle's and Luther's original views, may thus,
in a certain sense, be compared with the CathoUc doctrine. The Catho
lic Church saith : " I am immediately certain, wherein the true doc
trine of Christ and of the Apostles consists, for, I have been therein in-
ffucted, trained up and educated ; and what I have learned, hath been,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 387
by the Divine Spirit, deeply irapressed and confirmed on my heart.
The written word of the Apostles can only coincide with their oral
communications, and must be interpreted by the same. On the other
hand, fhe opinion of fhe two Reformers appears to have been this :
" God, by his own interior word of power, working with human co-ope
ration, hath implanted his doctrine within us, through the vehicle of the
Sacred Scriptures. According to this interior word, whose working
forras the Christian consciousness, the outward word must, in its de
tails, be then explained." It is indeed extreraely difficult to forra a very
clear conception of the primitive views of the Reforraers : but, we
think it vain to atterapt to reconcile, in any other raanner, the words
of Luther, " The believer is internaUy taught by God alone," with the
perpetually recurring assertion, that, without the Bible, no Christian
knowledge is possible. In the sequel, we shall obtain fuHer explanations
on this raatter.
4 XLV. — Continuation. Internal ordination. Every Christian a priest and teacher,
and consequently independent of aU ecclesiasticad communion. Notion of eccle
siastical fi:eedom.
These opinions were attended with the weightiest and most decisive
consequences. As each beUever was deeraed to be instructed by God
alone, and capable, without huraan aid, of attaining to Christian know
ledge ; so, in the first place, an outward Christian ministry could not
even be conceived : God, by means of Scripture, was the sole teacher.
In the second place, ordination, as a sacrament, becarae no longer ne
cessary : since this presupposes the necessity of a continuance of the
divine work of salvation, by the mediation of the Church. But then,
as God coraraunicates hiraself, with indubitable certainty, only in an
iraraediate and interior manner, it foUows, that as no human teacher is
any longer necessary ; so an outwardly accredited ministry is equally,
and stUl more unnecessary. The exterior ordination becomes trans
muted into a purely internal act, whereby God iraparts the consecration
of the Spirit, not to this or that individual in a special manner, but to
aU in an equal degree. In a word, Luther laid hold of the old Christian
idea of a universal priesthood, disfigured it, and then applied it to his
new scheme. This is a subject to which he often recurs, but, he treats
it, at full length, in the Essay to the Bohemian Brethren, which we
have already had occasion to cite. We must here briefly state the lead
ing ideas of this essay. Quite in the beginning, and still more in the
course of this production, Catholic Ordination is exhibited as a mere
daubing, shaving, and jugglery, whereby nought but lying and idle
fools, true priests of Satan, were made. One could likewise shave the

388 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
hair off any sow, and put a dress on any block.* Luther requires his
disciples confidently to reject aU those, who have been ordaiued by the
beast, as he calls the Pope, that is to say, all those who had received
ordination in the Catholic Church, in whose place the Pope is named,
as being its representative. No one should doubt, he says, that he is-
iustified, nay, obliged to do this, since all beUevers have received frora
Christ a priestly dignity, which not only entitles, but binds fhem to
exercise the office of teaching, to forgive sins, and to administer all
the sacraments. The Holy Spirit, with its interior unction, instructs
each one in all things, engenders faith in hira, and raakes him assured
of its possession.! Although now all be qualified for, and possess the
right of exercising the priestly functions, yet, in order to avoid disorder,
they must delegate to one or raore of their body the general right, to be
exercised in their place, and in their name, after the more respected
members of the comraunity have imposed hands on hira, and thereby
made him their bishop. (Ordination according to this point of view,
is nothing more than a mere act of introduction into an ecclesiastical
office.) Before we proceed in this exposition, we raay be permitted to express
the thoughts, which the views of Luther here stated, have excited in our
minds. His writing to the Bohemians, in the true democratic tone of
the most disgusting popular adulation, confers on every Christian a
degree of perfection, which is belied by the most casual glance, that
an impartial spirit will cast into its own interior. That yearning after

* Luther de Instituendis minist. eccles. opp. tom. ii. fol. .585.
t Loc. cit fol. 584. '¦ Christianum esse puto eum, qui Spiritum sanctum habet,
qui ut (Christus ait) docebit eum omnia. Et Johannes ait : unctio ejus docebit vos
omnia, hoc est, ut in summa dicam : Christianus ita certus est, quid credere et non
credere debeat, ut ctiam pro ipso moriatur, aut saltera raori paratus eit," (What
would Luther now say? Fol. 585. ''Deinde cum quilibet sit ad verbi rainisteriuin
natus e baptismo, etc. Quodsi exemplum petimus, adest Apollo Act. 18, quem legi
mus plane sine ulla vocatione et ordinatione Ephesum venisse et forventer docuisse,
Judaeosqne potenter revicisse. — Aliud exemplum praestant Stephanus et Philippus. .
. . . Quo jure. rogo,et qua auctoritate? Certe nusquara nee rogati nee vocati aquo-
piam, sed proprio motu et generah jure.'' (What astonishing proofs!) Then: "Nova
res est, inquinnt, et sine exemplo, sic eligere et creare episcopos. Respondco : Imo
antiquis'ima et exemplis Apustolorura suorumque discipulorum probata, licet per Fa-
pistas contrario exemplo et pestilentibus doctrinis abolita et extincta." (Corapare the
Acta of the Apostles u. xiv. 22 ; Titus, c. i. 5. II; Tim. ii. 2.; Deinde si maxime
nova res esset, tamen cura verbura Dei hic luceat et jubeat, simul necessitas anima.
rum cogit, prorsus nihil raovere det>et rei novitas, sed verbi majestas. Nam quid rogo
non est novum, quod fides facit ? Non fuit etiam Apostolorum tempore novum hu.
jusmodi ministerium 1 Non fuit novura, quod filii Israel mare transierunt ?" etc.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 389
.communion, which is discernible in every man, and by none is felt
more vividly than by the Christian, would be utterly inexplicable, if
each man, like to a God, knew everything, possessed all truth and all
life within himself, and, in every respect, absolutely sufficed for hira
self. All communion arises and exists but by the sense, or fhe clear
knowledge of our own wants and deficiencies, and the perception
thereby determined, that it is only in connexion with, and the closest
adherence to others, our own incapacity and helplessness can be re
moved. From Luther's view of the rights of a Christian, we cannot
even conceive, why the latter should at all need a teacher, and where
fore a comraunity, of which each individual member possesses sufficient
power, to satisfy all his own wants, should be called on to appoint such
a teacher. Even the quite material and paltry motive, which he assigns
for the necessity of a public teacher, namely, " the avoidance of dis
order," is, in his scheme, devoid of all consistency.
What need is there of a congregation, for mutual edification or mu
tual instruction, when each individual is taught to consider hiraself as
an independent, all-sufficient monad ? Far other principles than these
of Luther's, did the Apostle Paul, in his first epistle to the Corinthians,
(c. xii.) unfold on the communion of life in the Church, which ho finds
estabUshed in the distribution of the diverse gifts of the one Spirit
among many, yet, in their operations necessary for all believers, who,
therefore, like the merabers of one body, are taught to depend one upon
the other. If Luther says, " each one is born out of baptisra for the
ministry," so Paul, on the other hand, saith : " Are all apostles, are all
prophets, are all teachers ?" Luther considers the Divine Spirit as so
distributed araong all, that in each individual it is found in all its forras,
whereby the very idea of a common organic life is utterly destroyed.
Paul, on the other hand, asserts the various revelations of the One in the
many, whereby a living connected whole is produced.*

• Melchior Canus (Loci theologici, hb. iv. c. 4, p 238, seq.) has already well an
swered the objection of the Reformers, that Catholics attributed the entire gifts of the
Holy Spirit to the body only, and were unwilling to concede to individuals the full
measure of such graces, though they need them all. Canus replies, as the peculiar
functions of every member in the physical body tend to the profit of the whole, and
each participates in them all, so it is with the moral body of the Church. " Uni
cuique, ait S Paulus, nostrum data est gratia secundura mensuram donationis Christi.
Et, ipse dedit quosdam quidem apostolos, etc. ad consummationcm sanctorum in
opus ministerii, in aedificationera corporis Christi. Et posterius : accrescaraus in
illo, qui est caput Christus ; ex quo totura corpus compactum et connexum secun
dum operationera, in mensuram uniuscujusque membri, augmentura corporis facit in
adificationem sui in charitate." (Eph. c. iv., 11, 16.) Membrum igitur, quoniam

390 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Luther thus considered each individual believer as absolutely inde
pendent of a religious comraunity, because standing in need of none,
and therefore ecclesiastically free. Here we are enabled to explain a
phenoraenon, the connection whereof with others was impervious to the
understanding of a celebrated historian. Schmidt, in his history of the
Germans, deemed it strange, on the part of the Lutherans, that they
should reject metaphysical freedora, and yet, on the other hand, lay
claim to ecclesiastical liberty. It was precisely, however, the denial of
the former, which led to the affirmation of the latter. He who believes
himself to be guided by God only, cannot possibly discover any mean
ing in a dependence on men ; nay, he must reject it as absurd — as, on
one hand, the offspring of arrogance, ambition, and the love of a besot
ting domination ; so on the other, as the effect of spiritual bUndness,
and of a slavish sense, ignorant of Gospel Uberty — the liberty of the
children of God. The CathoUc, on the other hand, who concedes to
man the first-named species of freedom, and pretends not to deny his
power of independent action, cannot do otherwise than look on hiraself
as bound by fhe authority of the Church, and for this reason, because
everything huraan is to be considered as established in raanifold rela
tions, and deterrained by the finite world, in which it lives.*

id, quod totius corporis est, nihil sibi vindicat proprium : Bed ita in corpus omnia con
fert, ut magis corporis, quara raerabri actiones perfeetionesque esse videantur. Quo-
circa illud absurdum est, quod ii scilicet, quibuscum nunc disseritur, eam curam,
quara debent capere, non capiunt  Nos sane, quemadmodum sciraus, animam
actum et perfectionem esse, maxime quidera corporis physici organici, secundo
autera loco membrorura etiam singulorum, quibus varlas licet edat functiones,
sed cranes illae et corporis proprie sunt, et propter corpus ipsum membris a na
tura tributae ; ita spiritum veritatis ad corpus primum ecclesiae referiraus, deinde
propter ecclesiam ad singulas etiam ecclesiae partes, non ex aequo, sed analogia et pro-
portione quSdam juxta mensuram uniuscujusque membri. Unum corpus, inquit, ct
unus spiritus. Unicuique autem nostrum data est gratia secundum mensurara dona
tionis Christi, Quosnam, vero, hsec mensura Christi est ? Secimdum operationcm»
ait, in mensurara uniuscujusqe membri. Spiritus ergo suo quidem modo singulis pro.
missus est, ut magnos doceat, doccat et parvulos, Ac parvulis lac potum dat, ma-
joribus solidum cibum, Illis Christum loquitur et hunc crucifixera : his loquiter sa,
pientiara in raysteno absconditara. Verum singulis membris ^ic spiritus veritatis
adest, ut non solum corpori miiverso non desit, sed corpori quam membris prius pi>-
tiusque mtdhgatur adesse, etc.
? Luther de capt. Babyl. p. 288, b. " Christianis nihil nullo jure posse iraponi le
gum, sive ab hominibus, sive ab angelis, nisi quantura volunt, liberi cnim sumus ab
omnibus. Dccebat enim nos esse, sicut parvuli baptizati, qui nullis studiis, nuUis ope
ribus occupati, in omnia sunt liberi, solius gloria baptismi sui securi et salvi. Sumus
enim et ipsi parvuli in Christo, ;issidue baptizati, p. 2'<8, a. Dico itaque : neque pa
pa, neque episcopus, neque ullus hominum habet jus unius syllabiE constituendiB

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. ,391
Moreover, in considering the outward relations of things, it is not
difficult to conceive how the doctrine we have stated might, nay raust,
have arisen in the mind of Luther. As he had against hira fhe authori
ty of the existing Church, he was forced to resort to the iraraediate
power of God working within him ; as the old ecclesiastical spirit be
came extinct in his breast, he must begin by renouncing all historical
and traditionary guidance, and incapable of calling back in person the
Apostles themselves, in order to be authorized by them in the narae of
Christ, he saw no other expedient than an appeal to an invisible, inter
nal authorization. The consequences were not slow to follow. Scarce
had Luther's opinions obtained currency, and begun to be enforced,
when raen, the most uncalled, deeraed themselves to have received the
caUing of teachers, and universal confusion ensued.*
The Augsburg Confession sought to obviate this evil, and hence en
joined, that no one should teach in public, who had not received a law
ful vocation. An article which, in the Lutheran system, is utterly
unintelligible, ahd to which, therefore, we can assign no place therein :
but raust merely rest satisfied with stating its existence, as well as the
extraneous causes, to which it owed its origin. It is, too, a conse
quence of the accidental character of this article, that it merely asserts,
that every teacher is to be called in a lawful manner, without at all
determining in what this lawfulness consisfs.| Lawfulness, according

super Christianum hominera, nisi id fiat ejusdem consensft, quidquid aliter fit, tyran-
nicospirita fit." Hence, Melancthon, in further proof of this asserts that, after
Christ, no new law, no ordinance and rite ought to be instituted. " Loci, p, 6. Ade-
mit igitur potestatcra, novas leges, novos ritus condendi."
* The congregations elected such raen for their preachers, as spoke in a raanner
the carnal sense was delighted to hear. It was, by such preachers that the war of
the peasants was, in a great degree, enkindled, George Eberlin, a Lutheran pastor,
in the year 1526, dissuaded the peasants frora joining in the insurrection, and araong
other things observed : " Should the people say, why had revolt been preached up to
thera, the answer is, why did they not let their preachers be tested beforehand, and
without advice suffer every loose fisherraan to preach? Compare Bucholz: Ges
chichte der Regierung Ferd. I. (History of the Reign of Ferdinand I,) Vienna,
1831. vol, ii, p. 220.
+ Confess. August. Art, xiv. De ordine ecelesiastico docent, quod nemo debeat
in ecclesia publico docere, nisi rite vocatus. Moreover, it was necessary not only to
pass this ordinance, but to enjoin, that teachers should generally be procured, and be
maintained. The Saxon nobility and peasants took Luther at his word ; and since
he had told them, that, by the interior unction, they were raade acquainted with all
things : and as men divinely illuminated, they stood in need of no human teachers,
they were uncommonly flattered by this declaration, and seriously resolved to do
away with the public ministry. Hence, they withheld from the curates their, dues.

392 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
to fhe principles of fhe Reforraers, consisted in this : that nothing ex
ternal could be lawfully instituted, and that every ono might undertake
the office of teacher, who believed himself under the impulse of the
Divine Spirit, and could find such singular hearers, as, firmly con
vinced, they already knew everything, and needed no instruction, yet
were, nevertheless, raost desirous fo learn. That, at a later period,
the Consibtories reserved to theraselves the right of deciding on the
qualifications of a candidate, for the office of preacher, and permitted
the congregation to elect only such, as had enlisted the approval of the
most higher functionaries, is a fact as well known, as the utter incon
sistency of such an arrangeraent, with the fundamental doctrines of
Luther, raust be evident to every mind. At all events, it is a very re
markable fact, that the Lutherans, nay, Luther hiraself, in his maturer
years, should have practically, at least, rejected his fundaraental opin
ions, and thereby unequivocally deraonstrated, that, perfectly adapted
as those opinions might be, for the destruction of an existing Church,
and the subversion of all established notions, yet were they utterly un
serviceable, for the building up and consolidation of a new Church.
To construct such a Church, they were forced to recur to tho old
Catholic raethod, which had been so violently assailed. In the exarai-
nation of the doctrines of the Anabaptists, we shall first have occasion
to furnish the most striking evidences of this retrograde movement.
§ XLVI. — Continuation. Invisible Church.
By the analysis we have followed, we have obtained a tolerably com
plete insight, into the Lutheran theory of fhe Church. The believer,
according to what has been stated, is, in the first place, instructed by
God only, exclusively of all co-operation of human activity, whether it
be his own, or that of other men. In the second place, he is on this
account infallible, because, having been taught by God, without human
concurrence, whereby error can alone arise, he is in himself absolutely

Luther complains somewhere, " That if aid be not speedily brought, the Gospel,
schoole and parish ministers, are all ruined in this land ; the latter raust go, for they
possess nothing, and wander about, looking like haggard ghosts," Elsewhere he
says : " The people will no longer give anything, and there is such thanklessnesB
among them for the holy Word of God, that, if I could do it with a safe conscience, I
should help to deprive them of pastors or preachers, and let them live like swine, as
they already do," See Plank's History of the Protestant System of Doctrine. Vol.
ii, p, 349. (In German,) Had not the sovereign power interfered to set restraints on
this gospel liberty, never, according to Luther's principles, could an ecclesiastical
community have been formed.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 393
inerrable. Thirdly, it cannot hence be discerned, why he should need
the suppleraental aid of a congregation, invested with authority, from
whose centre the Word of God should be announced to him ; for, by
the assistance of the outward Divine Word, written in the depths of
his heart, he hears his voice alone, and without an interraediate organ.*
What, after all this, can the Church be other than an invisible
community, since no rational object, in the visibiUty of the Church, can
any longer be conceived 1 So, in fact, Luther defines its notion, when
he says, " As we pray in faith, I believe in a Holy Ghost, in a com
munion of saints. This means the coraraunity, or congregation of all
those, who live in fhe right faith, hope and charity ; thus, the essence,
life and nature of Christendora, consists not in a bodily asserablage, but
in the asserablage of hearts in one faith, "f That this one faith will
never fail, Luther had not the slightest cause to doubt, for God, whose
agency is here represented as exclusive, will everywhere produce the
same effects.
But, we have already seen how Luther, although, according to him,
believers are inwardly taught by God alone, yet all at once (and with
out its being possible to discover, in his system, any rational ground
for such an assuraption), adraits the establishraent of huraan teachers,
and even the lawfulness of their caUing. Hereby the Church becoraes
visible, recognizable, obvious to the eye, so tbat the Ul-connected notions
of God, the sole teacher, and of a huraan teacher declared corapetent,
and who cannot yet be dispensed with, raeet us again in such a way as
to imply, that the invisible is still a visible Church also. In Luther's
work against Ambrosius Catharinus, this singular combination of ideas
is most decidedly expressed. Luther asks hiraself the question, which
Catharinus had already proposed, " but those will say, if the Church be
quite in the spirit, and of a nature thoroughly spiritual, how can we
discern where on earth any part of it raay hel" And he accordingly
confesses, that it must be absolutely internal in its nature ; only he

¦* We must here for once observe to our readers, that it is not our fault, if, in the
words of the text, a contradiction should be apparent. For, the words, " God alone
without any intermediate organ worketh in man ;" and those, " He worketh by the
aid of the external, di'vine, and written Word," involve a contradiction. It is only in
the second part of this work, this contradiction will be fully solved.
t Luther " On the Papacy," Jena. German edition, vol. i, p. 266. Respons, ad
librum Ambros. Cathar. anno 1521, Opp. tom ii, fol. 376. In the work on the Pa
pacy, Luther says, " Furthermore, because communion with the visible Church con.
stitutes no communion with the invisible, and because many non-Christians are found
in the visible Church, so no visible Church is at all necessary !"

394 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
replies, " the necesary raark, whereby we recognize it, and which we
possess, is baptisra, and the Lord's Supper, and above all, the Gospel."*
Hereby the Church evidently becoraes outwardly manifest, and conse
quently not entirely, and in every respect spiritual. Still better doth
the Augsburg Confession describe the Church as a comraunity of saints,
in which the Gospel is rightly taught, and the sacraments are duly
adrainistered ;f so that, in as far as it consists of saints only, it is abso
lutely invisible ; for the saints no one knoweth but God alone ; and, in
asmuch as the Gospel is there taught, and baptism, and the body of the
Lord are therein adrainistered, it cannot avoid being visible. The
singularity of the notion, that the Church, which should be only an
invisible, because a purely spiritual one, yet must be perceptible to fhe
senses, is still further heightened by the addition, that it is found there,
where the Gospel is rightly taught, and fhe sacraments are rightly ad
ministered. For this passage suoposes that there are false Churches ;
and now to distinguish the true from the opposite Churches, the right
doctrine set forth by the saints, and the right worship adminis
tered by them, is given as a sign. Doubtless, the true Church
possesses the pure evangelical Word and sacraments, and lives
by them, and consequently possesses saints. Yet, from all this, the
true Church of Christ, amid the struggle of various parties, is not to be
recognized. For, either from the circurastance, that a saint, or, in
other words, a man qualified by God alone for the rainistry, preaches,
we should conclude his doctrine to be true ; or else, frora the truth of
his doctrine, we infer that he is a saint. The first is not possible, for,
from a thing to us uncertain, nothing certain can be deduced. The
second presupposes, that he, who wishes to learn the true doctrine of
Christ, and consequently deraands a characteristic of the sarae, already
possesses the true doctrine, and is certain and assured of its possession,
and therefore needs no- mark. Yet, every one inquires after fhe true
Church of Christ, only because he wishes to attain to the possession of
Christ's true doctrine, as well as to acquire the certainty and assurance,

* Luther's Respons, ad libr, Ambros. Cathar. loc. cit. fol. 376.377. Dices autem,
si ecclesia tota est in spiritu, et res omnino spiritualis, nemo ergo nosse poterit, ubi sit
ulla ejus pars in toto orbe. . . Quo ergo signo agnoscam ecclesiam ? Respondeo ;
signum necessarium est, quod et habemus, Baptisma, ac panem et oraniura potissi
mura Evangelium.
1 Confess. August. Art. vii. Item docent, quod una sancta ecclesia perpetuo
raansura sit. Est autem ecclesia congregatio sanctorura, in qua. Evangehum recte
docctur, et recte administrantur sacramenta. Et ad veram unitatera ecclesiae satis
est, consentlre de doctrina Evi-ngehi, et adrainistratione sacramentorum.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 395
that he possesses it. But, should he receive for answer, the true
Church is there, where the true doctrine is found, so a reply is evidently
given, which is nought else but the question itself, that is to say, nothing
at all is answered.
§ XLVII. — Continuation. Rise of the visible Church according to Luther. Ultimate
reasons for the truth of an article of faith.
But, as yet this reasoning can scarcely be understood ; and its real
sense will then only be clearly apprehended, when we have dwelt more
at large on the origin of the Church, such as Luther darkly conceived
it. His meaning may thus be more accurately expressed as follows.
In a man, belief in Christ takes seed ; if this faith corae to raaturity,
then is the disciple of Christ forraed. But, as a raere believer, he stands
only in one relation to God in Christ ; he is a raember of the invisible
Church, of the concealed and everywhere scattered worshippers of the
Lord. But as soon as he gives utterance to his faith, that which was
hidden within him, bursts visibly forth, and he appears an open disciple
of the Saviour, perceptible to the eyes of the whole world. If he finds
now several with the like views, if they associate with him, and together
outwardly set forth the substance of that, which they internally recog
nize as religious truth : then the invisible community becoraes visible.
The common faith, which inwardly aniraated and united all, ere they
knew each other's sentiments, becomes, as a coraraon doctrine, an out
ward bond holding fhem all together. In the same way it is with fhe
sacraments, and the outward worship, which they acknowledge to be
ordained by Christ. That Luther had this idea, is evident from what
follows. In his apology for free-will, Erasmus took occasion to touch
on this weak side, in the Lutheran doctrine respecting the Church.
Luther had then made considerable steps in the way of iraproveraent,
and solemnly declared, that he approved not the principles of those who,
in all their assertions, constantly appealed to the language of fhe Spirit,
in their interior ; and expressed his opinion in what manner the Scrip
ture should be judge in matters of faith. He says, an internal certainty
of having seized the true sense of Holy Writ, is to be distinguished from
the outward certainty ; the former (the Christian consciousness)
consisting in the testiraony of the Holy Spirit, which assures each
individual, that he is in possession of the truth ; the latter con
sisting in the Scriptural proofs alleged by the public rainistry.* In

* Luther de servo arbitrio. Opp. tora. iii. fol. 182. Neque illos probo, qui refugium
suum ponunt in Jactantial spiritCis, Nos sic dicimus, duphci judicio spiritus esse ex-

396 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
this passage, the clergy are conceived to be the representatives of the
Church, which accordingly is of a nature quite visible, and professing
the faith of the invisible Church, expressing its consciousness, has a de
fined system of doctrines, that through the instrumentality of its minis
ters it defends, and, as the sentence of the saints, holds to be true and
inerrable. The visible Church appears, consequently, as the expression
and the copy of fhe invisible.
The following considerations are of great importance, to enable us to
form a coraplete conception of the Lutheran theory of the Church, and
of its divergence frora the Catholic system. Luther confounded the
internal sense of the truth of a proposition, with its outward testiraony,
or rather, his view of the purely interior and spiritual nature of fhe
Church, whose merabers were instructed by the Holy Spirit only, neces
sarily involved this confusion.
After dilating at length on the manner in which the Christian, amid
the various views as to the sense of the written Word, can assure hira
self that his own view is the true one, he lays down the maxira : "then
thou canst be assured of any matter, when thou canst freely and safely
assert, this is the pure and genuine truth ; for this wiU I live and die,
and he who teaches otherwise, be he who he wiU, let hira bc anathema."*
Hereby, Luther raade subjective certainty the highest criterion of Gos
pel truth, without reflecting that, by the very fact, the eternal Word of
God had becorae an outward teacher, an external authority, for attesting
that that Divine Word had revealed such and such doctrines, was above
all things necessary, in order to irapart the certainty in question. The
passage of St. Paul's, " If an angel frora heaven were to teach another

plorandiis seu improbandos, Uno interiori, quo per Spiritum sanctum vel donum Dei
singularc, quilibet pro se, su&que solius salute illustratus, certiFsime judicat et discemit
oraniura dogmata et sensus, de quo dicitur 1 Cor. ii. 1. Spiritualis omnia judicat et a
nemine judicatur, Haec ad fidem pertinet, et necessaria est cuihbet etiara privato
Christiano. Hanc superius appdlavimus interiorem claritatem Scripturas sacrae.
Alteram est judiciura externura, quo non modo pro nobis ipsis, sed et pro aliis ct prop.
ter aliorum salutera, certissirae judicaraus spiritus et dograata aliorum. Hoc judicium
est publici ministerii in verbo, et officii externi, et maxime pertinet ad duces et proB-
cones verbi. Quo utimur, dum infirraos in fide roboramus (?) et adversarios refuta.
mus. Sic diciraus, judice Scriptura, omnes spiritus in facie Ecclesiae esse probandos.
Nam id oportet apud Christianos esse imprimis ratum atque fiimissiraum, Scripturas
sanctas esse lucem spiritualem, ipso sole longe clariorem : praeserlim in iis, quae per
tinent ad salutem vel necessitatem Thus he speaks in the year 1525, not when he
wrote to the Bohemians. Here we find the source of what was afterwards put forth,
as a claira of the Lutheran clergy.
* Luther's Commentary on the Epist. to the Galat. part i. p. 31. In the writing
to the Bohemians, this sentiment is oflen expressed.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 891
Gospel, let him be anathema," gave him occasion to make this asser-
tion. But Luther did not consider, that Paul, to whora the Saviour
himself had appeared, to whom extraordinary revelations had been made,
was in a very different situation frora an ordinary Christian. Doubtless,
the unconquerable firmness of Christian conviction, is the mark of a
true-believing soul ; yet, unfortunately, the grossest error hath the
power to exert the most lamentable fascination over the mind, and bring
it by degrees under bondage, as Luther, had he even been unacquainted
with earlier examples in history, might have seen in those fanatics,*
whom he so violently combated.
An expedient, varying in expression, yet the same in substance, is
resorted to by Zwinglius, when, in his " Commentaries on True and
False Religion," he says, the mark of true doctrine, the sign that we
have rightiy understood the Divine Word, is the unction and testimony
of the Holy Spirit. Faith, according to him, is no science, for it is pre
cisely the learned who are often most addicted to error ; and, on
this account, faith is no matter for investigation, and is exalted above
all strife.f
Zwinglius makes here the most perverse application of a truth, which
he had found a thousand times repeated in Catholic writers, especially
the mystics. The belief in Jesus Christ, must undoubtedly attest itself;
in each one, who possesses it in the right way, it will exalt and extend
the consciousness of God ; it will pervade and transform his whole ex
istence ; infuse into his soul the fullest confidence in God, the deepest
tranquillity, and the most joyous consolation; and impart to him a power
for all good, and the victory over hell and death. In these personal
perceptions, the dogmas professed by the understanding as the doctrine
of Jesus Christ are tested ; and we clearly recognize herein the fulfil
ment of what that doctrine promised, and the truth of its claim to be a
power frora God. But, the converse of this proposition can, by no
means, be affirmed, thaf a series of religious tenets, which tend to nourish
the piety of an individual, or a greater or smaller circle of men, necessarily
contain the doctrine of Christ, or even are not at variance with it. There
is no doubt but that the opinion, that man in his regeneration worketh
nothing, and God alone worketh all things, captivated and strongly ex
cited the religious feelings of Luther. But the inference which he
thence drew, that therefore that tenet was taught by Christ, cannot be
admitted. The writings of Calvin, Beza, Knox, and others show, that,

* The Anabaptists.
t ZwuigU Comment, de verat et falsa lelig. Opp. tom. ii. fol. 195.

398 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
from a heUef in the doctrine of absolute predestination, they and their
disciples derived a marveUous ease of raind, a boundless religious en
thusiasra (which often even degenerated into a frightful aU-destructive
fanaticisra,) and an uncoraraon energy, activity, and perseverance of
conduct. But it thence as little follows, that the doctrine which ren
dered these Calvinists personally easy, is a Christian and apostolic one,
as frora the mere circumstance, that in the reception of the sacraraents,
Zwinglius felt himself impressed, strengthened, and solaced by no high
Divine power, we could conclude, that, through these channels of sal
vation, Christ imparts not from the spring, whose waters flow into eter
nal Ufe. And if ali the three Reformers, together with all their
followers, had the personal experience and living conviction of never hav
ing performed one good work, what would thence follow ? Evidently
nought else, than that the state of their souls was raost laraentable, and
we, if they still lived, would be obliged to require fhem seriously fo
amend their lives. But by no means wiU we draw the inference, that
it could not have been otherwise ; nay, we will urge against thera, as
a matter of capital reproach, thai out of themselves, oui of their own
individual life they have deduced an universal law. Christ is our
pattern as well as our lawgiver ; but such no creature is. The Lu
theran Church is the incarnate spirit of Luther, and therefore thus
one-sided.

5 XLVIII. — Continuation. Divergences in the doctrine on the Church, shortly
expressed.
Now only, can the differences, between the Catholic and the Lu
theran view, be reduced to a .short, accurate, and definite expression.
The Catholics teach : the visible Church is first, then coraes the invis
ible ; the forraer gives birth to the latter. On the other hand, the
Lutherans say the reverse : from the invisible emerges fhe visible
Church : and the former is the ground-work of the latter. In this ap.
parenfly very uniraportant opposition, a prodigious difference is avowed.
When Christ began to preach the kingdora of God, it existed nowhere
but in hira, and in the Divine idea. It carae from without to raen, and
first of all to the apostles, in whom the divine kingdom was thus founded
by the Word of God, speaking from without, and after a human fashion
unto thera ; so that it was conveyed to them from without. When,
through external media, the religious consciousness of these had been
awakened, by the incarnate Son of God, and they had, accordingly,
received the outward calling, to announce the Gospel unto others, they
went into countries where, in like manner, the kingdom of God was noi

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 399
but the dominion of Satan ; and, as instruments of Christ, working
within them, they impressed, from without, the iraage of the celestial
man on fhe interior of those, who before had been stamped with the
image of the earthly one. And as Christ had done unto them, they
also did again unto others : they appointed disciples, who, like them,
continued to preach the docfrine of salvation, as the Holy Scripture, in
nuraerous passages, loudly declares, and so on perpetually did the in
visible spring out of the visible Church. This order of things is im
plied in the very notion of an external, historical revelation, whose entire
peculiar essence requires a definite, perpetual, and outward ministry,
to which each one raust adhere, who will learn the dictates of that
revelation. By the tisfimony of this rainistry, and so by an outward
testiraony, the external revelation is preserved in its truth, purity, and
integrity. But according to Luther, it is quite otherwise. First, it is the Chris
tian consciousness (interior clarii-us sacrce Scripturce ;) then coraes the
outward certainty (exterior claritus sacriB Scriptures ;) the Church is
a»community of saints, in which the Gospel is rightly announced ;
saints, above all, are consequently described as existing, whose origin,
•''* extraction and rise, are utterly unknown, and then they preach. How
then have they become disciples of Christ ? The universal priesthood
of all Christians precedes, and out of this grows the special priesthood ;
but, on the contrary, it is the special which determines the general
priesthood, the outward the internal one. If the apostles have not pro
duced the Lord, as little have the disciples of the apostles elected the
latter. And wherein, according to Luther, is a man in the last result
to find the certainty, that he possesses the truth ? In a purely internal
act, in the testiraony of the Holy Spirit ; just as if the revelation in
Christ Jesus were an interior one ; as if he had not become man — as
if in consequence, the question at issue were not about an external tes
tiraony, an outward authority, to impart to us the certainty as to what
he taught. Hence, the respect for tradition in the Catholic, and the
rejection of it in the Protestant Church. By Luther, the outward
authority of the Church is converted into an inferior one, and the ex
terior Word authenticated as divine into the internal voice of Christ
and of his Spirit.
Had he wished, from his idea of the Church, to draw a consistent in
ference in respect to Christ, so he might very well have given up an
outward, historical Christ, and an external revelation ; nay, he would
have been compelled to reject the latter as incongruous. But all Chris
tianity rests on the incarnate Son of God : hence, by an appeal to the
outward, and written Word, Luther attempted to maintain an unison

400 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
with an external revelation. Yet, the impossibility of clearing his doc«
trine of all reasonable doubts, and well-founded objections, which might
be adduced, even frora the Scriptures themselves, urged him, in his con
troversy with Catholics, to accord the final decision, in religious raat
ters, to the internal Word.* But, when arguing with the fanatics, who
themselves appealed to the voice of the Spirit, he then held fast to fhe
outward Word, and even entrenched himself within fhe authority of the
perpetually visible Church.f Hence, from this essential perversion of

'* As a proof of this, we may cite the Conference of Ratisbon, in the year 1541,
at which the speakers, on both sides, had agreed on the article, that to the Church
alone belongeth the interpretation of Scripture. When now the notion of the Church
came to be discussed, and the Catholics understood by it the outward, visible Chureh,
Melancthon declared at the end, that by the Church were to be understood, the
saints, that is to say, those in whom God alone had begotten faith.
t Luther, in a letter to Albert, elector of Prussia, writes as follows : — " This arti
cle," says he (the real presence of Christ in the sacrament of the altar,) " is not a
doctrine or opinion invented by men, but clearly founded and laid down in the Gospel
by the plain, evident, undoubted words of Christ, and, from the origin of the Chris.
tian Chmches, down to the present hour, hath been unanimously believed and held
throughout the whole world. This is proved by tho dear Fathers, books, and wri
tings, both in the Greek and the Latin tongues ; and, raoreover, by the daily use and
practice of this Institution, down to the present day. This testimony of all the holy
Christian Churches (had we even nothing more,) should be alone sufficient to make
us adhere to this article, and not to listen to, or be led by any fanatical spirit ; for, it
is dangerous and frightful to hear and believe anything contrary to the unanimous
testimony, belief, and doctrine of all the holy Christian Churches, as from the begin.
ning, and with one accord they have now taught, for upwards of fifteen hundred
years, throughout the whole world. Had it been a new article, and not from the
foundation of the holy Christian Churches ; or, had it not been so unanimously held
by all Churches, and throughout all Christendora ; then it were not dangerous or
frightful to doubt it, or lo dispute whether it be true. But since it hath been believed
from the very origin of the Church, and so far as Christendom extends; whosoever
doubts it, doth as much, as if he believed in no Christian Church, and not only con
demns the whole Christian Church, as a damned heretic ; but condemns even ("hrist
himselr, with all the apostles and the prophets, who have laid down this aiticle, which
wc utter, " I believe in one, holy Christian Church," and have vehemently proclaim
ed (as Christ hiraself in Matthew, c. xxviii. 211)—" Behold, I am with ye all days,
even to the consummation of the worid;" and, (as St. Paul, in 1 Tim. iii. lo)—
" The Church is the pillar and the ground of the truth." If God cannot lie, then
the Church cannot err. And let not your Highness think that this is my counsel, as
if it sprang from rae ; it is the counsel of the Holy Ghost, who knoweth all hearts
and things better than we do ; for, such He hath declared by His chosen instrument,
St. Paul, when the latter says to Titus (c. iii. 1 0. 11 .) " An heretical man, thou must
know, s subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgment."— The fol
lowing passage, too, frora the same Reformer, is well worthy of reraark : — " We con
fess, that unde|.lhe Papacy there is many a Christian blessing— nay, every Christian

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 401
vieW, Sprang the constant vacillation between the adoption of a visible
and an invisible Church, an outward and an internal Word, as the ul
timate ground for the profession or the rejection of any doctrine ; so
that, sometimes, the visible Church is raade to judge the invisible, some
times vice versA. Hence, in the succeeding history of the Lutherans,
the constant uncertainty, whether and how far the symbolical books
Were to be received as binding, and in what relation the Scripture stood
to them. Hence, the contest, whether Luther had willed, or not, a vis
ible or an invisible Church ; he willed both, and taught what was
inconsistent with either. But Luther's true spirit graduaUy gained, in
this respect, the most decided victory, yet only in an inverted course :
Luther followed a mystical impulse, and what in the dark, tumultuous,
irresistible rush of his feelings, appeared to him as the truth, he firmly
maintained ; whereas, his later followers have given themselves up to
the regional element predominant in man ; and, in consequence, what
ever seems rational to them, whatever they can most easily and raost
conveniently master by the understanding, they immediately hold to be
Scriptural doctrine. As subjectivity must decide, what is matter of
history, we see the numberless variations of the doctrine of Christ ;
and what seemeth true to each individual, he forthwith places in his
Saviour's mouth. So it came, at length, to such a pass, that among
Christians theraselves, the revelation of God in Christ was doubted, de
nied, and even ridiculed ; for, a revelation which leaves us in the
dark, as to its own purport, and can establish araong its own followers
no coraraon, settled, and lasting understanding of the same, reveals on
that account nothing, and thereby contradicts and refutes itself.
We again repeat it : the meaning of the doctrine, the Word is be
come flesh, the Word is become man, was never clear to Luther's raind.
For, otherwise he would have seen, in the first place, that it signified
far more, than that for thirty years and upwards, the Divine Word had
visibly and palpably worked among the Jews in Palestine : secondly
that it intimated far mor^ than that the Word had therewith ended,
that happily before its extinction, it had been recorded on paper. Had
Luther been able to rise to the true notion of the incarnation of the
Logos, he certainly would have conceived the Church to be an institute
of education ; but this was never clearly stated by him, and still less
from his point of view were it intelligible, had he even most clearly

blessing — a true baptism— a true sacrament of the altar — true power of the keys for
the forgiveness of sins — true office of preaching — a true catechism. I say, that un
der the pope, there is the true Christianity — yea, the right pattern of Christianity,"
&e. Then he goes on to enforce this truth against his opponents.
26

402 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCE!*
expressed himself on the subject. We cannot perceive in his system^
how man really cometh by Holy Writ, nor even indeed, why he needeth
instruction and human education, to attain io true knowledge; since
God alone, and by interior meanis, teacheth him. As little can we con
ceive wherefore huraan exhortation, raenace, and instruction should
be necessary, to induce bim to will what is good, since this God alone
worketh. A jLix.  The truth and the falsehood in Luther's doctrine on the Church.
Luther's notion of the Church is, however, not false, though it is
one-sided. If he found it impossible to conceive the Church as a living
institute, wherein man becometh holy ; so he stiU retained the view,
that it should consist of saints, whereby its ultiraate and highest object
is declared. In more than one place, he says, he attaches great weight
to the definition of the Church, as a comraunity of saints ; because each
individual can thence infer what he should be. In his systera, fhe inte--
rior part of the Church, which is yet the most iraportant, is everywhere
put forward ; and that no one in the Divine kingdora can enjoy the
frue rights of citizenship, when he belongs only outwardly to the Church,
and hath not entered into the true spirit of Christ, is in a praiseworthy
manner pointed out. Moreover, it is not to be doubted, that Christ
maintains his Church in the power of victory, by means of those, who
live in his faith, belong to hira in heart and spirit, and rejoice in his se
cond coraing. It is also not to be doubted, that these are the true sup
porters of his truth ; that without thera it would soon be forgotten, tarn
into pure error, or degenerate into an erapty, hollow formalism. Yes,
without doubt, these — the invisible, who have been changed and glori
fied into the iraage of Christ, are the supporters of the visible Church :
the wicked in that Church, the unbelievers, the hypocrites, the dead
members in the body of Christ, would be unable for a single day to pre
serve the Church, even in her exterior forms. Nay, as far as in them
Ues, they do all to distract the Church, to sacrifice her to base passions,
to pollute her, and abandon her to the scorn and mockery of her ene
mies. With never-failing profusion doth the Lord raise up, in the ful
ness of His strength, raen, through whom He sheds over His Churchy
light and the newness of life ; but, because after a human fashion, they
cannot be infallibly recognized as his disciples, and even ought not to
be so, in order not to proraote confidence in mere man, and because his
followers are to be caUed after no man, be he Athanasius, or Arius,
Augustine, Luther, or Calvin, we are by him referred to his tiwn insti-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 403
tution, wherein the truth can never fail, because he, the truth and the
life, ever abideth in it.
Luther, moreover, has rightly seen the necessity of admitting, that a
revelation, emanating iraraediately frora God, requireth a divinely insti
tuted Church, and the Christian faith a far higher, than a mere human
guarantee. But his fault was, that he did not seriously weigh what was
signified by the words, the immediate revelation in Christ is external ;
for, otherwise, he would have understood, that a divinely instituted
Church is necessarily visible, founded as it is by the word of God be
corae visible, and that the warranty of faith raust needs be external.
Vast were the consequences of this want of perception. In the religious
comraunity, which owes its existence to Luther, the so-called invisible
revelation in the huraan mind, has since deterrained fhe conception of
the visible, nay, even the written revelation ; and, according as each
one believes, God reveals hiraself to him in his interior, he explains and
distorts the outward Word, and against such arbitrary interpretations,
no Lutheran can allege any solid objection, since from the inward ema.
nates the external Church.
Lastly, the proposition, that the internal Church is to be first estab-
fished, and then the exterior one, is, in one respect, completely true, and
hereby Luther was deceived. We are not living raembers of the ex
ternal Church, until we belong to the interior one. What hath been
imparted to us from without, must be reproduced by and within us ; the
objective must become subjective, ere we be entitled to consider our
selves true raembers of the Christian Church. Thus far, certainly, the
invisible is to be ranked before the visible Church ; and the latter is
eternally renovated out of the forraer. But this kingdora of God begins,
grows, and ripens within us, after it has first externally encountered us,
and made the first steps to receive us into its bosom. The act of exte
rior excitement, instruction and education, is ever the first condition of
life to what is internally excited, taught, and educated ; but, as soon
as the exterior hath passed into the interior, then the inward becoraeth,
in its turn, the outward ; and the image, which from without, was im
pressed upon the interior, is reflected frora fhe interior on the exterior.
But, as Luther wished to break with the existing outward Church, he
was obliged to give the absolute precedence to the invisible Church, and
consider hiraself as the immediate envoy of God.* But, by exalting.

» After his journey from the Wartburg, Luther, as is we^} known, wrote frora Bor-
na to the elector Frederick, as follows : — " He had received his Gospel," said he,
"nitfrora men, but frora heaven alone, from Jesus Christ; and, therefore is he a
Christian and an evangehst, and such he wished o be called in future." Even Cal-

404 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
into a general principle, his view of the relation of the internal to the
external Church, he fell into the greatest erabarrassments. On one
hand, he desired (and in perfect consistency with the view he entertain
ed of hiraself, as a divinely inspired evangelist,) that the doctrine, which
coraing forth frora his interior as the voice of God, he had announced
abroad, should be raerely re-echoed by his disciples : and, thus from
him, too, the visible should again bring forth and absolutely deterraine
the invisible Church : — a condition, which utterly annihUafed his own
principle.* But, if he held to the latter principle, and considered each

vin, in his answer to Sadolet's Epistle to the Genevans, appeals to this immediate
mission : Opusc. p, 106. " Ministerium meum, quod Doi vocatione fundatum
ac sanctura fuisse non dubito.'' P. 107. " Ministerium meum, quod quidem ut ii
Christo esse novi," etc.
* In modem times it has often been denied, that Luther had desired to lay down
for all future ages dogmatic decisions. But, the sort of proof, which is adduced,
would, in all cases, where personal interests were not concerned, bo declared to bc
anything but satisfactory. Men cannot, in the least degree, have transported them
selves into the spirit of those ages, and, least of all, have attended to the character of
the Reformers, and particularly of Luther, when they advance such a stateraent. If
the doctrinal uncertainty of the greater part" of his present worshippers, had been
one of Luther's peculiarities, it would be difBcult to account for his constancy and
perseverance in his career, nay, for the very origin of his reformation. Yet, in proof
of what has been asserted in the text, wc may cite, though briefly, the words of the
reformer himself. In his reply to Erasmus (Adv, Erasm. Roterod. lib. 1. p. 182, b.)
he lays down the principle : " fidei est non falli," which he applies, in the passage fol
lowing, to particular articles. Erasmus had said, " if the doctrine of free-will had
been an error, God would certainly not have tolerated it in his Church, nor have re.
vealed it to any saint." To this Luther answers : " Priraura non dicimus, errorera
hunc esse in ecclsia sua tderatum k Deo, nee in uUo suo sancto ; ecclesia enim Spi-
riia Dci regitur, sancti aguntur Spiritti Dei, Rom. viii. Et Christus cum ecclesia
sua manot usque ad consiunmationem raundi. Matt, xxviii. Et ecclesia est firraa-
mentum et columna veritatis, 2 Tim, iii, Haec, inquara, novimus, nam sic habet et
Symbdum omnium nostrum : credo ecclesiam sanctam Catholicam, ut impossibile
sit, illam errare etiam in minima articulo." Nay, Luther adds : " Atque si ctiam
donemus, ahquos electos in errore teneri in tota vita, tamen ante mortem necesse est,
ut redeant in viam," etc. In his opinion on the imperial decree of the22d Septem
ber, 1530, he says to the same efiect : " Whoso professeth the Augsburg Confession,
will be saved ; although its truth should become manifest to him only later : this con-
fession must endure until the end of the world, and the day ofjudgntent." See Bu-
cholz's History of the reign of Ferdinand 1, vol. iii. Vienna, 1832, p. 576 (m Ger.
man,)— a work where the history of the diet at Augsburg, with all the ecclesiastical
negotiations, is most copiously and instmcrivdy detailed. Hence, we can, by no
means, agree with Bauqjgarten Crusius, when, m his " Manual of the History of
Christian Dogmas," he thus blames the more precise definitions of the Lutheran doc
trine, in the Formulary of Concord : " These thoughts were rendered matters of dog.
ma, while, at the origin of the reformation, they had in their higher, more spiritual

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 405
one like himself, as internally and immediately taught by God alone ;
then the most opposite doctrines were proclairaed, and the internal
voice of God contradicted and belied itself. From this dilemma, his
disciples to this day have never been able to extricate themselves.
§ L. — Negative doctrines of the Lutherans in regard to the Church,
If we would now point out more accurately, the negative doctrines of
the Lutherans, in regard to the Church ; it is easy, in the first place,
to conceive wherefore the papal supremacy was, and must necessarily
have been, rejected by them. The opinion, that Christ had founded
only an invisible Church, is absolutely incompatible with the other, that
he had given to it a visible head : the one notion destroys the other.
Luther looking on every determination of belief, through human media
tion, as equivalent to what was diabolical, the idea of the papal supre
macy, wherein the doctrine of the dependence of each member on the
whole body is most distinctly expressed, raust (independently of the
faults pf individual pontiffs, which not unfrequently cast a shade on the
history of the Papacy,) have appeared to his mind as anti-Christian, and
the Pope himself as Anti-Christ. For the f apacy is quite inconsistent
with the idea of a purely infernal, and invisible, and so far exclusively
divine Church, and encroaches, according to this system, on the office
of Christ, the sole and invisible head of the Church, who alone, and by
internal means, teacheth his disciples, and without any interraediate
agency, draweth them to himself When Protestants so often repeat,
Christ is alone the head of the Church ; the assertion has exactly the
same seuse, as when Luther says, Christ is the sole teacher, and should
accordingly be estimated in precisely the same manner. Moreover, if
the Protestants, of the present day especially, find the idea of the Pa
pacy objectionable, this aversion is stiU more conceivable. Of what
could the Popedom exhibit the unity ? Of the most palpable, decided,
and irreconcileable contradictions ; this, indeed, would be an utter
impossibility ; — it could only be fhe representative of what was in
itself a thousandfold and most radically opposed, and this anti-Christ,
Satan himself alone could be. Of what body could the Pontiff be the
head 1 A body, whose merabers declare themselves independent one
of the other: a thing which is inconceivable. The fault of Protestants
is this, that what with them is irapracticable, what from their point of
sense, been opposed to the worldly spirit of the rulmg Church, and had been meant
to express only the idea of human helplessness, and of the devotion of human life to
God." See his Lehrbuch der Dogmengeschichte, part. i. p. 595. Jena, 1832.

406 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
view may with indisputable consistency be rejected, fhey would refuse
to the Christian Church also, which is anything buf a distracted, self-
contradictory, self-annihilating, self-belying thing, that ever at the same
moraent utters the affirraative and the negative. If a considerable por
tion of Protestants, instead of naraing Christ their invisible head, would
designate him as their unknown head, concealed from their view, they
would at least give utterance to an historical truth. The same judg
ment, moreover, which Protestants raust forra of the Papacy, they na
turally pass on the Catholic view of Episcopacy.
Lastly, in respect to tradition, it is sufficiently evident from what
has been said, and it has already been explicitly shown, why in the
twofold signification above pointed out, Protestants cannot concede to
it the same place, which it occupies in the Catholic system. It has
occasionally been said, however, that the Reformers had not rejected
Tradition "inthe ideal sense;" but only Traditions. It is certainly
not to be doubted, that still partially subdued by that old ecclesiastical
spirit, which, on their secession from the Church, they had uncon
sciously carried away with them, they believed in the same, and read the
Holy Scriptures in its sense. Though materially, they did not reject
every portion of Tradition,, yet they did so formally. For, if indeed,
they acknowledged the doctrinal decisions of the Church, as embodied
in fhe first four cecuraenical CouncUs, fhey did so, not on account of
their ecclesiastical objectivity, but because, according to their own sub
jective views, they found thera eonfirraed by Holy Writ. But the Gos
pel truth, which hath been delivered over to the Church, for preser
vation and for propagation, reraaineth truth, whether, in consequence of
a subjective inquiry, or, of a pretended internal iUumination, it be ac
knowledged or be rejected. Hence, the ecclesiastical traditionary
principle is this : such and such a doctrine, — for instance, the divinity
of Christ, — is a Christian evangelical truth, because the Church, the
institution invested with authority from Chrisf, declares it to be his doc
trine ; — not because such or such an individual subjectively holds it,
as the result of his Scriptural reading, for a Christian fruth. The
Bible is ever forced to assume the form of its readers : it becomes little
with the little, and great with the great, and is, therefore, raade to pass
through a thousand transforraations, according as it is reflected in each
individuality. If that individuality be shallow, flat, and dull, the Scrip
ture is so represented through its raediura : it is made to take the colour
of the most one-sided and perverse opinions, and is abused to the sup
port of every folly. In itself, therefore, and without any other medium,
the Bible cannot be considered, by the Church, as a rule of faith : on
the contrary, the doctrine of the Church is the rule, whereby the Scrip-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 407
fare must be investigated. The Reformers failing to acknowledge this
great truth, their partial agreement with Tradition was purely acciden.
tal; as is most clearly evidenced by the fact, that, in the sequel, nearly
all those positive doctrines of Christianity, which Luther and the first
Reformers still maintained, have been cast off by their disciples, with
out their ever ceasing to profess themselves members of the Protestant
Church. On no point did the Reforraers recognize Tradition for the
sake of its objectivity ; and, therefore, they rejected it, wherever it ac
corded not with their own subjective caprices. What doctrine doth
tradition more clearly attest, than that of free-wUl ? Yet, this they re
jected. In short, they entirely raerged the objective historical Chris
tianity into their own subjectivity, and were consequently forced to
throw off Tradition.
Accordingly, they refused obedience to the Church — deeraing it
ignoble and slavish. They forgot that, a divine authority impresses
upon the obedience also, which pays horaage to it, the starap of divinity,
and exalts it as much above servitude, as the spirit is raised above the
flesh. It is reraarkable, that no one any longer doubts, but that an
outward, fixed, eternally imrautable raoral law, though not in all its
parts first established by Christ, yet hath been by Him confirmed and
brought to greater perfection. This rule of will and of action, every
Christian recognizes ; and, however far short of it he raay fall in his
own conduct, yet, he never thinks of changing it, according to his sub
jective moral point of view ; nor, in the commission of his faults, flat
tering himself, that the standard, according to which he should act, and
that according to which he, in reality, doth act, perfectly correspond.
But, the necessity of a like fixed and unchangeable standard for the
inteUigence is disputed. Here each one is to give hiraself up, to the
guidance of his own subjective feelings and fancies, and to be certain,
that what he feels and thinks, is truly felt and thought ; although any
individual, who has only attended for some weeks to his own train of
thoughts, may easily perceive, that in this field he is not a whit stronger
than in the sphere of morals. That the Bible alone cannot, in itself,
constitute such a settled, outward rule, nor was ever so intended by
Christ, no one surely, after the awful experience which, in our times
especiaUy, has been made, and is still daily made, will feel any longer
disposed to deny. 4 u. — Doctrine of the Calvinists on the Church.
The Calvinists adopted Luther's general views, respecting the
Church, without alteration, and solemnly eonfirraed them in their Sym-

408 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
bolical writings.* But Calvin is distinguished by many peculiarities,
which deserve to be mentioned. The phenomena, which in the whole
corapass of ecclesiastical life, from the comraenceraent of the revolution
atterapted by Luther, down to the flourishing period of Calvin, had
presented themselves to the attention of the observer, had not passed
by, without making the deepest impression upon the mind of the Gene
van Reformer. He had observed the boundless tyranny, which had
followed in the train of the new principles : nor had he overlooked the
fact, that the idea of a Christian put forward by his predecessor, as an
independent, all-sufficing being, capable, from the fulness of his own
spirit, of satisfying all his higher wants, is a mere fiction, which all
experience belies.f He had been struck with the fact, that the rulers
of the new Church were devoid of all influence and respect ; that the
people, which had been taught to look on them as the mere work of its
own hands, denied them frequently the most indispensable obedience ;
and that, if temporal princes had not interposed their authority, all order
and discipline would have been subverted, :(: As at Geneva, the prin-
pipal scene of Calvin's activity, the ecclesiastical reformation was con
nected with a civil revolution, the wildest anarchy had broken through
the restraints of public morals, and raatter for the most earnest reflec
tion was thus offered in abundance.
Hence, Calvin thought it necessary to straiten the bonds, which
united the individual with the general body, to excite a new reverence

* Zwingl. Commentar, de vera, et falsa Relig. Opp. tom. ii. fol. 197, where he com
prises, in ten short propositions, his whole doctrine on the Church. Calvin Instit. 1.
IV. c. 1. fol. 190, seq, ; Confess. Helvet. i. c. xvii. ed. Augs, p. 47; Helvet. ii. Art.
xiv ; Anglic. Art xix. p. 133 : which, however, very clearly points out the visible
character of the Church : " Ecclesia Christi visibilis est ccetus fidelium, in quo ver
bum Dei purura prsdicatur, et sacraraenta, quoad ea, quee necessario exigantur, juxta
Ctunsti institutum recte administrantur." Very diflferent from this, on the other
hand, is the Confessio Scotorura, Art. xvi. p. 156. The Hungarian Confession has
nothing to say respecting the Church ; but, on the other hand, it has a section de ves-
tit-U pastorum, p. 251.
t Calvin, Instit. 1. iv. c, 1. § v, fol. 572. "Etsi extemis mediis alhgata non est
Dei virtus, taraen ordinario docendi modo alligavit : quera dura recusant tenere fana-
tici homines, multis se exitialibus laqueis involvunt. Multos irapdlit vel superbia,
vel fastidium, vel a>raulatio, ut sibi persuadeant privatira legendo et meditando se
posse satis proficere, atque ita contemnant publicos ccetus et praidicationem superva-
cuam ducant, Quoniam autem sacrum unitatis vinculum, quantum m se est, sol-
vunt vel abrumpunt," etc.
X Loc, cit, tj ii. fd. 375 " Ejus (Satanas) arte factum est, et pura verbi prffidica.
tio ahquot saeculis evanuerit : et nunc eadem improbitate mcumbit ad labefactandum
ministerium ; quod tamen sic in ecdesia Christus ordinavit, ut illo sublato hujus
tedificatio pereat," etc

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 409
for the Church, (of which Luther had always spoken in such terras of
disparagement, and whereof, indeed, he had never formed a clear con
ception,) as well as to estabUsh, on a more solid basis, the authority
of its rulers. . He carefully collected all that had ever been said upon
the Church, in any wise good or useful for his object ; and did not even
hesitate to transplant into his garden, many a flower from the so-much-
detested Corpus Juris canonici ; taking care, however, not to name the
place of its extraction. So he preferred, to adopt in his " Institutes of
the Christian Religion," propositions, which, in the Protestant system,
are utterly untenable and baseless, than consistently to enforce the
principles that he had inherited from Luther. At the very commence
ment of his Treatise on the Church, he points out the natural igno
rance, indolence, and frivoUty of man, and the consequent necessity of
certain institutions to implant, cherish, and mature the doctrines of faith.
lu the Church, hath the treasure of the Gospel been deposited, he pro
ceeds to say ; pastors and teachers have been instituted by God, and
been irivested with authority, to the end, that preaching might never
fail, and a holy concord in Faith, and a right order, might constantly
obtain.* But when his reason made him the reproach, how, if the Church
were really so constituted, he could feel himself justified in severing all
ties of connexion with the one in existence ; h^e then stunned his con
science 'with the most violent invectives against her ; satisfied as he "
was, that the generation which had once begun to swear by men, and
to revere their opinions, as the Word of God, would easily take such
sallies of furious passion, as a substitute for solid argument.f
After these introductory observations, Calvin speaks first, of the in
visible Church, and requires his disciples, in the first place, to be firmly
convinced, that such a Church doth in reality exist — namely, a host
of elect, who, though they do not see each other face to face, yet are
united in one faith, in one hope, in one charity, and in the same Holy
Spirit, as members under the one Christ, their common head. In the
second place, he requires them to believe, with undoubting assurance,
that they themselves belong to this invisible Church, which can be only
one, since a division of Christ is irapossible. Then, he adds : though a
(Jesolate wilderness on all sides surrounds us, which seemeth to cry out,

• Calvin. Instit. lib. iv. c. i. fol. 370. " Qijia autem njdita.s nostra et segnities
(addo etiam ingenii vanitatem) externi? sqbsidiis indigent .... pastores instituit ac
doctores (Deus,) quorum ore suos docere ; eos auctoritate instruxit ; nihil denique
omisit, quod ad sanctum fidei consensual et rectum ordinem faceret."
t Loc. cit. c. ii- fol- 381.86.

410 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
the Church is vanished ; yet, let us be assured, that the death of Jesus
is not unprofitable, and that God knows how to preserve his followers,
even in the obscurest corners. The reader will not fail to observe,
that together with the reasons, which are to be looked for in his doc
trine of absolute predestination, there was an especial raotive, that
induced Calvin to enforce on his disciples the conviction, that they
belonged fo an invisible Church. This was the general demoralization,
which he saw prevailing among them, and which threatened to under.
mine the belief, that the so-called Reforraation, had in reality been
brought about.* So he diverts their view from the world of reality, and
turns it to the obscurity of the invisible world, in order to afford, to that
eternal longing of the Christian soul after coraraunion, a satisfaction
which the visible Church evidently denied. He immediately passes
over to the latter, to impart to it a more solid and beautiful forra, to
insure its efficacy and its influence in the training up of believers, to
make the visible Church appear as fhe reflection of the invisible, and,
in this way, to attempt to reconcile, by degrees, the members of the
latter with those of the forraer.
How salutary, nay, how indispensable, is this view of the nature of
the visible Church, says he, is evident alone, from her glorious appella
tion of " mother." There is no coming into life, unless she conceives
us in her worab, unless she brings us forth, nourishes us at her breasts,
and finally watches over and protects us, untU we throw off this raortal
coil, and become like unto the angels. For, as long as we live, our
weakness will not admit of our being discharged from school. Let us
consider, raoreover, he continues, that out of the pale of the Church,
there is no forgiveness of sins, and no salvation ; Isaiah and Joel attest
it, and Ezechiel concurs with them. We see from hence, that God's
paternal grace, and the especial testiraony of the spiritual life, are con
fined to his flock; so that separation from the Church is ever per
nicious. Calvin appeals to Ephesians, c. iv. 11, where St. Paul says, "that
Christ gave sorae apostles ; and some prophets ; and some others.

+ Loc. cit. J xui, fol. 376. " Dum enira apud eos, quibus Evangelium annuntia-
tur, ejus doctrinae non respondere vita; fructum videut, nullam illic esse ecclesiam
statim judicant. Justissima quidem est ofi'ensio, cui plus satis occasionis hoc raiser-
rimo sseculo prsbemus ; nee excusare heet maledictara ignaviam, quam Dominus
impunitam non sinet : uti jam gravibus flagellis castigare incipit. Vae ergo nobis,
qui tam dissoluta flagitiorum licentia committiraus, ut propter nos vulnerentur imbe-
cilles conscientia!.— Quia enira non putant esse ecclesiara, ubi non est solida vitee
puritas et rategritas, scelerura odio a legitima ecclesia, discedunt, dum a factione
improborum declinare se putant. Aiunt ecclesiam Christi sanctam esse," etc.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 411
evangelists ; and some others, pastors and doctors ; for the perfecting
of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body
of Christ ; until we all meet in the unity of the faith, and of the know
ledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the raeasure of the
age of the fulness of Christ :" — a passage which the Catholic Church
adduces in support of the view that she takes of herself. After this
quotation, the Reforraer adds : " We see that God, though in one mo
ment He could render His own followers perfect, yet, would have fhem
grow up to maturity only by raeans of an education by the Church.
We see, moreover, the way raarked out, wherein these plans of God
are fo be unfolded ; for, to the pastors is the preaching of the Divine
Word intrusted : all raust conform to this precept, so that, with a mild
and docile spirit (mansueto et docili spiritu) they give themselves up to
the guidance of the teachers selected for that purpose. Long before
had the prophet Isaiah characterized the Church by this sign, when
he said, " The spirit which is in thee, and the words, which I have
placed in thy mouth, will never depart from thy mouth, nor frora the
mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord'." Hence, it follows, that
those deserve to perish of hunger and misery, who despise the celestial
food of the soul, which is adrainistered frora above through the hands of
the Church. That we raay know thaf in earthly vessels, an incom
parable treasure is presented to our acceptance, God Himself appears,
and as far as He is the Founder of this order of things, desires to be
acknowledged as ever present in His institution. In like manner, as
He referred not His chosen people of old to angels, but raised up on
earth teachers, who performed truly the office of angels : so He de
sires now to instruct us after a huraan fashion. And in like raanner,
as in ancient times. He was not content with merely revealing his law,
btit appointed as interpreters of the sarae, the. priests, from whose lips
the people were to hear its true sense explained : so it is now His will,
that we should not merely be engaged with the reading of Holy Writ ;
nay, He hath instituted teachers, that we raay be supported by their
aid. From hence a two-fold advantage springs. On one hand, the
Almighty best tries our obedience, when we so hearken to His ministers,
as if He spake himself; and, on fhe other hand. He condescends to our
weakness, hy choosing rather to address us after a human manner,
through the medium of interpreters, in order to draw us to Himself,
than to repel us by the voice of His thunders. Calvin, after remarking,
that in all apostasies from the Church, arrogance or jealousy ever lies
at the bottora, and that he, who severs the sacred bonds of unity, will
not faU to incur the just chastisement for this godless adultery — to wit,
spiritual blindness through the most poisonous errors and the most de-

412 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
testable Ulusions ; proceeds to say, " the raore aborainable therefore are
the apostles, who aim at a division in the Church : it is as if they
chased the sheep away frora the fold, and delivered them up to the jaws
of the wolf"*
Calvin is as inexhaustible in his own self-refutation, as he is unsha
ken in his confidence in the thoughtlessness of the men, from whora he
seriously expects, that the grounds, which conderan his own disobedi
ence against the Catholic Church, they wiU good-naturedly take for
proofs, that they owe subraission to him and fo his institutions. As we,
he says in another place, profess an invisible Church, which is seen by
the eye of God alone ; so are we bound to revere a Church, which is
perceptible to men, and to persevere in its communion.| He never
forgets to point out as a mark of a true Chistian community, its vene
ration for the rainistry, and for the office of preaching ; J and, if Luther
said, the true Church is there to be found, where the Gospel is rightly
announced ; so Calvin adds, it is there to be found where the prfeaching
of the Divine Word is heard vnth obedience. " Where," as he express
es hiraself, " the preaching- of the Gospel is received with reverence,
there neither a deceptious, nor a doubtful image of the Church is pre
sented ; and no one will go unpunished, who contemns her authority,
or despises her exhortations, or rejects her counsels, or mocks her chas
tisements, still less who apostatizes from her, and dissolves her unity.
For such value doth our Lord attach to comraunion with His Church,
that he is held for an apostate and an unbeliever, who obstinately secedes
frora any [particular reformed] comraunity, should it otherwise revere
the true ministry of the TVord and of the sacraments. It is certainly no
slight thing, that it is called ' the pillar and fhe ground of the truth,' as
well as the ' House of God.' Hereby, St. Paul raeans to say, the Church
is the faithful preserver of the truth, that it may never be lost in the
world ; for, by her rainistry and her aid, God wished to preserve fhe
pure preaching of His Word, and show himself a kind parent, who
nourishes us with spiritual food, and provides aU which can minister to
our salvation. Even this is no mean praise that the Church is called
the ' chosen one,' the bride elect, who must be without spot and without
wrinkle, the body of the Lord. Hence, it follows, that separation from
» Loc. cit. c. i. § V. fol. 372.
t Calvin, lib. iv. c. 1. u. 7. fol. 374. " Quemadraodura ergo nobis invisibilem,
sohus Dei oculis conspicuara ecclesiara credere necesse est, ita hanc, qus respectu
homluuia ecclesia dicitur, observare, ejusque communionem colere jubemvu:.''
X Loc. cit. § ix, fol. 374, " Qua; (multitudo) si rainisterium habet verbi, et homo-
Tat, Sl sacramentorum admraistrationem, ecclesia procul dubio haberi et censeri me
retur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 413
the Church is tantamount to a denial of God and of Christ ; and we
should guard the more against the heinousness of schism, for awhile, as
far as in us lies, we thus labour for the destruction of Divine Truth, we
deserve to call down upon ourselves the full weight of God's wrath.
And no more detestable crirae can be imagined, than by a sacrilegious
infidelity to violate the marriage, which the only-begotfen Son of God
hath deigned to contract with the Church."*
Lastly, Calvin, for good reasons, endeavours to enforce on his read
ers the conviction, that no magnitude of moral corruption can ever de-
1 prive the Church of its inherent character,! and that those, who, on this
point are too rigid, and in consequence incite to defection, are general
ly swollen with arrogance, and impelled by a malicious self-compla
cence. He even adds, that a certain obscuration of the true faith should
not be overrated. J
Frora these principles of Calvin, we can understand why he retained
Ordination, and even under the condition, that it should be adrainisfer-
ed not by the people, but by the Presbytery. § He even evinced an in-

* Loc. cit. § X. fd. 374-375.
t Loc. cit. c. ii. i i. fol. 381. "Ubicunque integrum exstat et illibatum (verbi et
sacramentorum rainisterium) nullis morura vitiis aut raorbis impediri, quominua
ecclesiae noraen sustineat." C. i. i xvi. fol, 377. " Hoc tamen reperimus niraiam
morositatem ex superbia magis et fastd falsaque sanctitatis opinione, quam ex ver4
sanctitate veroque ejus studio nasci. Itaque qui ad faciendara ab ecclesia defeo-
tionera sunt aUis audaciores, et quasi antesignani, ii ut plurimum nihil aliud causae
habent, nisi ut omnium contemptft ostendant se aliis esse meliores."
X Loc. cit. § xii. fol. 374. " Quin etiara poterit vel in doctrinS,, vd in sacraraen-
torum adrainistratione vitii quippiam obrepere, quod alienare nos ab ejus communione
non debeat." We could wish that space permitted us to cite sorae passages, from
the writings of Theodore Beza, upon the Church. What Calvin teaches, Beza ex-
cellently applies. We need only peruse Beza's Epistle to a certain Alamannus,
" ecclesiae Lugdunensis turbatorem," in order to learn how Calvin's maxims were
practically enforced. See Theodori Bezae Vezelii epist. theolog. liber unus, Genev.
1573, p. 48. May we not consider it as a result of Calvin's deeper conception of the
Chureh, siurviving to this day, that even now the German Calvinistic theologians
have, on this subject, furnished far raore excellent matter than the Lutheran ones ?
It is Schleiermacher and Marheineke (and the latter, in his book of rehgious instruc
tion for the Higher Gymnasia, stiU more than in the Manual of dogmatic Theology
destined for University Lectures,) who, among the modem Protestants, have by far
the best treated this subject. Marheineke had already written much that was excel
lent on the Church, before he attached hunself to the Hegehan school, fi'om which
certainly a better spirit has emanated.
5 Loc. cit. lib, iv. c. 3. § 11.16. fol. 389-392 ; Ub. iv. c. 14. § 20. fol. 418. " Sa.
cramenta duo instituta, quibus nunc Christiana ecclesia utitur. Loquor autem dt
iis, qua in usum totius ecclesia sunt instituta. Nam impositionem manuum, qu&
ecclesia ministri in suum munus initiantur, ut mm invitui potior tocari sacramen-

414 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
cUnation to acknowledge Holy Orders as a sacrament. Certainly from
this point of view, the reraarkable fact, that in the EngUsh Calvinistic
Church episcopacy was retained, finds here its deepest motive ; although
it is not to be denied, that various other circumstances also concurred
to this retention. With Luther's first opinions, no episcopacy could
have existed ; and the Danish and Swedish episcopal systera, is essen-
tially different frora the Anglican.* But, hereby in the Anglican
Church, the internal self-contradiction was carried to the extreraest pitch.
A Catholic hierarchy, and a Protestant system of faith in one and the
same community ! The Anglican bishops boast, that by means of ^
Catholic ordination, they descend in an unbroken succession from the
apostles ; and are, accordingly, in a most intimate and living connec
tion with the ancient Church ; and yet, by their participation in the
ecclesiastical revolution, they broke off the chain of tradition.
How great, therefore, raust be our astonishment, when Calvin makes
belief in the divinity of the Scriptures, depend on the testiraony of the
Holy Spirit in the interior man, and when he could descend to such a
pitiable misinterpretation of the true proposition of St. Augustine's :
" I would not believe in the Sacred Scriptures, if the authority of the
Church did not determine rae thereto. "f Here again that effort was
relaxed, which had so earnestly endeavoured to oppose an objective raat
ter to subjective caprice ; and evidently, in order to obviate the possible
consequences, which, frora the undeniable fact, that in and by the Catho
lic Church, fhe canon of the Bible had been settled, and its several
books preserved in their integrity, might be deduced in favour of that
Church.J

tum, ita inter ordinaria sacramenta non numero " If, by sacramentum ordinariura,
Calvin understands, quod in usum totius ecclesia; (omnium fidelium) institutum est,
so the Catholic Church quite agrees with him,
* Confess, Anglic Art, xxxvi.
+ Calvin Instit. hb. i, u. 7, ^ 3, fol, 15, " Maneat ergo fixum, quos Spiritus eanc-
tus intus docuit, solide acquiescere in Scriptura. et hanc quidera esse xurcvrKrTtii
neque deraonstrationibus et rationi subjici eara fas esse : quam tamen meretur apud-
nos certitudinem spiritus testimonio consequi. Talis ergo est persuasio, quie rationes
non requirat : talis notitia, cui optima ratio constat, nerape in qua securius constan-
tiusque raems acquiescit, quara in uUis rationibus; talis denique sensus, qui nisi ex
ccelesti revelatione nasci nequeat "
X Loc. cit. § 1, fol. 14. " Sic enim magno cum ludibrio Spiritas sancti quserunt:
ecquis nobis fidem faciat, hac a Deo prodiisse ? Ecquis salva ac inlacta ad nostram
usque ajtatera pervenisse certiores reddat ? Ecquis porsuadeat, librum hunc reveren
ter excipiendum, alterum numero expungendum, nisi certam istorum omnium regu
lam ecclesia praescnbcret ? Pendet igitur, inquiunt, ab ecclesir; determinatione et
quae scripturae reverentia debeatur, et qui libri in ejus catalogo censendi sint. Ita

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS- 419
Yet these principles of Calvin, emanated from fhe thoroughly subjec
tive nature of Protestantism ; and, it must be adraitted, that his views, on
the Church, are far raore inconsistent with the inraost spirit of the refer-
mation, than his opinion, as to the raode of assuring ourselves of the
divine origin of any sacred writing, is with his doctrine on the Church.
But at all events, it is highly honourable to his perspicacity, as well as
to his Christian spirit, that he saw, or at least felt, that by raeans of
mere learned investigation, the believer could obtain no satisfactory
result : that on account of the obscurity, which involves the origin of
^many of the sacred writings, and the formation of the canon itself, and
which spreads in general over the first two centuries of fhe Church,
doubts as to the genuineness of one or other Canonical Scripture may
ever be raised — doubts on the final solution, whereof faith cannot re
main suspended : and that accordingly, some higher guarantee must be
Sought for. Such he found, following out earlier indications ; and what
he found was not false, but one-sided, unsatisfactory, and cheerless for
the Church. That through such principles an opening was made to the
desolation of the sanctuary, proceeding from a one-sided culture of the
religious spirit, Calvin might have learned from Luther's views touching
the Biblical canon. Where the latter " did not perceive the Spirit,"*
that is to say, did not find the reflection of his own spirit, he forthwith
beUeved the suspicion of spuriousness to be well-founded. But who
can ultimately decide on this test of the Spirit, which a book of Scrip
ture doth abide or not, when that book is rejected by one party, and

Sacrilegi homines, dum sub ecclesiae praetextd volunt eilraenatam tyrannidem evehere,
nihil curant, quibus se et alios absurditalibus illaqueent, modo hoc unura extorqueunt
apud siraplices, ecclesiara nihil non posse." Moreover, no Catholic so expresses him.
self, that it depends on the Church to determine what veneration be due to the sacred
writings, and what books are to be held as canonical; but Cathohcs have at all tiraes
asserted, that the Chmch is only a. witness and a guarantee, that the canonical
Scriptures are really what they are considered to be. Calvin, however, expresses
himself still raore honestly than Luther, who, in his Commentary on the Epistle to
the Galatians, c. i. p. 3i) (Wittenberg, 1556, part i.,) says : " So the Church should
have power and authority over Holy Writ ; as the canonists and the sententiarii
(schoolmen) have written against God, and in the raost shameless manner. The
ground which some assign for this opinion is, the Church hath not approved of and
adopted more than four gospels; therefore there are only four, and had the Church
adopted raore, there would have been raore. But now, if the Church hath the
power, according to her good will and pleasure, to adopt and to approve of gospels,
what and how many she chooses, so it thence follows that the authority of the Church
is above the Gospel." This was now, indeed, easy to bo refuted, aa even Luthei
himself refutes his own fiction.
t "DenGeist verspurte." These are Luther's own words.— rran».

416 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, ic
defended by another. Neither can be refuted, because each exalts in*
dividual sentiment, as the highest and the ultimate criterion of certainty |
and will not let its religious faith be moulded according to the objective
doctrine of the Bible, but will itself, according to its own pleasure, de
termine what is, or is not Scripture. Accordingly, from the language
of the Spirit, it can never be decided, whether Matthew, Mark, Paul,
Peter, and the rest, have written any book ; at most, it declares that a
Christian is the author of such a writing. But when the question turns
on the canonicity of fhe Scriptures, it is the former, and not raerely the
latter fact, which we desire to know ; for the apostles only we hold to
be unerring, but no one besides.*

* Confessio GaUica (c. iv. lib. i. p. Ill) agrees with Calvin when it says : " Hos
libros agnoschnus esse canonicos, id est, ut fidei nostrte norman et regulam habemus,
atque non tantum eX comrauni ecclesiae consensfi, sed etiara multo magis ex testimo
nio et intrinsica Spirittls sancti persuasione : quo suggerente docemur, illus ab aliis li.
bris ecclesiasticis discemcre, qui ut sint ules (utiles?) non sunt tamen ejusmodi, utex
iis conetitui possit aliquis fidei articulus,"

CHAPTER VI.
tHE CttUBCH IN THE NEXT WOKLD, ANtJ tTS CONNEXION WITH THE
CHURCH MILITANT.

§ MI.— Doctrine of Catholics on this matter.
Hitherto we have considered the Church only in her terrestrial being
and essence ; and her superraundane part remains still to be described.
The faithful, who summoned away from hence, have quitted their visi
ble communion with us, and have passed into another state of existence,
do not (so the Catholic Church teaches,) thereby sever the bonds of
connexion with us. On the contrary, holy love, which was transferred
from a higher order of existence to this lower world, perpetually enfolds
in her sacred bands, all those whom she hath once held in her embraces,
(provided only they have not wilfully torn themselves from her), and
amid the dissolution of all earthly energies, stiU retains her eternal
power. All now, who, with the hallow of love, have departed hence
as also those higher created spiritual beings, who, though they never
lived with us in the relations of space and time, yet, like us, stand un
der the sarae head Christ Jesus, and are sanctified in the sarae Holy
Spirit, form together one Church — one great and closely united con
federacy with us.* But, not all beUevers, who have been raerabers of
this terrestrial Church, and have departed frora it, with the sign of the
covenant of love, enter iramediately, on their passage into eternity, into
those relations of bliss, destined, frora the beginning, for those who love
God in Christ. According as they quit this earthly life, either slightly
touched by divine love, or by it effectually freed from the stains of sin.

* Cardinal Sadoletus, in his letter to the Genevans, admirably expresses the pith
of the doctrine of the Catholic Church : '' Sin mortalis anima sit, edamus, et biba-
mus, inquit apostolus, paulo enim post raoricmur : sin autem sit iminortalis, ut certo
est, unde, quseso, tantum et tarn repente factum est corporis morte dissidium, ut et
viventiuni et mortuorum animae inter se nihil congruant, nihil comraunicent, oranis
cognationis nobiscura et communis humanas societatis oblitae ? Cum praeserlim cha
ritas, quae prascipuum SpiritQs sancti in Christiano genere est donura: quas nunquam
nonbenigna, nunquam non fructuosa est, et in eo, in quo inest, nunquam inutiliter
consistit, salva semper et efiicax in utrique vitii permaneat." — Jacob. Sadolet. Card,
opp. Itm. ii. p. 181.
27

418 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
they pass into different forms of a new existence. The former are
transferred to a state, suited to the still defective, moral, and reUgious
life of their souls, and which is destined to bring them fo perfection :
the latter to a state of happiness, corresponding to their consummate
sanctification. The first, like the members of the Church terrestrial,
are with reason included in the suffering Church ; for their peculiar
existence must be considered as one, not only still passing through the
fire of purification,* but, as also subjected to punishment ; for, it de
pended only on themselves, by the right use of their free-will, during
their earthly career, to have estabUshed themselves in a perfect, inti
mate, and untroubled union with God.t Those, however, adraitted
into the ranks of happy spirits, forra, together with these, fhe Church
triumphant — a denomination which sufficiently explains itself.
That the doctrine of an ulterior state of purification, of a purgatory
in fine, is involved in the Catholic dogma of justification, and is ab
solutely inseparable from the same, we have already, in a former part
of this work, demonstrated. Wo shall, accordingly, speak here only of
the peculiar mode of comraunion, which is kept up between us and the
poor souls that are delivered over to the cleansing fire. We are taught,
and are even urged by the strongest impulse of our hearts, to put up
for them to God and Jesus Christ, our raost earnest supplications. We
present to God, more especially, tho sacrifice of Christ upon the cross,
and beseech him, that for his Son's sake, he would look down with
graciousness and corapassion upon our suffering brothers and sisters,
and deign to quicken their passage into eternal rest. J This custom.

* In the Missal, one of the prayers for the dead, runs thus : " Suscipe, Domine,
preces nostras pro anima famuli tui N, ut si qua ei macula de terrenis contagiis ad.
haserunt, reraissionis lus misericordia. deleanttir. Per Dominum nostrum Jesum
Christura." *
t In the Florentine formulary of reunion (which expresses the unity of belief of
the Greek and Latin Church.) it is said: " Item si vere poenitentcs in Dei carilate
decesserint, antequam dignis poenitentiae fructibus de commissis satisfecerint et om-
issis, eorum animas pojnis purgatoriis post mortem purgari (xx^xptixx'tg ^TifxaipixK xxi-
aJgirS-m wsrd 6dvxrat :) et ut a poenis hujusmodi revelentur, prodesse eis fidelium vivo-
ram sufiragia, Missarum sciheet sacrificia, orationes, et deemosynas, et alia pietatis
officia, qute a fidelibus pro aliis fidelibus fieri consueverunt, secundum ccclesisB msti-
tuta Harduin." Acta concil. tom. ix. p. 422.
} Concil. Trid. Sess. xxv. decret. de Purgator. " Cum Catholica ecclesia  do-
cuerit, purgatorium esse : animasque ibi dctentas fidelium suffragiis, potissimum vero
acceptabili altaris sacrificio juvari, praicipit sancta synodus episcopis, ut sanara de
Purgatorio doctrinam, a Sanctis patribus et a sacris conciliis traditam, a Christi fide
libus credi, teneri, doceri, et ubique prajdicari diligenter studeant. Apud rudem vero
plebem difficihores ac subtiliorus quaestiones, quae ad aedificationem non faciunt, et ex

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 419
which we cannot absolutely abandon, for, we are impelled to its exer
cise, by all the power of faith and of love, is not only confirmed by the
usages of the raost ancient nations, and of the chosen people of God in
particular, but may be proved to have been authorized by the prac
tice of the primitive Church ; and is, accordingly, revered by us as an
apostolic tradition. But, moreover, as to the raode of punishment, and
the place, which purgatory occupies, the Church teaches nothing fur
ther ; for, she has, on this point, received no special revelations j and
when we use the expression, " purifying fire," we employ it only in the
usual figurative sense.
Of a different kind is the intercourse subsisting between us and the
triumphant Church. Let us turn our view, more particularly, to those
of ifs raerabers who were once incorporated with the Church on earth.
Not only do they work araong us by fhe sacred energies which, during
their earthly pilgriraage, they displayed, and whereby they extended
God's kingdora, and founded it more deeply in the hearts of men ; en
ergies, whose influence, acting at first on those within their immediate
sphere, spread thence ever wider and wider, and will extend to all
future times. Not only are they permanent models of Christian life,
in whom the Saviour hath stamped his own iraage, in whom he, in a
thousand ways, reflects himself, and in whora exhibiting to us patterns
for all the relations of life ; he brings vividly before our view, the whole
compass of virtues rendered possible through hira. But, they also min
ister for us, (such is our firm and confident belief,) in a still more ex
alted degree ; and this their ministration requires from us a correspond
ing conduct. The purer their love, and the fuller their share in that
ineffable bliss, whereof they have become partakers in Christ ; the more
they turn their affections towards us, and amid all our efforts and
struggles, remain by no means passive spectators. They supplicate
God in behalf of their brethren ; and we in turn, conscious that the
prayer of the righteous raan availeth much with God, implore their in
tercession. The act, whereby we do this, is called invocation (invo.
<:atio ;) and that, wherein they respond to this call, is termed intei^ces-
sion (intercessio.)*

¦quibus nulla fit pietatis accessio, a popularibus concionibus secludantur. Incerta item,
vel qua; specie falsi laborant, evulgari ac tractari non permittant. Ea vero, qua; ad
ouriositatem quandara, aut superstitionem spectant, vel turpe lucrum spectant, tan
quam scandala, et fidehura offendicula prohibeant," etc. Sess. xxii. c. 11. " Quare
non solum pro fidelium vivorum peccatis. ... sed et pro defunctis in Christo non
dum pleniter purgatis oiTertur." Sess. vi. can. xxx.
* Concil. Trid. Sess. xxv. " Mandat sancta synodus omnibus episcopas  ut fideles
(Jihgenter instruant, docentes eos, Sanctos unk cum Christo regnantes, orationes suas

420 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCE*
The setting up of the saints by the Church, as patterns for religioas
and moral iraitation, connected with the doctrine of their intercession
in our behalf with God, and of the corresponding invocation of their aid
on our parts, constitutes the principle of the veneration of saints, whicb
is in the same way related to the supreme worship, as the mutual rela
tion existing between creatures, is to fhe state of dependence of them
all on their common Creator and Lord. Virtuous creatures look with
love and reverence on those of their body, who were eminently endow
ed by God, and, in virtue of the love implanted within them, they wish
each other all good, and lift up their hands in each other's behalf unto
God, who, rejoicing in the love that emanates from himself, and binds
his creatures together, hears their mutual supplications, in case they be
worthy of his favour, and out of the fulness of his power satisfies them ;
and this no creature is able to accomplish. Moreover, if we are to
worship Christ, we are forced to venerate his saints. Their brightness
is nought else, than an irradiation from the glory of Christ, and a proof
of his infinite power, who, out of dust and sin, is able to raise up eter
nal spirits of light. He who, therefore, revereth the saints, glorifieth
Christ, from whose power they have sprung, and whose true divinity
they attest. Hence the festivals of the Lord, whereby, the commemo'
ration of the most important events in the Redeemer's history is, in the
course of the year, with the most living solemnity renewed, the Church
hath encircled with the feasts of the saints, who, through tbe whole
progressive history of the Church, testify the fruitful effects of the com
ing of the Son of God into this world, of hia ministry and his sufferings,'
his resurrection and the outpouring of the Spirit ; so that, accordingly,'
in the lives of the saints, the effects of tbe life of Christ, and its unde-
niable fruits, are brought home at once to our contemplation, and to our
feelings. And with reason may we say, that as God is no God of the
dead, but of the living ; so Christ is no God of a generation, tarrying
in the sleep of death, buf of a people truly awakened in the Spirit, and
growing up to sanctification, and to bliss. Lastly, it is to be borne in
mind, that the doctrine of the Church does not declare, that the saints

pro hominibus ofierre, bonum atque utile esse supplicitcr eos vocare ; et ob beneficia
impetranda a Deo per filiura ejus Jesum Christura Dominum nostrum, qui sdus nos.
ter redemptor et salvator est, ad eorum orationes, opera auxiliumquc confugerc."
Sess. xxu. c. UI. " Et quamvis in honorem et memoriara sanctorum nonnuUas in-
terdura missas aedesia celebrarc consueverit i non taraen illis sacrificium offere docet,
sed Deo sdi, qui illos coronavit, unde nee sacerdos dicere solet, offero Ubi sacrificium,
Petre vd Paule, sed Deo de illorum victorhs gratias agens eorum patrocinia implorat,
ut ipsi pro nobis mtercedere diguentur in coelis, quorura memoriara facimus in terns."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 421
musi, but only that they can be invoked ; since the Council of Trent,
in the passage we have cited, says, " only that it is useful and salutary,
to invoke with confidence the intercession of the saints." Of faith in
the divinity of Christ, and in his mediatorial office, or in his sanctifying
grace, and the like, the Church by no means teaches that it is merely
useful and salutary, but that it is absolutely necessary to salvation.

§ LIII. — Doctrine of Protestants on this subject.
To these principles of the Catholic Church, Protestants oppose but
mere erapty negations, and a dead criticism. In the first place, as re
gards purgatory, Luther, at the outset, denied this doctrine, as little as
that of prayers for the dead. But, as soon as he obtained a clear ap
prehension of his own theory of justification, he recognized the neces
sity of giving way here likewise to the spirit of negation. In the Smal
cald Articles, composed by him, he expresses himself in the strongest
manner against the doctrine of purgatory, and characterizes it as a dia-
boUcal invention.* Calvin also, with the most furious violence, de
clares against this dograa, and the symbolical writings of his party
coincide with hira on this subject.f At the sarae tirae, with the clearest
conviction, they avow the raotive, which incited them on to this violent
opposition ; and disguise noi the feeling, that the adoption, or even the
toleration of the doctrine of purgatory, in their religious system, would
admit a principle destructive to the whole, ReconciUation and forgive
ness of sins, they allege, is to be sought for only in the blood of Christ.
It would be, therefore, a denial of his merits, and of the rights of faith,
which alone saveth, if it were to be maintained, that the believer in the
©ther world had stUl to endure punishment, and were not unconditionally

* Artie. Smalcald. p. ii. c. 2. § 9. " Quapropter purgatorium, et quidquid ei so-
lemnitatis, culttts et quaestds adhaeret, mera diaboh larva est, Pugnat enim cum
primo articulo, qui docet, Christum solum et non hominum opera, animas liberare."
t Calvin. Instit. Lib. iii. c. 5. ^ 6. fol, 241. "Demus tamen ilia omnia tderari
aliquantisper potuisse ut res non magni momenti, at ubi peccatorum expiatio alibi,
quam m Christi sanguine quaeritur, ubi satisfactio alio transfertur, periculosissimum si-
lentiara. Clamandum ergo non modo vocis sed gutturis ac laterura contentione, pur
gatorium exitiale Satanse esse commentum, quod Christi crucem evacuat, quod con.
tumeUam Dei misericordiae non ferendam irrogat, quod fidem nostram labefacit et
evertit," etc. Confess. Helvet i art. xxvi p. 86. " Quod autem quidam tradunt de
igne purgatorio, fidei Christianae : credo remissionem peccatorum ct vitam astemam,
purgalionique plenae per Christum adversatur." — Anglic, xxii. p, 134.

422 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
to be admitted into heaven.* The misconceptions, which these asser
tions betray, have been already pointed out elsewhere.
As regards the kingdom of saints made perfect, and our relation to
them, the Xjutheran opinions on this matter, stand in the closest con
nexion with their doctrine on the Church, and are only a transfer of
their maxims, respecting the ecclesiastical communion of believers in
this worid, to that of the next. They deny not the communion of be
lievers in the Chuich miUtant ; but, they reject the conditions, under
which it can become real, living, and effectual. The believers indeed,
stand all in a spiritual communion between each other, but we know
not why : the whole doth not govern fhe individual — there is no rautual
action between both, so that the meraber can well dispense with the
body ; the idea of communion remains completely idle, powerless, and
ineffective. In the sarae manner, they question not the existence of a
communion existing between us and the saints ; but, they rest satisfied
with the bare representation of it — a representation devoid of aU fruth ;
because it either hath no reality, or at best, but an imperfect one.
The angels must be devils, and the saints wicked demons, if they could
only be conceived to be in a state of cold, stiff" indifference towards us;
and their love of God would be idle in itself, did it not extend to ra
tional creatures, equally susceptible of love, and were not active in our
behalf. It was this idea which partly induced the German reformers
not to offer a direct opposition to the Catholic doctrine.
In the first place, fhey concede that the lives of the saints are worthy
of imitation, and that they should be honoured by our imitation. They
even deny not that the saints pray for the Church at large, but they
assert, that fhe saints must not be prayed to for their intercession.*

* The mere attention to the prayers of the Church, for instance, of the following
prayer (in die obilOs seu depositionis defuncti,) might have shown to the Reformers
the utter groundlessness of their reproaches. " Deus, cui proprium est misereri
semper ei parcere, te supplices exoramus pro aniraa famuli tui N. quam hodie de hoc
sajculo raigrare jussisti : ut non tradas eara in raanus inimici, neque obliviscaris in
finem ; sed jubeas eara a Sanctis angelis suscipi, et ad patriam paradisi perduci : ui
quia in ie speravit ei credidit, non pcenas infemi sustineat, sed gaudia tBtcma possi-
deat. Per Domin ura nostrum Jesum Christum."
* Confess. August. Art. xxi. " De culta sanctorura docent, quod memoria sanc
torum proponi potest, ut iniiteraur fidera eorum, et bona opera juxta vocationem. . . .
Sed Scriptura non docet invocare sanctos, seu petere auxilium t Sanctis. Quia unum
Christum proponit nobis mediatorem, propitiatorem, pontifieem, et intcrcessorem."
Apolog. ad Art. xxi. § 3-4. p. 201. " Prajterea et hoc largimur, quod Angeli orent
pro nobis. De Sanctis etsi concedimus, quod sicut vivi orant pro ecclesia. univeisA
in genere, ita in coelis orent pro ecclesia in genere. Porro ut maxime pro ecclesii
orent Sancti, tamen non sequitur, quod sint invocandi."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 423
The reason which they adduce, is the same that lEirought about the dis
solution of the ecclesiastical communion — naraely, that Christ is our
only Mediator I We must, however, examine the coherency of these
ideas. It is indeed passing strange, that the saints should pray to God
for ns, without apprehending that they encroach on the mediatorial
office of Christ ; and God and Christ should even permit these, their
functions, in our behalf, and, accordingly, find them free from all pre
sumption : and yet, that we, on our parts, should not beseech the exer
cise of these kindly offices, because our prayer would involve an
offence, whereas, fhe thing prayed for involves none. But the prayers
of the saints raust surely be terraed culpable, if our requests, for such
prayers, be culpa'ile. But, should their supplications, in our behalf, be
laudable and pleasing unto God; wherefore should not the prayer for
such supplications be so likewise ? Accordingly, the consciousness of
their active intercession necessarUy deterraines an affirmation of the
same on our part, and excites a joy which, when we analyze it, already
includes the interior wish and prayer for these their active aids. For
all communion is mutual, and to the exertions of one side, the counter-
exertions of the other must correspond, and vice versa. Certes, our
indifference for the intercession of the saints would annihilate the same,
and completely destroy all communion existing between fhe two forras
of the one Church. But, if it be irapossible for us to be indifferent on
this raatter, then the doctrine of the Catholic Church reraains un
shaken. The intercession of the saints, as well as fhe corresponding invoca
tion of that intercession on our part, is so far frora irapairing the raerits
of Christ, that it is merely an effect of the sarae ; a fruit of his all-
atoning power, that again united heaven and earth. This our ecclesi
astical prayers very beautifully and strikingly express ; as they all,
without exception, even such wherein we petition the benign influence
of the celestial inhabitants on our earthly pilgriraage, are addressed in
the Redeemer's name. Moreover, if the intercession of the saints in
terfere with the mediatorial office of Christ, then must all intercession,
and prayer for intercession, even among the living, be absolutely re
jected. It should be borne in mind, that Catholics say of no saint, he
hath died for us ; he hath purchased for us rederaption in his blood, and
hath sent down the Holy Spirit I But, by coraraunion with Christ, all
glorified through hira, partake, as weU in his righteousness, as in all
things connected therewith ; and hence, fhe power of their intercession ;
hence also, the right of petitioning for that intercession frora the living,
as well as frora the departed just.
The opinions, which, according to Calvin's exaraple, his disciples in

424 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
France, and fhe Remonstrants in Holland, have formed on this raatter,
have the merit of entire consistency. They declare the idea of an in
tercession of saints for mortals, fo be an absolute imposture and de
lusion of Satan, since, thereby, theright manner of praying is prevent.
ed, and the saints know nothing of us, and are even quite unconcerned
as to all that passes under the Sun.* From this point of view, in which
it is imagined, that the saints resemble fhe gods of the Epicureans,
and live joyous and contented in heaven, without being, in fhe least,
concerned about our insignificant actions, or suffering themselves to be
thereby disturbed in their enjoyments, the prohibition to solicit the suf
frage of the saints, is alone tenable. Such an idea of blessed spirits, aa
only the most obtuse selfishness could imagine, possesses certainly no
thing to invite to a friendly intercourse with them ; and God forbid,
that in heaven a felicity should be reserved for us, to which the con
dition of any earthly being, in whose breast the spark of a loving sen
sibility is yet alive, would be infinitely to be preferred !

* Confess. Gall. Art, xxiv. p. 119. " Quidquid homines de mortuorum sanctorum
j ntercessione comraenti sunt, nihil aliud esse, quara fraudem et fallacias Satanae, ut
homines a recta, precandi forraa abduceret." Remonstrant, Conf. C. xvi. § 3, '*Quip.
pe de quibus (Sanctis) Scriptura passam afRrmat (!) quod res nostras ignorent, et ea,
quae sub sole fiunt, rainime curent." A deeper view into the connexion of ideas,
which induced the ancient Protestants to hold, here also, a negative course, is afforded
us by Theodore Beza, who says of the veneration of saints, that it destroys the unity
of God. In his epistle to Andrew Dudith in order to dispel his doubts, that in tho
end Catholics raight yet be right, — he observes, that these had not left a single article
of religion unfalsified, and he continues : " Unura scilicet Deura reips& profitentur
(verbo enim id eos profiteri ac etiam vociferari non inficior,) qui quod unius Dei tam
proprium est ac dxnivStvirTav, atque est ipsa Deltas, ad quoscunque suos, quos vocant
sanctos, transferunt." See his Epist theol. lib. i. Geneva, 1573, n. 1, p. 15. Cer.
tainly ; for Catholics, doubtless, assert that the saints have helped God to create the
world ! In his writing on Divine Providence, Zwinglius, as we have in a forraer part
of the work observed, adduces among other things, this argument against human
freedom, that thereby a sort of polytheism would be introduced, and the true God set
aside, since the notion of freedora involves independence, and therefore, every one, to
whora free-will was attributed, would be converted into a.God. The sarae argument
is now alleged against the veneration of saints ; whence we may also see, how closely
are interlinked all the doctrines of Protestants.

PART II.
THE SMALLER PROTESTANT STATES.

§ LIV. — Introduction.
We have, already, often had occasion to observe, thaf the principles
of the Gerraan Reformation, were not on all points consistently carried
out by the German Reforraers ; nay, that they frequently resisted, with
their utmost energy, what comprised nothing more than a very natural
inference from their own principles, or a continuance and development
of the views laid down by themselves. We here by no means allude to the
so-called RationaUst theology, which, in raodern times, has been often
represented by Catholics as weU as by Protestants, as a mere continuance
and further prosecution of the work begun by Luther.* It is difficult
to explain, how the notion could ever have obtained such easy, un
qualified, and often implicit credence, that a doctrine, which denies the
fall of the huraan race in Adam, is to be looked upon as a farther
development of that, which asserts, that in Adara we are all become
incurable ; or that a system, which exalts human reason and freedom
above all things, must be considered as an ulterior consequence of the
doctrine, that human reason and freedora are a mere nothingness ; in
' Jhort, that a system, which stands in the most pointed, general con
tradiction with another, should be admired as its consummation. Re
garded from one point of view, the modern Protestant theology must
be acknowledged to be the most coraplete reaction against the elder
one. In the modern theology, Reason took a fearful vengeance for
the total system of repression, practised upon her bj' the Reformers,
and did the work of a most thorough destruction of all the opinions put

* We presume to suggest, that Catholic theologians, in asserting that the modem
rationalism is a necessary consequence of the Reformation, mean not to deduce it
from all the pecuhar theological tenets professed by Luther and the first Reformers.
They only, thereby, mean to assert, that the doctrine of the Supremacy of Reason in
matters of religion proclairaed by Luther and other Reformers, more boldly and une.
quivocally than by all forraer heresiarcha, necessarily led to the introduction of ration-
aUsm. The doctrine of Private Judgment is the common parent of all, even the most
discordant and opposite heresies. — Tram,

426 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
forth by the latter. There is, however, it cannot be deniod, another
point of view from which the matter may be considered (see § 27 ,) but
this wc must here pass over unnoticed.
When, accordingly, we speak of an incomplete development of
the principles of primitive Protestantism ; or, when we say that the
consistent development of the same was even rejected and assailed by
the Reformers ; we advert fo those doctrines, which could and must be
deduced from their one-sided supernaturalism ; if we be justified in
supposing, that a doctrine once put forth, being in itself pregnant and
iraportant, is sure to find sorae souls ready to devote themselves to it,
with all their energy, and own its sway without reserve. The funda
mental principle of the Reformers, was, that without any human co
operation, the Divine Spirit penetrates into the soul of the true Chris
tian, and that the latter, in his relation to the former, is with re.spect to
all religious feeling, thought, and wiU, perfectly passive. If this prin
ciple led the Reformers, in the first instance only, to fhe rejection of
Church authority and Tradition, and to the adoption of Scripture as
the only source and rule of faith ; it must, when rigidly followed up,
be turned against the position and the iraportance of Holy Writ in the
Protestant systera itself. Is written tradition not in itself a human
mean for propagating doctrines and precepts? For the understanding
of fhe Bible, which has come down from ages long gone by, and from
a people so utterly different from ourselves, is not very great human
exertion requisite, such as the learning of languages, the study of anti
quities, the investigation of history ? In what connexion, therefore,
stands the proposition, that Scripture is the only source of faith, with
fhe other proposition, that independently of aU huraan co-operation, the .
Divine Spirit conducts to God ? If such an overruling influence of
the Deity on man really exist, wherefore doth God still need Scripture
and the outward word, in order to reveal His will to man ? In such a
way, and by such an interraediate train of thought, men deduced, from
the fundaraental principle of the Reformation adverted to, the erroneous
opinion, that independently of aU human forras of coraraunication, the
Deity by iraraediate interior revelations, makes himself known to each
individual, and in such a shape communicates his will to man. From
which it follows, that Holy Writ itself raust be held as a subordinate
source of knowledge for the Divine decrees, or as one that raay be
entirely dispensed with. If the Christian ReUgion, by the severance
of Scripture from the Church, had been already menaced with an utter
absorption into mere individual opinions ; so now even the written
Word, in the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles, was no
longer asserted to be the first and the only fountain of religious fruth;

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 427
and everything, accordingly, was given up to the most unlimited caprice.
Returning frora this its extreraest point of developraent, (though in an
erroneous way,) Protestantisra passed into a formal system of visions.
And this was effected by the instrumentality of Count Swedenborg,
who believed himself elected by God, to hold a real intercourse with,
and receive real instruction from, celestial spirits, who appeared to him
in outward, locally determined forms, to enable him to oppose to vague,
mere inward inspirations, and to subjective feelings, a fixed, outward,
objecfive standard, and to prevent the coraplete dissolution and evapora
tion of all Christianity. In Swedenborg's systera, accordingly, the
one-sided raysticisra becarae plastic, and false spiritualisra took an out
ward bodily shape, whereby the fantastic spirit of the Protestant sects,
was pushed to its farthest extrerae ; as subjectivity, striving after objec
tivity, becarae to itself an outward thing, in order to replace the exter
nal, visible Church founded by Christ. In other words, the raere
impressions and feelings of the other Protestant sects, receive, through
tbe plastic phantasy of Swedenborg, visible forras ; about the sarae as
if a man were fo take for realities the iraages of his drearas !
The false spiritualisra of these Protestant sects, to which everything
imparted frora without appeared like death and petrifaction itself,
directed its assaults raore particularly against ecclesiastical institutions.
And a distinct order of sacred rainistry, even in the Lutheran and
Calvinistic guise, it considered as an abomination, whereby the spirit
was fettered ; and the forms of outward worship, even the few which
the Reformers had retained or new-modelled, it looked upon as heathen
ish idolatry. Thus grew up the conviction of the necessity of reform
ing the Reformation itself, or rather of consummating it ; for this had
not yet delivered the spirit frora all outward works, nor brought it
back to itself, to its own inraost sanctuary.
However, in raore than one respect, these new-sprung sects approxi
mated to the Catholic Church, frora which they appeared to be still
further reraoved, than even the Lutheran and the Calvinistic corarauni
ties. It was almost always in the doctrine of justification, which,
though they made use of unwonted forms of expression, they mostly
conceived in the spirit of Christ's Church, this approximation was per
ceptible. They represented the inward, new life, obtained by fellow
ship with Christ, as a true and real renovation of the whole raan, as a
true deliverance frora sin, and not raerely from the debt of sin ; and
their feelings revolted at the doctrine of a mere irnputed righteousness.
Even in the Pietism of Spener, which receded fhe least from the formu
laries of the orthodox Protestantisra, this tendency is manifest. There
is no difficulty in discovering the connexion of this phenomenon with

428 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c.
the ruling, fundamental principle of these sects. The stronger the
sway of the Divine Spirit over the human heart, as asserted by them ;
the less could they understand, how its cleansing fire would not con
sume and destroy all the dross of sin ; and hence, in the harshest terms,
thev often censured the Lutheran and Calvinistic doctrine of justification
by faith alone, which they depicted as a carnal, nay, diabolic principle.
This hostility appears most violent in Swedenborgianisra, whose author,
in conforraity with the mode, in which he believed he arrived at the
knowledge of all his doctrinal peculiarities, sees Calvin descend into
hell, and finds Melancthon totally incapable of rising up to heaven ;
as in the proper place, we shaU have occasion to recount this vision in
connexion with his whole systera. Hence, in fine, the very rigid
ecclesiastical discipline, and the seriousness of life, which mostly cha
racterize these sects ; hence, too, the maxim that even the visible
Church should consist only of the pure and the holy ; a raaxim, which
connects thera with the ancient Montanists, Novafians, and Donafists.
With the ecstatic Montanisfs, especially, they have great affinity,

CHAPTElt 1.
tub: ANABAPTISTS, OR MENNONlTM

FIRST PEKIOn OF, THE ANABAPTISTS*
^ tv. — f*undamental principle of the Anabaptists.
The Reformation had scarcely boasted an existence of five yearSj
when, frora the midst of its adherents, men arose, who declared it to
be insufficient. Luther was at the castle of Wartburg, when from
ZwickaUj Nicholas Stork, Mark Thoraas, Mark Stubner, Thoraas
Muncer, Martin CeUarius, and others, came to Wittenberg, to enter in
to a friendly conference with the theologians of that city. They spoke
of revelations which had been imparted to them, without, however,
at first exciting attention, by any singularity of opinion, save the re
jection of infant baptism. Writers have occasionally expressed their
astonishraent, how the above-naraed men, (two only of whora possessed
any tincture of learning, the rest belonging to the class of workmen)
were able to bestow reflsction upon the subject adverted to, which
had not then been agitated. This phenoraenon, however, can only
then afford raatter for surprise, when we would call in question the
active intercourse between these men and the Reformers of Witten
berg — an intercourse which it is vain to deny ; for when Melancthon
conversed with thera about their faith, he found it in exact conformity
with that of the new Saxon school. And why should Luther's maxims
and writings not have reached their ears, more especially as the lead
ing preacher at Zwickau was among the number of his confidants ? If
such be the case, then nothing is easier than to account for their re
jection of infant baptisra. Luther having, as we observed in a former
place, connected the efiicacy of the sacraraents with faith only, it is
not possible to understand why infants should be baptized : and from
the reformer's point of view, it was not difficult for any one to discov
er the utter want of an adequate ground for this ecclesiastical rite.
From Melancthon's inclination to recognize the gospellers of Zwick
au, as well as from the embarrassment Luther experienced in refuting
their arguments, without totally abandoning his theory, respecting the
mode of sacramental efficacy, men might long ago have inferred the

430 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
close affinity between the Anabaptists and the Saxon Reforraers, and
should utterly have disregarded the pretence of any extraction from the
Vaudois. Undeniable as is the original affinity, between fhe Anabaptists and
the Lutherans, yet, this affinity soon changed info a mutual opposition
the most decided. An indescribable confusion prevailed in the minds of
the new sectaries, and a fearful fanaticism drove thera on to every
species of extravagance and violence ; and as they had fhe inraost con
viction of doing all things by the impulse of the Divine Spirit, all hope
of opposing their errors by rational instruction was utteriy fruitless.*
Muncer was deeply iraplicated in the war of the peasants ; and the
very tragic history of Munster, must have, at last, opened the eyes of
the most indulgent and irapartial observer. From this time forward,
especially, the Anabaptists encountered every where the most dclcrrain-
ed adversaries ; and hundreds in their community, under Catholics as
well as Protestants, had to forfeit their Uves for their principles.
In unfolding to view the doctrines of the Anabaptists, we may right
ly assign the most prominent place fo their ftlilleuarian cxpoclations.
-\fter foretelUng the utter extirpation of aU the ungodly, they announc
ed the kingdom of Christ as immediately thereupon fo be established
on earth. A new, perfect life, in comraon among Christians, would
then be founded, which was to subsist without external laws, aud with
out magistracy ; for, in all it.s members the moral law written on every
man's heart would revive, and be powerfully exhibited in life. Even
Holy Writ would be abolished ; for, the perfect children of God no
longer need the sarae (and its contents would be no longer an outward
object, but rather the inmost portion of their being.) Then perfect
equality among all would be established ; and every thing would be in
common, without any individual caUing any thing his property, or lay
ing claim to any privilege. Wars and hostilities of every kind would
cease to exist. Even marriage would no longer be contracted, and
without marrying or giving in marriage, " some pure and holy fruit
would yet be produced, without any sinful lust and wicked desire of
the flesh."t •
Thus it was an ideal state of the Christian Church, that floated be-

» Mdancthon's History of Thomas Mtincer. (In German.) Luther's works,
ed. Wittenberg, part ii. p. ,473, " Hereby he imparted to these doctrines an illusive
appearance ;— he pretended he had received a revelation from heaven, and taught
nothing else, comraanded nothing dse, but what God had approved."
t Justus Menius's " Doctrine of the Anabaptists refuted frora Hdy Writ," with a
preface by Luther : included in the works of the latter, Wittenberg, ed. part ii. p.
309, b. (In German.)

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 431
fore the imagination of the Anabaptists — the confused representation
of a joyful kingdom of holy and blessed spirits, which inspired these
sectaries with such deep enthusiasm, gave them such power and con
stancy of endurance under all persecutions, and caused them to exert
on all sides so contagious an influence.* The more exalted, pure, and
innocent, the vital principle of the sect appeared, the raore easily could
its adherents inflame the souls of their contemporaries. We cannot re
fuse to these fanatics an infantine originality in their view of human
society ; and the impetuous desire after a complete realization of the
Wea of God's kingdom — the impatient haste which prevented them from
awaiting the development of tirae, and with which they panted for a
sudden irruption of the relations of the next world into the present, — a
sudden unveiling of that state, that only in fhe course of ages could be
gradually revealed, announces something magnanimous, and rejoices
the heart araid all the aberrations we encounter in their history, and
which were quite inevitable. In fact, they, in part at least, only anti
cipated a future state of things ; and all they strove to realize, was not
the raere invention of an unbridled phantasy. Social life rests on a
spiritual and bodily coraraunity of goods ; all the thought and re
flection — all the learning and knowledge of the individual becorae the
coraraon property of the social body, to which he belongs ; and what
ever he acquires for himself, he acquires ultimately for others also. For,
an indomitable propensity to coraraunicate his acquireraents is inher
ent in every raan ; and we think we know nothing, if our knowledge
be not for the benefit of those, with whom we live. Whoever hath
brought forth some original idea, is urged by a mysterious inward im
pulse to subrait it to the judgment of intelligent raen ; for, the peculiar
constitution of our intellectual nature, will not permit us to trust our
own thoughts, if they meet not with approval. There is, perhaps, no
other more certain criterion of madness, than the clinging to some idea,
which every one holds to be a mere idle fancy. In a word, all men
forra, as it were, but one man ; and herein, among other things, con
sists the truth in the Neo-Platonic doctrine of an universal soul ¦  a
doctrine by which the followers of that phUosophy even sought to ex
plain the sympathy existing between men. But if a man will have his
thoughts and ideas recognized, he must of necessity communicate them
to others.

* Melancthon's History of Thomas Muncer, loc. cit. p. 474. " With such idle
talk he made the populace gape ; then people ran to him, and every one desired to
hear somethmg new ; for, as Homer says, ' The new song is ever the favourite with
the populace I' " H-iw could Melancthon thus speak against the Anabaptists ! As
if the song which he sung, were an old one !

432 EXPOSITION OP DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
In the CathoUc Church, this idea of the coraraunity of spiritutil life
is most fully expressed ; since, in what regards religion, the individual
submits all his productions to the judgment of the whole body, and
foregoes the pleasure of having discovered any fruth, if his lucubrations
be considered, by the comraunity, as containing aught inconsistent with
its fundaraental principles.
It is nearly the same with corporeal goods. Man enters info civil
society, not only with the view of securing his property by the union
into which he has entered, but also with the resolution of sacrificing it,
in case of necessity, to fhe exigencies of the comraon weal. What are
hospitals, poor-houses, infirraaries ; what are all public establishments
for education and instruction, but a special reflection of fhe idea of the
coraraunity of goods among all ? The greater fhe progress which so.
eial life, under the influence of Christianitj', makes, and the greater in
consequence the civilization of the human race ; the more do special
associations for special objects arise, wherein a raultitude of members
go security for the individual, in order to guarantee and insure his
earthly existence. Insurance establishments become ever more nurae
rous, and raore comprehensive in their objects ; and these also, we
hold to be evermore significant expressions of the idea of a comraunity
of goods, — an idea, indeed, which, like all others, can never be com
pletely realized in this finite life. Who doth not here, too, recall to
raind the first Christian coraraunity of Jerusalera ? The consuraraa-
tion of the Christian period will doubtless, though in a freer and milder
form, lead us back to the state of its primitive age. Moreover, we here
stand on ethical ground ; for external existence possesses value only as
it is the expression of inward life, and the work of spontaneous resolu
tion. But the Anabaptists wished fo realize at once and by violence,
one of the highest raoral ideas ; and this is ever impossible. Nay, they
wished to introduce it araong men such as they are, who, by their en
tire education, are as unsusceptible, as they are unworthy, of such an
idea, and they made its introduction into life the prop for their own in.'
dolence, yea, for every possible wickedness. The greater the contra
dictions, accordingly, between the idea of the Anabaptists and the real.
ity of life, the raore the difficulties increased, when they wished to re
alize that idea in society. The more undoubted, amid all these obsfa.!
des, their belief in their own divine raission ; the more infuriated raust
they becorae, and the more convulsive raust be all their efforts. Hence,
in the first Anabaptists we discern, beside the simplicity of the child,
the fury of the wildest demagogue ; who, to create a holy and happy
Worid, destroyed in the most unholy and calamitous raanner, the actu
al one ; and, as a bUnd instrument, ministered to the ambition, the av-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTEST.\NTS. 433
sirice, and all the basest passions of the reprobate men, whom we so
fifrequently meet with in tl^e early history of the sect."*
§ LVI. — Initiation i.ito the Sect. Signs and confirmation of covenant.
The Anabaptists beUeved themselves authorized, by an injunction
from above, to prepare the way on earth, for the approaching establish
ment of the above-described perfect kingdom of God. They travelled
about, accordingly, in every direction, to announce the liberty of God's
¦children, and to make a preliminary election of all those, whom the
Lord would use as instruments for the rooting out of all tares, and the
extirpation of all the ungodly. The community about to be gathered
together by them, was to consist exclusively of saints, and typically to
represent, in every way, the celestial Church, which was expected.
Hence, all who wished to be taken into the new comraunity, were bap
tized anew ; for, they had before recieved only the powerless, watery
))aptism of John ; whereas, they now would be cleansed with Christ's
baptism of fire and of the Spirit. By this baptisra, they understood
the real regeneration of the spirit out of the Spirit — the complete sur
render of the whole man unto God— the disengagement of the will from
all creatures — the renunciation of every attempt to wish to be any thing

• The idea of the absolute community of goods is far more ancient than Plato's
Republic, and all the institutions of his time, which he might, perhaps, have had in
view. When the golden age, the period of Saturn's rule, was to be portrayed ; when
'the Goddess Justitia, (who is something far more than the idea of the suum cuique)
still dwelt ou the earth ; the poet connects the words :
" Nondum vesanos rabies nudaverat enses,
Ncc consanguineis (such all men su-e) fuerat discordia nata,
Flumina jam lactis, jam ilumina nectaris ibant,
With Ne signare quidem, aut partiri limits campum."
Even the freedom allotted to slaves during the Saturnalia, called to mmd the ori
ginal absence of all distinction among men. But the happy period ceased, since " de.
seruit propere terras justissima virgo." Plato, eis well as Aratus, Macrobius, and
others, drew from the same cycle of sages. It is worthy of remark, that the idea of
the absolute comraunity of goods appears, almost always, connected with that of
comraunity of wives. Such is the case m Plato, in Epiphanes, the son of Carpo-
urates, and very clearly among the Anabaptists, and the elder Gnostic sects ; and
when the latter are so frequently charged with the libido promiscua, this accusation
ought not, as often happens, to be so slightly called in question. Hence, also, it fol
lows, that an absolute community of goods would annihilate the whole civiUzation of
the human race : because it is incompatible with the existence of maniagie aud the
family : domestic hfe absolutely presupposes property.
28

434 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
in one-self— lastly, the being filled with the power from above. Thi'j
notion of the effects of baptism is essentially the same, as the Catholic
Church has ever set forth. And it was partly the perception, that so
many rest satisfied with the mere outward work, and confound the
water with the Spirit, and the bodily ablution with the infernal purifi
cation of the soul ; and partly, the guilty and wilful ignorance, that
such a conceit was condemned by the Church itself, which could have
persuaded fhe Anabaptists, that their doctrine on baptism was a new
revelation from God. At aU events, we clearly see, from this fact, that
some lofty idea aniraated and impelled thera.
According to the baptismal formula of Hans Denk, every candidate
renounced seven evil spirits ; namely, man's fear, man's wisdom, man's
understanding, man's art, man's counsel, man's strength, and raan's un
godliness, and in return received fear of God, wisdora of God, and so
forth. Melchior Rink raade use of the foUowing forraula : — " Art thoa
a Christian ? Yes. — What dost thou beUeve, then ? I believe in God,
my Lord Jesus Christ. — For what wilt thou give me thy works ?— I will
give them for a penny. — For what wilt thou give me thy goods ; for a
penny also ? No. — For what wilt thou give then thy life ; for a penny
also ? No. — So then thou seest, thou art as yet no Christian, for thou
hast not yet fhe right faith, and art not resigned, but art yet too much
attached to creatures and to thyself; therefore thou art not rightly bap
tized in Christ's baptism with the Holy Spirit, but art only baptized
with water in John's baptisra."
" But if thou wilt be saved, then thou raust truly renounce and give
up all thy works, and all creatures, and lastly, thy own self, and must
beUeve in God alone.* But now I ask thee, dost thou renounce crea
tures ? Yes. — I ask thee again, dost thou renounce thy own self ? —
Yes. — Dost thou believe in God alone? Yes. — Then I baptize thee in
the narae,"^ etc.f This action, the Anabaptists called the seaUng and
the sign of the covenant.
It raust here, however, be observed, that these sectaries by no means
connected with the outward act the comraunication of the Holy Spirit.
On the contrary, they accurately distinguished between both, as Calviit,
frora the same motives, afterwards did ; and they regarded the exterior
act in baptism, only as the symbol of suffering in general, and of the
mortification of wicked lusts in particular.^ The raembers of this sect.

* Frora these raaxiras it is clear, that the justifying faith held by the Anabaptists,
was the fides formata of the Catholic Church.
t Justus Menius, loc. cit. p. 309, b.
X Phihp Melancthon's Instruction against the Anabaptists, in Luther's works.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 435
moreover, did not baptize their new-born children, as not understanding
the signification of this holy act ; and they administered the sacred
rite to them only on their attaining to riper years. Hence, the name
of " Anabaptists," is characteristic of the proceedings of the sect only
in reference to its initiation of strangers, but by no means denotes their
principles in relation to their own merabers ; as they never twice bap
tized those of their own body, who were to be initiated into their
Church. Of the holy eucharist, the Anabaptists taught, in like raanner, that
it has only a figurative signification. " Eating and drinking in cora-
mon," said they, is throughout the whole world a sign of rautual love :
the same holds good of " the supper " of Christians. As wine, raore
over, is extracted from the grape only by the wine-press ; so, they
taught, it is only by the pressure of sufferings, the Christian is prepared
for the kingdom of God, and the felicity it insures. The corn must
first be ground, before it can be converted into bread ; so man raust first
be ground down by misfortune, before he can be qualified for entering
into the kingdom of heaven. So we see, that baptisra, and the eucharist,
were, in their estimation, rites pre-eminently figurative, denoting the
necessity of sufferings, and of unshaken constancy under persecution.
Their very afflicted condition, forced these sectaries to look out every
where for a source of solace and of fortitude under their trials ; and
therefore, in the above-naraed sacraraents, they saw only the properties,
whereof they stood in such especial need. Hence, whosoever araong
them felt hiraself at any moment, not suflSciently strong to stand the
combat courageously, was exhorted to abstain from coraraunion ; for
it was raore particularly fear and despondency, which they loved to
set forth as those sins, whereby a raan " eateth and drinketh judgment
to himself."*

5 LVii. — These sectaries assail the Protestant doctrine of Justification.
With peculiar bitterness did these sectarians declare themselves

Part. ii. p. 292, ed. Wittenberg, 1 551. (In German.) " Baptisra is a sign that Chris
tians in the world must let themselves be oppressed, and bear and suifer every kind of
danger and persecution. This is signified by the outpouring of water upon thera."
Compare p. 299. " In the third place, baptism is a covenant, exclaim the Anabap
tists, whereby mau engages to mortify his wicked lusts, and to lead a rigid life, and
exercise patience under sufferings : but this infants do not yet understand or practise."
* Melancthon, Instruction, loc. cit. p. 298. Justus Menius, loc. cit. p. 339.

436 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
against the Lutheran docfrine of Justification, and in this respect,
almost corae round to the Catholic point of view. Their notion, respect
ing the justifying faith of Protestants, is very well expressed in the
following passage, from the work of the Lutheran Justus Menius :—
" They mightily boast," says he, " they have in their doctrine the true
power of God, and that ours is an idle, weak, unfruitful husk ; that
we can do nothing more than cry out, faith, faith alone ; but this cry
reraaineth, in every respect, an idle and dead cry." It strikes us, at
the first glance, that it was only to faith, as united with good works,
that the Anabaptists ascribed the power of justification : whereas, how-
ever, according to the above-cited formula of baptism, they declared
themselves ready to give up their works for a penny. This is, however,
only a coarse expression for the great truth, that the Christian should
ever think humbly of hiraself, and not be proud of his moral endeavours
— it is only a condemnation of the deadliest foe to aU Christian piety —
to wit, arrogance and confidence in one's own works. The foUowing
reasoning of Justus Menius against the Anabaptists, will set this mat
ter in the clearest light ; while, at the same lime, it is of importance, as
determining the notion, which the Lutherans attached to justification
by faith alone_. He says, — " The fanatics cannot here get out of this
difficulty ; though they often repeat, that we are not to put faith in the
merit of works and sufferings ; yet, they insist, that we ought to have
them, however, as things necessary to salvation. Tliat is nonsense, for
if works be necessary io salvation, then we cannot certainly obtain salvo'
tion without them, and then consequently, faiih alone doth not save ; but
that is false."
This memorable passage, in a writing which Luther accompanied
¦with a preface, by no raeans signifies that the principle, whereby salva
tion is obtained, consists in faith, and not in the works to be wrought
besides ; but that faith, even when it should not produce the fruit of
good works, yet insures salvation. The Pastor of Eisenach will also
discover a contradiction in the doctrine, that, on one hand, works are
necessary to salvation ; and, on the other hand, that the Christian
should not attach importance to the sarae. But here the self-same ob
jection recurs, which the Lutheran theology also raised against the
Catholic doctrine of justification, to wit, that it leads to solf-righteous-
ness, and obscures fhe glory of God. Menius observes, " Only see how
consistent is their system : man, ihey say, musi renounce his own works,
and yet ihey contend and urge, with all their might, ihat he must hwse,
together with faith, works also, or he will not be saved. But what is the
meaning of this ? Works are necessary to salvation ; and yet he, who
wiU be saved, must renounce his works. Ergo, he, who wiU be saved,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 43T
must himself renounce what is necessary to salvation, and without which
he cannot be saved. Make this tally,* rebel I Remeraber, that men
dacem oportet esse memorem, that is, he who will lie, ought to have a good
memory ; otherwise, when in what he afterwards says, he will contra
dict himself, people will observe, how he hath lied in what he had before
spoken ; this should make the lying spirit more heedful.""]"
The theology of the good Justus Menius, finds the inculcation of
good works, absolutely incompatible with fhe idea of huraiUty. And,
accordingly, he thinks the doctrine, that we must "renounce" such
works — that is to say, acknowledge ourselves useless servants, even
when we have done all, to be perfectly irreconcilable with the other
tenet, that works are a necessary condition to salvation. Whereupon,
in his opinion, there reraains no other alternafivp, than to believe, that
faith, even without ever evincing its efficacy in works, can render us
acceptable to God !
^ 1.VIII. — Continuation. Concurrence of the most various errors in the sect.
Among the Anabaptists, considered as a sect, we discover not other
doctrinal peculiarities, though we find a considerable multitude of errors
professed by individuals, or even larger parties among them. Justus
Menius had learned, that even original sin was denied by the Anabap
tists ; probably, it would seem, to give a broader basis to their doctrine,
respecting the unlawfulness of infant baptisra. On this subject, they
were wont fo appeal to the language and conduct, which the Saviour,
on several occasions, had manifested in respect to children. From a
misunderstanding, they attached especial importance to the text, where
in children are held up by him as models for adults, if they would enter
into the kingdom of heaven. J That, however, only a few of the Anabap
tists rejected the doctrine of original sin, although Justus Menius
charges, without restriction, the whole body with such a denial, is evi
dent from the fact of another accusation being preferred against thera ;
to wit, that they held the body of Christ to have been created by the
Holy Spirit, and raerely fostered in the womb of the Blessed Virgin ;
eo that, thereby, the Saviour would not have taken flesh and blood from
Mary. They feared that, in conceding raore, they would have been

* In the German, the word bundschuh (a buckled shoe) is used ; this Menius em
ploys as a term of reproach, because such was painted on the banners of the rebellioua
peasants under Miincer.
t Justus Menius, loc. cit. p. 3 1 9-20.
t Justus Meinus, loc. cit. p. 333,

438 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
unable to uphold the sinlessness of Christ. Whereas, this error is not
even conceivable, except on the supposition of original sin; the kindred
doctrine above adverted to, respecting the peculiar, sinless sort of gene-
ration to take place in Christ's future kingdom on earth, necessarily
involved also a belief in an evil transmitted by the present mode of
sexual intercourse. And, indeed, that violent antagonism between the
huraan and the divine, which runs through the whole doctrinal systera
of these sectaries, were not possible, without the conviction of a deep-
rooted corruption tainting huraanity in aU its relations. Moreover, the
doctrine in question, respecting the conception of Christ, appears to
have obtained a very wide currency araong the Anabaptists : — at least,
very raany adversaries take the trouble of refuting it.* The greater
the raultitude, who gave in to this error, the smaller raust be the number
of those, who, to assail infant baptisra, denied original sin.
Many Anabaptists rejected the doctrine of Christ's divinity : others
taught an ultiraate restoration of all things — the a-^o-xxratrTitTif navrm,
and in consequence, the final conversion of Satan ; others again, that
souls, frora the moment of death, sleep until the day of judgment.
Even an antinomian tendency was discernible in some individuals
araong them. These, like the " brothers and sisters of the free spirit,"f

* Melancthon : Propositions against the doctrine of the Anabaptists, loc. cit. p.
289, b. ; Urbanus Regius, ibid. p. 402-18 ; Justus Menius, p. 342. " The reader may
also consult in the same volume of Luther's works, the dialogues between the Hes.
sian theologians Corvinus and Rymceus, and John of Leyden, Krechtingk, and others,
p. 453. It is clear, moreover, from this, that the Protestant Church historian,
Schroekh, has fallen into an error, in representing this doctrine of Christ's concep
tion as a peculiarity of Menno : for, it was taught in the sect, long before Mermo
joined it.
t " The brothers and sisters of the Free Spirit," were a fanatical sect of Pantheists,
that sprung up in the early part of the thirteenth century. They probably owed their
origin to the philosophical sehool, which Amalrich, of Bena, and David, of Dinant,
had founded, and which was, in the year 1209, condemned by a synod at Paris,
whose sentence was confirmed by the pope. They derived their narae from the abuse
they made of the texts of Scripture in Romans viii. 2-14 ; and in St. John iv. 23, as.
serting that " the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, had freed them from the
law of sin ;" " that, being led by the Spirit of God, they had become the sons of
God." Professing a mystical Pantheism, they held, like the PauUcians, that every
thing is an immediate emanation from the Deity, rqferring to theraselves the words of
Christ, " I and the Father are one." Whoever attained to their view, belonged no
longer to the world of sense (abusing, as they did, the words in John vui. 23, " I am
not of this world;") he could no longer be contaminated by it, and therefore he no
longer needed the sacraments. Separating body and mind, they maintained that all
sensual debaucheries could not affect the latter ; and hence, some araong them aban
doned themselves without scruple to the grossest vices. In Swabia, particularly,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 439
and like the " libertines,"* asserted that no one, who had once receiv
ed the Spirit, could any longer sin in any work whatsoever ; and that
therefore, fbr thera, adultery even was no sin ; and Zwingle refers by
name to a raeraber of the sect, who had announced this fo hira, as his
personal conviction. For a time, also, the opinion that polygaray is not
forbidden to Christians, was very general araongst thera. f

about the middle of the thirteenth century, they went about inciting monks and nuns
to abandon their rides, and suffer themselves to be led entirely by God and the " Free
Spirit." Severe measures were then taken against thera.
The Apostohcals, a sect founded by Segardh, of Parraa, towards the close of the
same century, held tenets very similar to those just described. — Trans.
* The " Libertines " were a sect of fanatical Pantheists, that sprang out of the
general religious ferment of the sixteenth century. They£rst appeared in Flanders,
in the year 1.547, emd thence spread into Holland, France, and Geneva, where they
gave Calvin much annoyance. At Rouen, a Franciscan monk, who had irabibed
fce tenets of Calvinism, was the first to inculcate the abominable doctrines of (ihe
new sect — Trans.
t On the denial of Christ's Divinity, see Justus Menius, loc. cit. p. 342 ; and
Zwingle's Elenchus contra C.atabapt. Op, tom. ii. fol. 39. " This account is per.
fectly credible, as we toow of Lewis Hetzer, for instance, that be was at once an
Unitarian and an Anabaptist ; and at a later period, as is well known, an Unitarian
congregation was formed in Poland, which professed likewise Analiaptist principles.
On the opinions which the Anabaptists entertained respecting the da-oxxTaiTTstir/t, or
final restoration of things, compare Justus Menius, p. 343 ; and Zwingle's Elenchus,
loc. cit. p. 38, b. The sleep of souls after death is there also attested, p 37, b. For
the antinomianism of the Anabaptists, see ibid. fol. 16. On the polygamy of John
of Leyden, and the defence set up for the same, see Luther's works, part ii. p. 455,
ed. Wittenberg. Here we find recorded the above-mentioned dialogue, held by the
Hessian theologians, Antonius Corvmus, and Jchn Kymaeus, with John of Leyden,
and Krechtingk, frora which I will take the liberty of extracting the following pas
sage, in order to show at once the extremely meagre and mean view the ancient Lu
therans entertained respecting marriage, and the straits, into which, by their rejection
of tradirion, they were necessarily driven. After several questions and answers,
wherein, especially, the QJd Testament polygamy was discussed King John of Ley.
den, in defence of his plurality of wives, observed ; — '' Paul says of a bishop, he
should be the man of one wife. If now a bishop should be the man of one wife, it
follows that in the time of St. Paul, it was permitfied for a man to have two or three
wives, according to his pleasure." The Lutheran preachers replied :— " We have be.
fore said, that marriage belongs to civil policy, and is a respolitica; but -as the civil
policy, on this matter, is now very different from what it was in the time of St.
Paul, and as it has forbidden, and mill not tolerate the plurality of -wives, you can.
not answer for such an innovation, either before God or man:' To this King John :—
"Yet I have the hope, that what was permitted to the fathers, will not damn us;
and I will in this case rather hdd with the fathers, than with you ; still less allow,
that I profess therein any error, or unchristian innovation." The Lutheran preach
ers :— " We would in this case much rather obey the civil power, because it is or-
<damed of God, and in such external matters, hath the right to comraand and to for-

440 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
These opinions, however, should not be considered as strictly Ana
baptist ; for, in part, they were in direct opposition to other maxims of
the sect. It is on the contrary, to be presumed, that at the commence
ment, amid the general religious ferment of the age, a multitude of men
joined the Anabaptists, without having any thing akin to them, save a
dark fanaticism and confusion of ideas. But in general, the remark
holds good, that the first Anabaptists had neither a compact system of
theology, nor any body of doctrines, however Ul-connected, which all
uniformly professed. If we consider, that their sect had not originated
in one man, as the common centre of all ; and that the leading idea,
round which all revolved, though powerful enough to inspire enthusiasm,
was yet, in a doctrinal point of view, unproductive ; if we consider,
moreover, that the dark feelings, by which aU were animated and im
pelled, had not received a definite expression in any public formulary —
a circumstance which gave occasion to a general complaint, on the
part of their adversaries ;* we shall feel the less surprise at the fact
above-mentioned. J LIX  Continuation. Relation of Scripture to the inward spmt. The Cburclu
If will be still more easy fo conceive fhe confusion of doctrines, in
this sect, if we direct our attention more particularly to the opinions
which they entertained respecting the office of preaching, and also what

bid, than recur to the exan^les of the fathers ; as for such a course we have not a
warrant in God's word, but, on the contrary, know truly, that the Scripture counte-
nances our opinion respecting marriage, rather than your view. For instance, the
Scripture saith, " Therefore shall a raan leave father and mother, and shall cleave
unto his wife." Here we are told, a man shall cleave unto his wife, and not unto
many wives. And St. Paul saith, " Let each man have his own wife." He saith
not, " Let each man have many wives." King John : ¦' It is true, St. Paul here doth
not speak of all the wives in general, but of each wife in particular : for the first is
my wife, I cleave lo her ; the second is ray helpraate, I cleave to her likewise, and so.
on Thus, the Scripture remains intact in all its dignity, and is not opposed to our
opinion. And wherefore should I waste raany words ?" " It is better for me to
have many wives, than many strumpets." The king finally proposed to leave to the
tribunal of God, the judgment on this matter. Here we discover the origin of the
desire, subsequently expressed by Philip, Landgrave of Hesse, to have two wives — »
desire which Luther and Melancthon, together wilh Bucer, however reluctantly,
complied with.
» Justus Menius, " Spirit of the Anabaptists ;" loc. cit. p. 363. " If they taught
only the right doctrmes, they would not prowl about so secretly in the dark, nor their
preachers lurk in holes and comers." See also Zwingle in several passages of hi»
cited work, Elenchus. Also, " Doctrme of the Anabaptists refuted from Holy Writ,'"
loc. cit. p. 311.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 441
was immediately connected with this, the relation of Scripture fo the
inward motions of the free, living Spirit. It was a principle, with this
sect, that every one raarked and sealed with the sign of the covenant,
was not only able, but was also bound to appear as a prophet and teacher,
as soon as he felt hiraself raoved by the Divine Spirit, and perceived he
was favoured with a revelation. To these inspirations Holy Writ was
made in such a degree subordinate, that fhe Anabaptists did not long
strive to bring them into an even apparent conformity with Scripture,
but declared the Bible to be in its present forra absolutely falsified.*
Hereby every standard, for the regulation of subjective opinions, was
rejected ; the entire system of Christianity was severed from aU exter
nal historical basis, and abandoned to the stormy fluctuations of a
drearaing fancy. With such errors no distinct order of preachers was
at all corapatible ; for, without settled doctrines, such an institution in
volves a self-contradiction. Hence also, the Anabaptists strained their
utmost efforts to subvert the Protestant preachers, to prevent the conso
lidation of the new, and (in their opinion) too material Church, which
depended on these ministers ; and then to convert it into a purely spiri
tual institution. f
If sorae years previously, the Lutherans had urged against the Catho
lic clergy the ever-recurring reproach, that instead of the doctrine of
the Bible, they preached up only the ordinances of the Church ; so they
in their turn, were now blaraed for fettering fhe living Spirit to a dead
word of Scripture, and not allowing raen fo follow the fresh, pure, un
troubled irapulse frora above j "and li'<e the Jewish scribes, they were
declared to have no Holy Ghost, but to be only conversant with Scrip
ture, and to chase their weariness away with its perusal. "J On the

* Justus Menius " On the spirit of the Anabaptists," p. 364. " For it is undenia
ble, that Thomas Miincer, and after hira his disciple Melchior Rink, together with
many other disciples, had no regard at all for Holy Writ, called it a mere dead letter,
and clung to special new revelations of the Spirit : nay, they dared even openly
give the lie to Scripture, as I myself heard frora the lips of Rink, who had the ef
frontery to say, that all the books of the New Testament in every language, Greek,
Latin, German, etc. were altogether false, and that there was no longer a genuine
copy on earth." Hereupon follows a special application of this principle to the
passage in Matthew xxvi 28, where the words, " which shall be shed for many for
the remission of sins," were, according to this doctor, inserted hythe devil.
t Calvin (mstructio adv. Anabapt. opusc. p. 485,) accus'sthem of only asserting,
that there should be no fixed teachers appointed to any particular place, but Ihat all,
like the apostles, should be itinerant preachers. But then he adds : " Hsec porro phi-
loBophia inde manabat, quod serio cuperent, fideles mmistros sibi oedere, vacuumque
locum sinere, quo liberius venenura suum ubique effundere possent."
} Justus Menius, Doctrine of Anabapt refuted, etc. p. 310-13. On the Spmt of

442 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
other hand; the Lutherans prove against the Anabaptists, what, as com-
ing from the Catholics, fhey would never theraselves assent fo ; they
point out to thera the estabUshment of an apostleship by Christ himself,
and draw, from this institution, nearly the sarae conclusions as the Ca
tholics theraselves. They allege, with laudable industry, Scriptural
texts, whereby the Holy Ghost had instituted teachers, prophets, and
administrators, and the disciples of our Lord had appointed bishops and
elders, in order that the one, true and pure doctrine might be preserved
unfalsified ; and they repeatedly enjoin, that teachers, though cho-sen
by men, are yet ordained by the Holy Ghost.* This assertion Melanc
thon approved even so far, as to hold orders to be a sacraraent. He
says, in his Instructien against the Anabaptists : " That priestly orders
should be placed in fhe number of the sacraments, affords mc rauch sa
tisfaction. Yet so*, that by orders be understood the calUng to the
office of preaching, and of adrainistration of the sacraraents, and so the
office considered in itself. For it is very necessary, that in Christian
Churches, the function of preachers should be regarded and esteemed
as something most precious, venerable, and holy ; and that people be
instructed, that it is by the hearing of sermons, and the reading of God'a
Word, and Holy Writ, God will irapart the Holy Spirit, to the end, that
no one may seek, out of the regular ministry, for any other revelation a-nd
illumination, such as ihe Anabaptists pretend to."f The Lutherans
were so unkind, as to torment fhe poor fanatics with questions, which,
to this day, they have been unable to answer theraselves. They asked
the Anabaptists, who had sent them ? and as they could show no ordi?
nary raission, where were the miracles whereby they authenticated
their extraordinary mission ? The Anabaptists, with reason, retorted
the same questions upon thera. ^
Luther had once said, " whoever is so firmly convinced of the doc
trine he announces, that he can, without hesitation, curse the opposite
view, furnishes in that case a proof of the verity of his opinions." In

the Anabapt. p. 364, b. " In short, it is well known and not to be denied, that the
Anabaptists have no more mjurious appellation for any one, than to call him a
Scribe." • Justus Menius, Refutation of doctrine of Anabapt. p. 3)2, b ; Spirit of the
Anabapt. p. 358, b. ; Melancthon, Instruction against Anabapt. p. 294.
t Melancthon's Instruction, etc. loc. cit. p. 294.
X ZwingU Elenchus, loc. cit. fol. 29 ; Menius Anabapt. refuted, loc. cit. p. 311.
" Also, how will they prove, that they have been sent by Chnst to gather together
the elect, and to seal them ? They work no signs, to enable us to discern this mis-
«on with certainty."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 443
this sort of demonstration, the Anabaptists certainly far surpassed aU,
who lived and flourished in their time.
J LX. — Hatred against all outward institutions for promoting edification. — Eccle
siastical disciphne. — Manners and customs.
To the ideas, which the Anabaptists had formed respecting the
Church, corresponded their views as to the accidental parts of outward
worship, and the arrangements having reference to the same. If Carl
stadt, in Wittenberg, and Zwingle, in Zurich, had broken down images
and altars, and the latter even had destroyed organs, the Anabaptists,
on their part, declared fhe bared and despoUed temples to be stUl idol-
houses.* Of singing, they entertained nearly the same opinion, as in
former ages Peter de Bruys, who held it to be a worship of Satan. Had
their loquacity not been too great, they would, doubtless, have looked
down upon the raanifestation of the Christian spirit in words, as sorae
thing too outward and too raaterial ; and hereby alone would they have
acted with perfect consistency.
As regards their ecclesiastical discipline and their peculiar customs,
they perfectly bear the impress of the ruling principle of the sect. The
idea of the community of goods, though this was to be completely rea
lized only after the advent of Christ, was in the language at least of
the community provisionally applied ; and, even prior to the establish
ment of the miUennium, a sort of proxiraate application of this princi
ple was to be attempted among those, who, in the mean tirae, professed
the doctrines of the sect. The authority which we have already often
cited, says araong other things : " They have neither father nor mother,
brother nor sister, wife nor children in the flesh, but are mere spiritual
brethren and sisters among one another. Each one says, I am not in
mine, but in our house ; I lie not in mine, but in our bed ; I clothe myself
not with mine, but with our coat. It is not I and Kate my wife, but I
and Kate our sister keep house together. In short, no one has any
thing more of his own, but every thing belongs to us the brethren and
sisters."! They rigidly maintained excommunication, for, no unholy one was
to be in the Church of God. J Their prohibition against assuraing any
* Menius, Spirit of the Anabaptists, loc. cit. p. 354.
t Meuius, Doctrine of Anabapt. refuted, loc. cit. p. 309, b.
X Calvin Instruct, adv. Anabapt. opuscul. p. 476. " Usus excommunicationis,"
said the Anabaptists, " inter omnes esse debet, qui se Christianos profitentur. Qui
baptizati noxam aliquara imprudenter aut castt admittirat, non ex industra, ii secreto
moneri debent semel atque iterum : tertio publice coram toto ceetu exterminandi
8unt. Ut possimus eodem zelo una panem frangere, et cahcem bibere."

444 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
function of magistracy, was in close connexion with this persuasion.
Rulers there were to be none, and universal freedom and equaUty were
to prevaU in all the relations of life. But it is observable, that we not
only find attributed to thera the doctrine, that the rainisters of the gos
pel should alone be invested with civU authority — a proof that magis.
tracy was not wholly despised — buf, we see this doctrine carried out
into practice. We see, raoreover, laymen also at the head of their political
governraent. We need only remind the reader of Thomas MUncer in
Orlaraiinde, and Miilhausen, as also of John of Leyden in MOnster, who
even called hiraself king. These facts stand in twofold contradiction
with the doctrines of the Anabaptists — first, with their principle, that
the office of teaching is coraraon to all Christians ; secondly, with their
just alleged prohibition against undertaking any function of civU power.
These facts, moreover, are easily explained by the utter impossibility of
their realizing such theories in life.
Furthermore, that the Anabaptists should not allow the sword to be
wielded, and accordingly, should hold all warfare to be unlawful, was a
principle that iramediately foUowed from the fundamental tenet of the
sect. Yet again, we are not astonished, when we see thera so often, in
despite of their principles, with arms in their hands, and hear them vo
ciferate the fearful cry against all princes, nobles and proprietors : " Strike
Pinkebank on fhe anvil of Nirarod." Lastly, they declared all oaths
to be illicit ; and in fact among perfect Christians, such as the new
kingdom to be erected by fhem presupposed, no oaths need ever be
taken.*

§ LXI. — The Anabaptists in the form of Mennonites ; — their second period.
» With that bold confidence, which is wont fo characterize fanatics, the
Anabaptists had announced the near approach of fhe thoroughly holy
kingdora of God on earth. But day after day, fhey saw themselves de
ceived in their expectations, so that they at last renounced the chimeri
cal hope. They had not even succeeded in uniting the portion of Chris
tians the raost iraportant, if not in nuraber, yet in internal energy, nor
in bringing about, as preparatory to Christ's coming, the total abolition
of aU civU raagistracy, and the establishraent of a holy theocracy. Nay,
they encountered such a raighty opposition, that the most credulous were
soon obliged to look upon the hopes they had fondly cherished, even in

» Melancthon, " Refutation of some unchristian doctrines put forward by the
Anabaptists,"' loc cit. p. 285. Joarraes Calvmus, loc. cit. p. 493.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 448
this respect, as idle and vain. Hereby vanished that idea, which had
been fhe inmost, vital principle of the sect, and which had constituted
ell its iraportance ; and with it accordingly, it lost all historical interest.
Its members became more modest and more franquU, and more recon-
ciled with the social relations. But as the high, practical object of their
existence had been given up, and a real doctrinal interest they had
never possessed ; the Anabaptists, by degrees, directed the energies, that
sfill survived their first mighty exciteraent, to the settlement and regu
lation of the most insignificant relations of outward life, faUing into the
most whimsical contests on these raatters, and, thereby, exhibiting a
striking contrast to their earlier history, where all the attempts at refor
mation had been conducted on a grand scale. As this second crisis of
their existence was approaching, its introduction was accelerated by
means of a Catholic priest, Menno Siraonis, curate of Wittmarsum,
near Franeker in Friesland, who, in the year 1536, went over to the
Anabaptists ;* and who possessed so little intellect and literary culture
as to join a party ,f whose vital object was allowed to be vain, and yet
enough of these qualities to pass among his fellow-religionists for a very
distinguished personage. He possessed, moreover, a very pious, ener-
getic zeal, and a certain degree of moderation (which, however, was
ne^er evinced towards Catholics) ; so that, by the confidence he had
won, he was enabled to appease the contests of the Anabaptists, to unite
them together, and fo regulate their social relations. They took their
name from him, and have since been usually called Mennonites. He
died in the year 1561.
It is worthy of remark, that the Mennonites call in question theiir
descent frora the earlier Anabaptists. When fhe first intoxication of
fanatacism was over, they forgot all they had perpetrated under its influ
ence ; and what they heard recounted of theraselves, they conceived to
regard sorae other coraraunity. Soraetimes they deduce their origin
from the first Christians ;| sometimes they assert, that quite indepen-
* Hermanni Schyn, historioe Mennonitarum plenoir deductio. Amstelodami, 1729
c. V. p. 116.
t Loc. cit. p. 138, we find a letter of Menno Simonis, wherein he says, he had
written his treatise on baptisra in Gerraan, " nara Latine inscitiae causa non bene
possem." t The good Schyn, in his Historic Mennonitarum plenior Deductio, c. i. Amst.
1729. " Ex primis Christianis, qui ex institutione Dommi nostri Jesu Christi exem-
plisquc Apostolorum, per omnia Christiana ssecula in hunc usque diem inter caetera
dogmata adultorum baptismura docuerunt; et adhuc docent, descendisse (Mennoni-
tas.") Immediately thereupon, it is said : " Inter hos siecuIo undecimo (rather du.
odecimo) emicuerunt Waldenses." What a leap from the first to the twelfth cen
tury!

446 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
dently of aU outward impulse, Menno Siraonis had arrived at his pecu*
Uar opinions through the exclusive study of Holy Writ ;* and some
times again, they allege, that among the first Anabaptists of the six
teenth century, there were men of a calm and moderate tone of think
ing, from whom they were themselves the descendants ; and this asser
tion is not entirely devoid of foundation. "f

§ Lxii. — 'Peculiar doctrines of the Mennonites. Their Church-disciplme.
From the later Symbolical writings of the Anabaptists, it is at the first
sight evident who were their progenitors. We shaU now proceed to
give the main substance of these Confessions, taking as our standard
the Confession of Waterland,J composed in the year 1580, by John
Ries and Lubbert Gerardi, Mennonite preachers ; without, however,
leaving the other unnoticed. After enlarging first on God, the Trinity,
and the incarnation of the Logos, the Confession comes to the doctrine
of the Fall, and says, that the first man, by his transgression of the
Divine precept, had incurred the anger of God, yet had been again
strengthened by consoling promises, in consequence whereof, none of
his descendants are born with the debt of sin, or of penalty.^ This, in
itself, very obscure proposition, derives frora the following doctrines pme
degree of light. It raight be explained, as if the Mennonites denied
original sin. But their opinion is rather, that a sinfulness is transmit
ted from Adam to all his descendants ; but that it is attended with no
debt ; since this is remitted by God's grace. In the fifth article, an
explanation is given respecting the faculties, which man in his fallen
state still possesses ; and it is taught with great propriety, that in the

* Schyn (loC. cit. p. 135) observes, after citmg the account which Menno SimoniB
had given of his going forth out of Babylon, — " Evidentissime constant, ipsum soli
sacrte Scripturae lectione, raeditalione, et illurainalione Spiritus Sancti  ex Papatd
exivisse." But from the very narrative of Menno adduced by Schyn himself, it ap
pears, that the former, even when a Catholic priest, had been in connexion with the
Anabaptists, though he condemned the extravagancies of the Miinster fanatics.
¦f Schyn Historia Mennon. p. 263-5 : here he appeals with justice to some favoura
ble testimonies of Erasraus.
X This Confession is found in Schyn Hist. Menn. c. vii. p. 172. See, m Hist.
Meim. o. IV. p. 78, the historical notices on this Confession.
^ Art iv. p. 175. '• Eousque ut nemo posterorum ipsius respectd hujus restitu-
tionis aut peccati aut culpa reus nascatur." The fourth formulary of the imited
Frieslanders and Germans, which is likewise tolerably full, says in Article iii. "per
eam (inobedientiam) sibi oranibusque suis posteris mortem consciviti, atque ita ex
prffistantissuna mlsserrima factus est creatura." — See Hist. Menn. p. 90.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 447
same way as Adam, before his faU, had the power of giving or of refu
sing admittance to the spirit of evU into his soul ; so after the fall, he
stiU has the power of perceiving the Divine influences, and accordingly
of receiving or rejecting the same ;* and this doctrine other formularies
express to the effect, that fallen man still possesses free-wUl^ Hence
it is clear, that the Mennonites considered those born of Adam, to be
subject to corruption, and as such, to be incapable of producing and
executing anything acceptable to God ; yet stiU they beUeved them
to be possessed of free-will. In consequence of this opinion, they de*
clare theraselves explicitly against an absolute grace of election : they
even devote a special article to the doctrine of Providence, and combat
the Calvinistic opinion, that God worketh evil.
After confessing, moreover, the vicarious atonement of Christ, they
declare, in terras the most clear and unequivocal, that saving faith is
that which " worketh by charity," and that through the same is right
eousness acquired.:]: Righteousness they describe as forgiveness of sins,
on account of Christ's blood, and accordingly, as a transformation of
fhe whole raan ; so that frora a wicked, carnal, avaricious and arrogant
man, he becometh a good, spiritual, generous and humble one ; in a
word, that frora an unrighteous he becoraeth a righteous man.§ What
they now inculcate respecting good works, follows as a raatter of course.
They even teach that the life of the righteous and regenerated raan
should be in perfect correspondency with the Divine law ; if, on his
part, he anxiously looks forward to the future rewards so graciously
promised. II
* Art. V. p 176. " Eidem jam lapso et perverse inerat facultas occurrens et a
Deo oblatum bonum audiendi, admittendi, autrejiciendi."
t The fourth Formdary of the united Frieslanders and Germans, Art. iv. p 90.
" Dominum leque post ac ante lapsura liberara homini rehquisse voluntatem accep-
tandi vel rejiciendi gratiam oblatam," etc.
t Art. XX. de vera fide salvifica. " Omnibus bonis et beneficiis, quae Jesus Chris.
tus, per merita sua, ad peccatorum salutem acquisivit, fruimur gratiose per veram et
vivam fidem, quae per charitatera operatur." The third symbolical writing of the
united Frieslanders and Gerraans called the "Olive Branch," says: "Hinc patet,
fundamentale ccrturaque filiorura Dei criterium et Jesu Christi membrorum esse ve.
ram et salvificam fidem per charitatem opcrantem."
§ Art. xxi. " Per viVam ejusmodi fidem acquiriraus verara justitiam, id est, con
donationem sive reraissionem omnium tam praeteritorum quara prEesenliura peccato
rum, propter sanguuiem effusura Jesu Christi, ut et veram justitiara, quas per Jesum,
co-operante Spuita sancto, abundanter in nos effundittu' vel infunditur (let the reader
here mark the adoption of Catholic phraseology ;) adeo ut ex malis, camahbus, ava-
ris, superbis fiamua boni, spirituales, Uberales, humiles, atque ita ex injustis, revera.
justi." Q Art, xxiii.

¦448 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Of such righteous and regenerated raen, the Church, according to
thera, exclusively consists.* In this hath Christ appointed a teaching
ministry ; for although every beUever be a member of Christ, he is no'
on that account a bishop, priest, or deacon ; for the body of Christ, the
Church, consists of various merabers. Moreover, the rainisters of the
word, though caUed and elected by the ministers of the sarae, must be
eonfirraed through iraposition of hands on the part of the elders. f Lastlyi
they must set forth only what coincides with the written word in the Old
and New Testaraent.
Christ, according fo thera, hath instituted only two sacraments to be
administered by the teachers. The sacraments are outward, sensible
acts, whereby is represented an inward, divine act, that transforms, jus
tifies, spiritually nourishes and sustains man ; while the person receiving
the sacrament testifies thereby his religion, his faith, his penitence, and
his obedience, and binds himself to the observance of the latter. Here,
however, we raust reraark that in this systera, neither by baptisra, nor
by the Lord's Supper, for these are the tvvo sacraments of the Mennon.
ites, is that divine power communicated, which purifies, renovates, and
nourishes the spirit of man. They merely typify what perpetually
occurs through the power, which from Christ and his spirit eternally
streams down on all believers, and only symbolize this constant action
of the Deity. The Mennonites, moreover, baptize only adults, as these
alone are capable of faith and penitence. That their doctrine, respect*
ing original sin, renders infant baptism, in their opinion, unnecessary,
is clear from what has been above stated. | Lastly, Menno Simonis
adopted the washing the feet of the travelling brethren as an indispen
sable cereraony ; and the confession of the united Frieslanders and
Gerraans expressly upholds it, and makes mention of it after the article
of baptisra. §
On irapenitent sinners, excoraraunication, after some brotherly exhor
tations, is rigidly enforced. ||
Obedience to the civil power is enjoined as a religious duty ; yet, sin
gular enough, it is asserted that the exercise of all functions of magis
tracy is unbecoming to the true Christian (aut raale aut plane non con-
venire) ; and that, on this account, he should forbear undertaking oflices
of this kind. The motive assigned is, that Christ instituted no civil
authority, and stUl less did he command his apostles to assume the

• Art. xxiv.
t Art. xxv. — xxviii. See edso formulary of the united Frieslanders and German!,
Art. X. p. 98.
X Art. XXI.— xxxv. } Art. xiii. p. 101. || Art. xxxv. zzzvi.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 449
functions of magistracy. On the contrary, they were invited by him
to iraitate his defenceless life, and to carry his cross, whereby certainly
nothing of earthly grandeur, secular power, or the right of the .sword
was indicated. Moreover, princes and public functionaries are under
thepbligation of waging war, of raarching against eneraies, and depriving
thera of property and life ; but all this is forbidden to the Christian.*
Finally, the Mennonites absolutely proscribe all oaths ; and, in alraost
all their confessions, declare against polygaray.f

§ Lxiii. — Conclusion. Special controversies.
It is beyond all doubt, as is clear from the preceding statement, that
the Mennonites in several articles of doctrine differ considerably from
the first Anabaptists, and that they have thrown off their more fanatical
tenets. The direct revelations from Heaven, communicated to each
individual, have here ceased ; and we find established a distinct order
of ministers, bound by the written word. The violent introduction of
God's kingdom upon earth, associated with the annihilation of the estab.
lished order of society, and of the rights of property, has given way to
the formation of a new inward Ufe, and to a concoraitant wiUingness to
assist the indigent according to ability, and to share every thing with
them in Christian love, without any external community of goods being
required. By the setting forth of a common system of doctrines, raore
over, very unchristian and deraoralizing tenets have been excluded..
But in other respects, we clearly discern in the Mennonite only the
purified Anabaptist. In the view, especially, entertained respecting the
civU power, we see the gliramering of that earlier fanaticism, that would
fain have doomed it to utter destruction, as totally unsuitable to the
Christian. In the prohibition, likewise, to engage in war, and to take
oaths, we see ever shadowed forth that ideal kingdom of Christ, which
through the raediation of the Anabaptists, was to confer a sudden fell-
city on the world.
Yet the establi.shment of a definite system of doctrines, already ad
verted to, must be so understood only in a very limited sense. This
will be apparent frora what foUows, wherein the opposition between the
inhabitants of Waterland and the united Frieslanders and Gerraans, to
which allusion has been raade, wUl be raore closely exarained.
The Mennonites, likewise, soon broke up into different parties ; but

• Art. xxxvu. X Art. xxxviii.
29

430 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
as the sect had lost all high importance, most of the controversies that
.sprang up in its bosom, were utterly insignificant. They divided into
the subtle, and the gross party. Those, who rigidly adhered to the an
cient rule of manners, received fhe former epithet ; the latter was given
to those, who allowed theraselves various raitigations of the rule. The
latter are called frora the district in Holland, which they inhabit, Wa-
terlanders ; the former Flemings and Frieslanders. The gross Men
nonites soon became by far the most numerous ; while the subtle ones
disputed among themselves on the questions, whether or not a Mennon
ite may acquire by purchase a house ; whether it be also lawful for him
to clothe hiraself in fine linen, if he wishes truly to evince the austere
spirit of the sect. These and the like differences faU not within the
scope of our inquiries ; though fhe first mentioned controversy, as a
remnant of the doctrine of the community of goods, and of fhe prohibi
tion to hold property, is deserving of attention, and coincides with the
fact, that fhe rigid Anabaptists frequently wish to be nothing more than
mere farmers of lands.
The UkevalUsts, called after a preacher of Friesland, who maintained
the proposition, that Judas, and the high-priests, who condemned Christ,
as they only executed the divine decrees, have been adraitted to salva.
tion, can here only receive a passing notice. More iraportant are the
differences on the question, whether or not an individual, whatever
may be his doctrinal views — should he even be a Socinian — can be re
ceived as a meraber of the community, or can be permanently so con
sidered 1 This question was connected with that respecting the value
and iraportance of public forraularies, to which the Mennonites on the
whole, though at different tiraes they published several confessions,
were never very favourably disposed. Those, who declared for abso
lute freedom, were called Remonstrants, and also Galenists, from their
leader, a physician of that name, at Amsterdam. Their opponents, the
Apostools, were likewise called after a physician in their communion
of that name, who resided at Amsterdam. But in proportion as tbe
Mennonites unreflectingly opened a door to foreign influences, their old
respectable, though often pedantic, earnestness, and the religious hallow
of life by degrees declined. Or rather is not this phenomenon— this
aversion to a settled definite system of doctrine — a reranant of that one-
sided practical tendency, which characterized the sect in its very origin ;
and in pursuance of which it tolerated in its bosom the raost various,
and the most opposite views on the raost iraportant dogmas of faith ?
The original spirit, accordingly, would here have only returned.
So rauch respecting the Mennonites or Anabaptists. With them the

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 451
•baptists are not to be confounded. Such are those Puritans in Eng
land named, who with respect to infant baptism hold opinions sirailar
to those of the Mennonites, without, however, being on other points
distinguishable from the English Calvinists of that party. From the
.year 1633 they have formed a separate community-.

CHAFTElt It
THE aUAKERS.

§• LXIV. — Some historical preliminary remarks.
tVnOEVER would undertake fhe task of tracing historically the graJ'
ual developraent of Protestant Sectarianisra, should after the Anabap-
lists treat of the Schwenkfeldians, who though they appeared only a few
years later than the forraer, yet, as exaggerated spiritualists, stand con
siderably higher. He would next have to describe sorae individual on'
thusiasts, as well as larger communities of this description, that made
their appearance in the latter half of the sixteenth, and the former half
of the seventeenth century ; and then only could he turn to the Qua
kers, who went to the farthest verge of the boldest spiritualism, and
were to be outdone only by contradictions. Among the first Anabap
tists, the effort of a false spiritualism took quite an eccentric course,
and the pure spiritual life, which they would fain have introduced, rested
on the expectation of an extraordinary, marvellous introduction of a
higher order of things into this lower world. All the ordinary relations
of earthly life were menaced with destruction, and that delicate subtle
kingdom of the spirit, which they aimed at, was in raanifold ways trou
bled by a very gross political spirit ; for earthly bonds cannot be, v/ith
out violence, suddenly dissevered, nor, at once, replaced by snpermun-
danities. This spiritual kingdora was founded in a very carnal man
ner, and the raeans proved destructive to the end. The supersensual
principle, also, even where it had attained, in this sect, to any consoli
dation, was not presented in its purity and integrity ; since the sacra
ment was retained, not as the channel and conductor, but raerely as the
erablera of divine graces. Moreover, araong the doctrines of this sect,
there were some which mere accident had annexed to its stem, or
which at least had not naturally grown out of its root.
Far more developed appears the spiritualism of Schwenkfeld, whose
peculiarities, however, we shall not be able to point out ; as no remains
of his sect have survived down to our days. But in its most complete
form doth this false spiritualism manifest itself, as we before said, among
the Quakers, who honour as their founder George Fox, a shoemaker
and shepherd, born at Drayton, in Leicestershire, in the year 1621, and

, EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c. 453
who departed this life in the year 1690. Araong the Quakers we dis
cover an interior piety, which, when we can succeed in forgetting, now
and then, the utter perverseness of the whole system, marvellously
cheers and refreshes, and even, at times, deeply raoves the raind, though
not, by any raeans, in the sarae degree as our own better mysticism.
Moreover, we find araong thera a conscious and firra prosecution of the
point of view they have once adopted — a consistency extremely pleas
ing and cheering, which flinches from no consequences, and has given
to Quakerism such an advantage over the orthodox Protestantism,
where the most cryipg dissonances are to be found. All parts stand in
the most harmonious proportion with each other, forming a fine con
nected whole, whose architectural perfection leaves little to be desired ;
and to the Catholic, especiaUy, who is forced by his own reUgious sys
tera to look every where for internal keeping and consistency, appears
entitled to respect. Consistency is not, indeed, truth itself, and doth
not even supply its place ; but a systera of doctrine is ever false, which
includes parts inconsistent with the whole. In George Fox, the founder
of the sect, we doubtless do not find this internal harraony of system,
nor the-transparent clearness of doctrine determined thereby ; but that
the system was capable of attaining to this harraony, lay in the vei"y
nature of the fundamental idea, out of which it sprang. A very re
markable and araiable trait of Quakerism is that avoidance of every
kind of asperity, which so frequently shocks us inthe orthodox Protest
antism. The manner, too, wherein the Quakers treat all the better
phenoraena of religion and morality iu the times anterior to Christianity,
evinces great tenderness of feeling; nor is this less manifest in their
rejection of the Calvinistic doctrine of absolute predestination. Here,
also, the Quaker strives to emulate the Catholic ; but the capital error
of Quakerisra is, that though in itself a fair, deeply conceived and har
monious system, it stands in the most direct opposition to historical
Christianity, and as far as in it lies, annihilates the same ; for this the
following exposition of its principles will clearly show. This task we will
now undertake, taking for our guide the Apology by Barclay — the most
celebrated writer among the Quakers, and whose book enjoys an alraost
symbolical authority ; for, thev have not put forth a regular confession
ef faith.*

• Roberti Barclai TheologicB vere Christianae Apologia, edit, sec, Lond. 1729.
With Barclay, however, we shall always corapare the following work, entitled : " A
portraiture of Quakerism, taken from a view of the moral education, discipline, pe
culiar custoras, rehgious principles of the society of friends." By Thoraas Clark
son, Esq., in three vols., 3d edit., Lond., 1807. The author was, for a long time, in

4.54 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Before, however, we make our readers acquainted with the system
of this remarkable religious community, we must lay before thera the
motives, which induced its first propagators to establish a peculiar sect.
Like many other religious parties, in the deeply convulsed age of Crom
weU, they particularly raissed in the High Church of England, the free
expansion of the spirit of piety — religious life, and inferior warmth, and
unction. Every thing in this Church appeared to them torpid and
petrified. The Divine Spirit, which heretofore had filled the Church,
was denied, and out of the living congregation had been banished, and
confined to the dead word of Scripture ; and the boast of the Reformers,
that this dead word would infallibly shed a heavenly light over its
readers, and enkindle thera with a holy fire, was refuted by every day's-
e.xperience. The established worship appeared void and meaningless
in the eyes of the Quakers, and seemed to consist of nothing raore than
a dry, cheerless repetition of forms and hymns, composed though they
were in the vernacular tongue. And in fact, when the real presence
of the Saviour had been rejected, and the sacrifice been abolished,
nothing more remained, which directly and by itself could fill the sus
ceptible soul with devotion and sacred awe, or exalt, solace and bless if.
The act was bereaved of its very soul ; it became an earthly thing, and
though rational, yet unspiritual and uninspiring. All now depended on
the fact, whether the preacher were able fo draw words of life from
the inraost core of a soul, filled with the Divine Spirit, and were enabled
to edify by a heavenly power the assembled believers, and by the com
bined aniraation, clearness, and depth of his discourses to initiate them
more and more in the mysteries of Christ's kingdom. But it was here
precisely the longings of the Quakers were most cruelly deceived ; so
that not unfrequently they would interrupt the sermons of the AngUcan
ministers, and in their revolted feeUngs would bid " the man of wood"
descend frora the pulpit. Even the raost spiritual-rainded preacher is
not raaster of celestial unction and illuraination ; — days and weeks of
internal dryness and desolation will occur ; — and no human art can
supply the gift from above. The majority of preachers, alas I abound
neither in divine nor human energy ; — others possess not even the
wiU ; and thus it cannot fail to happen, that the greater part of ser
mons attain not by one-half their end, and very many fall even far short
of it. This the Quakers deeply felt ; and in default of an act in the
pubUc worship, which by its intrinsic worth could seize possession of
the soul, they rejected the whole established service, as an institution
habits of intercourse with the Quakers ; and findmg them vigorous opponents to the
slave-trade, to the suppression whereof Clarkson devoted aU his energies, he came to
entertain a great affectlMi for them. This book must be used with caution.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 45.5
incapable of satisfying the higher wants of the religious man. To this
we must add the numberless disputes, which then convulsed the Angli
can Church. Opinions crowded upon opinions, each seeking its founda
tion in Holy Writ ; yet not one being able to prove by that standard
its own truth, or the untenableness of the^ opposite systeras ; and no
living human authority, invested with a divine sanction, was anywhere
recognised. It appeared to the Quakers, that the truths of Christianity
were in imrainent danger ; and that, if they had no other support than
Holy Writ, they raust perish in the struggle of parties. Thus they
receded from every external institution — not only from the Church and
public worship, but, in a great degree, from Scripture itself; and, for
what they held to be vital fruths of salvation, they sought an inde
structible basis in the immediate inspiration of a creative, inward light,
which, without any olher medium, was to be, if not the exclusive, yet the
principal source of nurture to the spirit.
§ LXV. — Religious systera of the Quakers. The Inward Light.
While avoiding all explanation as to the nature of the Paradisaic
man,* the Quakers hold, that frora 'the faUen Adara, a gerra of death,
a seed of sin, has been scattered over all his posterity ; for the word
" original sin" they will not employ, nor indeed any other technical
expression unsanctioned by the usage of Scripture. Hereby all raen
were entirely bereaved of the Divine iraage, which, however, the
Quakers do not particularize ; and this bereaveraent, according to thera,
must be understood by the menaced death, which they thus conceive
to have been only spiritual. "|" So long, however, as the universal seed
of death, through a conscious and active culture of the same, beareth
no fruits ; it constitutes, they continue, no guUt, and therefore by no

* Barclaii Apolog. theolog. Christ, p. 70. " Curiosas ilias notiones, quas plerique
decent, de statd Adse ante lapsum, prsetereo," etc.
t L. c. " Heec mors non fuit externa, seu dissdutio exterioris hominis ; nam quoad
hanc non mortuus est, nisi raultos post annos. Ita oportet esse mortem quoad spiri
tualem vitam et comraunionem cum Deo." A vahd conclusion, forsooth! What a
betrayal, too, of ignorance in philology ! On all this Clarkson furnishes us with
more details. Of the consequences which Adam's sin produced first in him, and
then in all his posterity, Clarkson says as follows : " In the same manner as distem
per occasions animal Ufe to droop, and to lose its powers, and finally to cease ; so un
righteousness, or his rebellion against this Divine light of the Spirit, that was within
hira, occasioned a dissolution of his Spiritual feelings and perceptions ; for he becarae
dead, as it were, in consequence, as to any knowledge of God, or enjoyment of His
presence." See the above cited work, p. 115.

456 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
means entails damnation. On this account, unconscious infants wore
not subject to eternal punishment.*
In a very reraarkable way do these sectaries represent the work of
the atonement after Adam's fall. God doth not raerely promise a future
Redeemer : — He not only guideth the general and particular destinies
of individuals and nations, in order to prepare them for the great day
of the incarnate deity ; — He doth not merely vouchsafe to raise up
among all nations wise men, teachers of their contemporaries in word
and deed, great law-givers and rulers. No! from the Logos himself,
who personaUy appeareth in the centre of history, and for the sake of
his raerits, a creative vital principle eraanates through aU ages, as from
the centre of a circle the rays are adraitted to every point of the cir
cumference ; so that the breath of Christ's Spirit blows forward and
backward, and leaveth no one untouched. To this they refer the passage
in St. John s Gospel : " He is the true Light, which enlighteneth every
man, that cometh into tbe world. "j
We must not here think of St. Justin's trite fi.t,a nZ ^iytv (seed of the
Logos) Aoyo" i^irtf (Ita Tixiv ; for, by this is understood the gerra of rationa-
lily, the iraage of God, the copy of the Logos in every man — in one
word, the higher nature of man himself. But, under the aforesaid light,
which emanates from Christ to every raeraber of the human race, the
Quakers understand a divine energy, to be superadded only to man's
higher nature.:):

* Barclaius, p. 70. " Quod Deus hoc malum infantibus non imputat, donee se
illi actualiter pecando conjungant," &c. The whole is thus su'mraed up in p 80.
"Confitcraur igitur, seraen peccati ab Adarao ad omnes homines transmitti (licet
nemini imputatum, donee peccando sese illi actualiter jungat,) in quo semine omni
bus occasionem peeeandi prsbuit, et origo omnium malarum actionem, et cogitation-
um in cordibus hominum est; 6<))'v, nempe <^'auaT^,, (ut v. ad Rom. habet :) i. e. in qu&
raorte omnes peccavere. Hoc enira peccati seraen frequenter in Scriptura raors dici
tur, et corpus mortiferum, quum re vera mors sit ad vitam justitite ct sanctitatis;
ideoque hoc semen, et quod ex eo fit, dicitur homo vetus, vetus Adam, in quo omnes
peccant. Proinde hoc nomine ad significandum peccatura illud utimur, ct non origi.
nali peccato, cujus phrasis in Scriptura nulla fit raentio, et sub qua excogitata, ct ut
hoc verbo utar, mscripturah barbarisrao, haec peccati infantibus imputatio inter Chris
tianos intrusa est."
t Barclaius, p. 126. "Hie locus nobis ita favet, ut a quibusdam Quakerorum
textus nuncupetur ; luculenter enim nostram propositionem deraonstrat, ut vix vel
consequcntia vel deductione egeat."
X Clarkson in the above-cited work, p. 117. diiFcrs from Barclay. According to
the former, " God did not entirely cease from bestowing His Spirit upon Adam's pos.
terity." According to the latter, Christianity is quite a ne-w manifestation of grace
on God's part, in order to regenerate man ; " a new visitation of life, the object of

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 457
Around this vital principle, dispensed by Christ, the eternal friend of
man, and pervading the human race, through aU the extent of space
and of time, revolve all the thoughts and feelings of the Quakers : — to
this is all piety and devotional awe referred, and hence, we must make
ourselves particularly acquainted with the description, which they give
of it. They apply to it various denominations, such as "spiritual,
celestial, and invisible principle and organ, wherein the Father, Son,
and Spirit dwell ; the body and the blood of Christ, wherewith aU the
saints are nourished to eternal Ufe ;" " the internal light," on which
account the Quakers are called the Friends of Light, or simply Friends
— (a title which is the most gratifying to them) — " the inward Christ,"
" the seed of Christ," " grace," " internal revelation," and so forth.*
Frora fhe lips of the Quakers, these words ever resounded; but the
Anglicans would by no means understand thera. Barclay bitterly
complains of this, and says, that while formerly those only were held
to be Christians, who, as St. Paul (in Roraans viii. 9) teacheth, had
" the Spirit of Christ," or, as he expresses hiraself in the same place
(viii. 14), " those only are the sons of God, who are led by the Spirit
of God ;" no one now any longer recognizes the sovereign necessity of
this possession by the Spirit.f It was objected to the Quakers, that
they held man to be of a divine essence, or every individual to be
Christ. Others again interpreted their language, as signifying by the
which was to restore men, through Jesus Christ, to their original innocence or con
dition." * Loc. cit. p. 106. " Hoc semine, gratia, verbo Dei et lumine, quo unumquemque
illurainari diciraus, ejusque mensurara aliquara habere in ordine ad salutera, et quod
hominis pertinacia et vdvratatis ejus raalignitate resist!, extingui, vdnerari, premi,
occidi et crucifidi potest, minirae intelligimus propriam essentiam et naturam Dei in
se prfficise sumtam, qu£B in partes et mensuras non est divisibilis .... sed intelligi
mus spirituale, cseleste, et invisibile prineipium et organum, in quo Deus. ut est Pater,
Filius et Spiritus, habitat ; cujus divinse et glorioste vitse mensura omnibus inest,
sicut semen, quod ex natura sua omnes ad bonum invitat et inclinat, et hoc voca
mus vehiculum Dei, spirituale Christi corpus, camera et sanguinem Christi, quEE ex
ccelo venere, et de quibus omnes sancti coraedunt, et nutriuntur in vitara aetemam.
Et sicut contra omnia facta mala hoo lumen et semen testatur, ita ab eis etiam cruci-
figitur, extinguitur, et occiditur ; et a malo fugit et abhorret, quod naturae suae noxium
et contrarium est. Et quum hoc nunquam separetur k Deo et Christo, sed ubi est,
ibi etiam Deus et Christus est in illo invdutus et velatus : eo igitur respectd, ubi illi
resistitur, Deus dicitur resist) et deprimi et Christus crucifigi et occidi, et sicut etiara
recipitur in corde, et efFectura suum naturalem et propriura producere non irapeditur,
Christus formatur et suscilatur in corde. . . . Hic est Christus ille inleraus, de quo
nos tantum et tara ssepe loqui et declarare audimur, ubique prffidicantes ilium, et
omnes hortantes, ut in lumen credant, illique obediant, ut Christum in semetipsis
natura et exsuscitatum noscaut, ab omni peocato illos liberantem."
+ Loc. cit. p. 4.

458 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
inward light, merely the conscience, the reason, or the religious feeling
of man. All these allegations they denied, in replying that the prin
ciple in question is not the essence of the Deity itself, but an energy
and an organ of God ; whereby divine life, as from a grain of seed, is
expanded in man. They added, they did not even compare theraselves
with Christ, as in him the Godhead dwelt bodily ; but they stood in
the same relation to hira, as the vine-branch to the vine-stem, which
diffuses vigour through every part. Lastly, the inward light, they said,
is not a human faculty, since in quality it is distinct from fhe nature
of man.* The real cause of these mistakes, we shall point out below.

§ Lxvi. — Continuation of the same subject. Effects of the Inward Light.
We now proceed to describe the workings of this inward light.
Every man hath a day of visitation, (diem ¦visitaiionis)-f on which God
graciously approacheth to him, and will awaken and enUghten him, in
order to forra Christ within his soul. Frora this no one is excepted,
but yet no one is forced : (for predestination there is none, nor irre
sistibly working grace.):]: The instrument which God employs for this
end, is the inward revelation, which, without any sort of medium —
without outward words or signs, endeavours to implant moral and
religious ideas in the soul of man, and hath sufficient power to make
them living.^ This inward light our authority continues to say, all the

* Loc. cit. p. 107-8.
t Loc. cit. p. 102. "Primo quod Deus, qui ex infinito euo araore filium suum in
mundura raisit, qui pro oranibus raortera gustavit, unicuique, sive Judseo, sive Gentili,
sive Turcse, sive Seythee, sive Indo, sive Barbaro . . . certum diem et visitationis
tempus dederit, quo die et tempore possibile est illis servari et beneficii Christi mortis
participes fieri. Secundo, quod in eum finem Deus eommunicaverit et unicuique
homini dederit mensuram quandam luminis filii sui, mensuram gratise, seu manifes.
tationera Spiritfls. . . . Tertio, quod Deus per hoc lumen et semen invitet omnes, et
singulos vocet, sed et arguat, et hortetur illos, cumque illis quasi disceptet in ordme
ad salutem."
X Barclay says of Calvin's doctrine, p. 84 : " Quam maxime Deo injuriosa est,
quia ilium peccati authorem efficit, quo nihd naturEe sua raagis contrarium esse
potest. Fateor hujus doctrina; affirmatores hanc consequentiara negare ; sed hoc
nihil est, nisi pura illusio, cum, ita diserte ex doctrina sua pendeat, nee minus ridicu-
lura sit, quam si quis pertinaciter negaret, unura et duo facere tria." Compare
Clarkson, vol ii. c. viii. Relig. p. 216. " This doctrine is contrary to the doctrmes
promulgated by the Evangelists and Apostles, and particularly contrary to those of
St. Paul himself, from whom it is principally taken."
§ Loc. cit p. 19. " Oportet igitur fateri, hoc esse Sanctorum fidei objectum prin-
cipale et originale, quod sine hoc nulla certa et firma fides esse potest. Et saepe hoc

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 459
ancient philosophers and teachers of nations attest — this all the higher
efforts, which we meet with in universal history, avouch (revelatio
objectiva.) This inward word, whereby God speaketh to every man, and mani-
festeth Hiraself to hira, is, through the external revelation and the
comraunication of Holy Writ, not rendered unnecessary, either for
mankind in general, or even for such as are acquainted with God's
outward word. That that raysterious language of God is requisite for
opening the sense of Scripture, and for admitting its contents into our
soul, ought never fo be doubted, says Barclay, (this is the revelatio sub-
jeciiva ;) " for the things that are of God, no raan knoweth, but the
Spirit of God ; and, therefore, have we received the Spirit that is of
God, that we raay know the things that are given us frora God." —
(1 Cor. n. V. 11-12.)* But even in the Christian Church, the objective
revelation is indispensable, and is to be considered as the primary
source of truth, and Scripture as a revelation of a subordinate kind J
for the source, from which Scripture itself flowed, must surely stand
higher than the latter. It is by the testimony of the Spirit, Holy Writ
itself first acquires authority ; and, therefore, is the Spirit the first
source of all knowledge and truth. In one word, continue the Quakers,
if it be true, that it is through the Spirit alone we are to arrive at the
real knowledge of God ; that through Him we are to be led info all
truth, and are to be taught all things ; then it is the Spirit and not Scrip-

uno fides et producitur et nutrittu: absque extemis iUis et vlsibilibus suppleraentis, ut
in perraultis sacrarura literarum exemplis apparet : ubi solum dicitur, et loquutus est
Dominus et verbum Domini tab factum est." P. 29 : " Sed sunt qui fatentur Spirit
ura hodie afflare et ducere sanctos, sed hoc esse subjective  non autem objec.
tive affirmant, i. e. exparte subjecti illuminando intdlectura ad credendam veritatem
in Scriptura declaratam, sed non prtestando eam veritatem objective, sibi tanquam
objectum, .... Haec opinio, licet priori magis tolerabilis, non tamen veritatem attin-
git: primo quia multae veritates sunt, quae ut singdos respicitmt, in Scripture non
oihnine invenientur, ut sequent! thesi ostendetur."
* Loo. cit. p, 48. " Licet igitur fatcamur, scripturas scripta esse et divina et
coelestia, quorum usus ecclesiae et solatio plenus et perutilis est, nee non laudemus
Deum, quod mira. Providentia scripta ilia servaverit ita pura et incorrupta 
nihilorainus taraen lUas principalem originem oranis veritatis et scientiae, et prima-
riam adaequatam fidei et raorum regulam nominare non possuraus, quoniara oportes
principalem veritatis originera esse ipsam veritatem, i. e. cujus certitudo et authoritas
e^ aho non pendet. Cum de aranis alieujus vel fluminis aqua dubitamus, ad fontem
recurrimus, quo reperto, ibi sistimus, nara ultra progredi non possumus, quia nimirum
ille ex visceribus terrae oritur et scaturit, qure inscratabilia sunt. Ita scripta et dicta
omnium ad EEtemum verbum adducenda sunt, cui si concordent, ibi sistimus ; nam
verbum illud semper a Deo procedit, et proeessit, per quod inscrutabilis Dei sapientia,
et consilium non investigaudum, in Dei corde conceptum, nobis revelatum est."

460 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
ture, which is the foundation, and the source of aU knowledge and all
truth, and the priraary rule of faith.*
Moreover, it must be observed, that on very many relations of the
spiritual life, and on numerous particulars, which are of great import
ance. Holy Writ imparts no instruction, and is, in part, incapable of so
doing ; that very many men are unable to read it even in their native
tongue : that at all events, there is not one in a thousand conversant
with tho original languages, and that there are not three texts on which
the interpretations of the learned agree. Under such circurastances,
should raan be abandoned to hiraself, or to other raen ? What doubts
doth not even the history of the Biblical text give rise to ? And how
can a man convince hirasblf from Scripture, that any disputed book —
for instance, the epistle of Janies — is canonical 1 Because, perhaps,
it is not in contradiction with other canonical books? Then every
cs.say, which is not opposed fo Scripture, may be admitted into the
Canon ! No alternative remains, but either to return to Rome, and
receive, at the hands of her infallible Church, the Scriptural Canon, or
to revere the Holy Spirit, as the first and principal fountain of truths.f
The Quakers, however, faded not to observe, that the revelations of
the inward light, coraraunicated to each individual, are not in contra
diction with the outward word of Scripture, and even irapart no other
truths of salvation ; but that they are only an eternally new, iraraediate
raanifestation of the sarae old gospel.:]: By this, however, they would
by no raeans set up the Bible, as a check and a touchstone to the teach
ing of the inward light; for this would be again to make Scripture the
arbiter of tbe Spirit, whose work it only is.
§ Lxvii. — Continuation of the sarae subject — Of Justification and Sanctification —
Perfect fulfilraent of the Law.
The workings of this divine and inward light in man, as hitherto
described, refer exclusively to the infusion of religious and ethical know-
Loc. cit. p. 49. " Illud, quod non est mihi regula in ipsas scripturas credendo,
non est mihi priraaria, adasquata fidei et raorum regula : sed scriptura nee est, nee
esse potest mihi regula illius fidei, qua ipsi credo ; ergo," etc.
t Loc. eit. p. 67. " Exempli gratia, quomodo potest Protestans alicui neganti Ja
cobi epistolam esse canonicam per scripturam probare ?  Ad hanc igitur angustiam
necessario res deducta est, vel affirraare, quod noviraus eara esse authenticam eodem
spiritus testimonio, in cordibus nostris, quo scripta erat: vel Romam reverti dicendo,
traditione novimus ecclesiam eara in canonem rctdisse, et ecclesiam infallibilem
esse; medium, si quis possit, inveniat."
X Loc. cit. p. 33, 61, 63. " Distinguimus inter revelationem novi Evangelii, et
novam revelationem boni antiqui Evangelii, hanc affirraamus, illam vero negamus."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 4^1
I into the breast of man : but this Ught is also the source of all
pious life. The day of visitation, graciously vouchsafed by the Al
mighty to every man, is to be the turning-point of his whole history, is,
in every respect, inwardly to renew him, — in a word, is to establish his
regeneration. On this matter of regeneration and of justification be
fore God, the Quakers (if we except the different view they take of the
relation between the Divine and the huraan operations in this work,
whereof we shall have occasion to speak later,) very nearly coincide
with the Catholic Church. And yet this coincidence they wUl not
allow ; and in virtue of deeply irabibed prejudices, taken in with their
mothers' milk, they persuade theraselves, that it is only in outward
works, such as pilgriraages — fasting — the mechanical repetition of forras
of prayer — raere outward alras-deeds — 'the use of the sacraments with
out any interior emotions — the gaining of indulgences, which the
Quakers confound with forgiveness of sins — that Catholics think they
render themselves acceptable to God. Under this misconception the
Quakers assert, that by denying the value and meritoriousness of such
like pious exercises, Luther h^, doubtless, rendered a great service;
but in this, as in other points, they contend he is more to be praised for
what he destroyed, than for what he built up.* For Luther and the
Protestants, they say, have gone to the other extreme ; as they have
denied the necessity of moral works for justification, and made the
latter consist, not in internal newness and sanctification, but solely in
the belief in the forgiveness of sins.f

* Loc. cit. p 159. " Nobis rainime dubium est, doctrinara hanc fuisse et adhuc
esse in ecclesia Roraana raagnopere vitiatara ; licet adversarii nostri, quibus, melio-
ribus argumentis carentibus, sspissime mendacia refugium et asylum sunt, non
dubitarunt hoc respectu, nobis Papismi stigma inurere, sed quam fals6 postea patebit,
 Nam in hoo, sicut in multis aliis, magis laudandus est (Lutherus) in iis, quo8 ex
Babylone evertit, quam qu^B ipse aedificavit."
t Loc. cit. p. 161. Barclay distinguishes between a two.fold redemption, — an ob
jective and a subjective one. By the former, he understannds the " redemptio a
Christo peracta in corpore suocrucifixo extra nos, et quel horao, prout in lapstl stat, in
salutis capacitate ponitur et in se transmissam habet mensurara aliquara efficaciae,
virtute spiritus vita3, et gratiae istius, quEc in Christo Jesu erat, quse quisi donum Dci
potens est superare et eradicare malum illud semen, quo naturaliter, ut in lapsd staraus,
fermentamur. — Secunda hac cognoscimus potentiam hanc in actum reductam, qui
non resistentes, sed recipientes mortis ejus fructum, videHcet luraen, spiritura, et grati
am Christi in nobis revelatam, obtinemus et possidemus veram, realem, et internam re.
demptionem a potestate et preevalentia iniquitatis, sicque evadiraus vere et realiter re-
dempti etjustificati, unde ad sensibilem cum Deo unionem et araicitiam venimus. — Per
hanc justificationem Jesu Christi minimfe intelligimus simpliciter bona opera, etiam qua
tenus a Spiritd Sancto fiunt ; ea enim, ut verfe affirmant Protcstantes, effectus potius

462 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
The Quakers describe Justification as the stamping of Christ on out
souls — as the Christ born and engendered within us, frora whom good
works spring, as fruits from tbe bearing tree ; — as the inward birth
within us, which bringeth forth righteousness and sanctification, puri
fieth and delivereth us from the power of evil, conquers and swallows
up corrupt nature, and restores us to unity and coraraunion with God.
The doctrine of the Friends of Light, who, on this point, were truly
enlightened, is, as every one must perceive, only the Catholic doctrine
couched in other language j yet, when they wish to express themselves
with perfect clearness, they make use of precisely the same formulas,
as the Council of Trent.* Even the word " merit" is not unknown to
them — the necessity of good works for salvation is openly asserted ; the
possibUity of the fulfilment of the law is demonstrated ; and even the
possibility of a total exemption from sin maintained.!

justificationis, quam causa sunt. Sed intelligimus formationem Christi in nobis, Christ.
um natura et productura in nobis, a quo bona opera naturaliter procedunt, sicut fructus
ab arbore fructiferS. : intemus iste partus in liobis, justitiam in nobis producens et
sanctitatem, ille est qui nos justificat, quocura contraria el corrupta natura  remota
«t separata est."
* Loc. cit. p. 165. Barclay here speaks of a " causa procurans," instead of a
" causa meritoria :" then he uses the formida, " causa formalis" and " formaliter jus
tificatus," whereby he understands the sarae as Catholics do.
t Loc. cit. 1. p. 167. "Denique, licet reraissioncra peccatorum cdlocemus in
justitia et obedientia a Christo in came sua peracta, quod ad causam ejusprocuran-
tera attinet, et licet nos ipsos formaliter justificatos reputcmus per Jesura Christum,
intus forraatura,et in nobis productura, non possumus tamen, sicut quidam (?) Pro-
testantea incauti fecere, bona opera a justificatione excludere ; nam licet propria prof.
ter ea non justificemur, tamen in illis justificamur, et necessaria sunt, quasi causa
sine qu^ non " (by which the Quakers understand something different from the Ma.
jorists) p. 168. "Cum bona opera necessario et naturaliter procedant ipartfthoc,
sicut calor ab igne, ideb absolute necessaria sunt ad justificationem, quasi causa sine
qua non, licet non illud propter quod, taraen id m quo justificamur, et sine quo non
possuraus justifieari : et quaravis non smt raeritoria, neque Deum nobis debitorem
reddant, tameu necessarit) acceptat et remuneratur ea, quia naturiB suae contrarium
est, quod a Spiritti suo provenit, denegare. Et quia opera talia pura et perfecta esse
possunt, cura a pure et sancto partft proveniant, ideoque eorum sententia falsa est,
et veritati contraria, qui aiunt, sanctissiraa sanctormn opera esse poUuta, et peccati
macua linquinata : nam bona ilia opera, de quibus loquiraur, non sunt ea opera legis
qua; a^ostt^us a justificatione excludit." P. 167. " Licet non expediat dicere, quod
meritoria sint, quia tamen Deus ea remuneratur, patres ecclesia; non dubitarunt verbo
" meritum" uti, quo etiam forte nostrum quidam usi sunt sensd raoderato, sednulla-
tenus Pontificiorura figmentis  faventes." A singular strife forsooth, with the
Papists, when the Quakers so express themselves respecting good works ! Compare
with this again page 195. Moreover the forraula "tn iiii* " justifieari, instead of
"propta ilia," is very feUcitons, for the latter expression is used in respect to the

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 463
Clarkson says, " The Quakers make but small distinction, and not
at all such a one, as many other Christians, between sanctification and
justification." " Faith and works," observes Richard Claridge, " are
both included in our complete justification. Whoso is justified, is also
in fhe determined degree sanctified ; and in so far as he is sanctified,
so far is he justified, and no further. The justification, whereof I speak,
rendereth us righteous, or pious and virtuous through the continued aid,
Working, and activity of the Holy Spirit. With the same yearning aa
we sigh after the continued assistance of the Divine Spirit, and are
prepared to evince the efficacy of His operations within us, shall we
inwardly discern, that our justification is in proportion to our sancti
fication. For, as fhe latter is progressively developed, according to the
measure of our confiding obedience fo the revelation, and the infusion
of grace, light, and the Spirit of God ; so shall we not fail to perceive
and feel the progress of our justification."* In respect to the degree
which sanctification in this life can attain to, Clarkson, in fuU concur
rence with Barclay, gives the following as the sentiment of the Quakers.
" The Spirit of God, who redeemeth, frora the poUutions of the world,
and implanteth in man a new heart, is regarded, by the Quakers, as so
powerful in ifs operations, as to be able to exalt him to perfection. But)
they would not, on this account, compare this perfection with that of
God, because the former is capable of progression. This only would
they assert, that in the state of internal newness, we can observe the
Divine comraandments ; as Holy Writ relateth of Noah and Moses,"
(Gen. vi. 9,) of Job (i. 8,) andof Zachary and Elizabeth, (Luke i. 6,)

merits of Christ. Yet is the latter also scriptural, and the distinction between causa
meritoria and causa formalis obviates all confusion. The question whether it be
possible for a perfect Cliristian to abstain entirely from all sin, is answered in a special
section. The thesis defended, runs as follows : — P. 197 : " In quibus sancta hfec et
unmacdata genitura plene producta est, corpus peccati et mortis crucifigitur, et arao-
ritur, cordaque eorum veritati subjecta evadunt et unita : ita ut nulhs Diaboli sugges-
tionibus et tentationibus pareant, et liberentur ab actuah peocato et legem Dei trans.
grediendo, eoque respectti perfecti sunt : ista tamen perfectio semper increraentum
admittit, remanetque semper aliqua. ex parte possibiHtas peeeandi, ubi animus non
diligentissimfe et vigilantissimfe ad Deum attendit.'
? Vd. ii. Rel. c. xiii. p. 319. From Henry Tuke, a Quaker, the following pas-
sage is also cited, p. 321 : " By this view of justification, we conceive the apparently
different sentiments of the apostles, Paul and James, are reconciled. Neither of them
says, that faith alone, or works alone, are the cause df our being justified ; but as
one of them asserts the necessity of faith, and the other that of works, for cfFecting
this great object, a clear and convincrag proof is afforded, that both contribute to our
justification ; and that faith without works, and works without faith, are equally
dead."

464 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
" that they were righteous before God, walking in aU the coramatid-
ments and justifications of the Lord without blarae."*
Hence, we ought not to be surprised, if the sarae objections nre
urged against the Quakers, as against the Catholics ; that they set up
their own righteousness in the room of the righteousness of Chiist.
They reply to these objections, in the same way also, as Catholics are
wont to do.

(j Lxvili. — Continuation of the sarae subject.— -Doctrine on the Sacramenta.
In the most consistent application of their fundamental principles,
fhe Quakers convert the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's supper,
into purely interior, and raerely spiritual actions and ordinances. The
Christian, they contend, needs no otherseal to his inheritance («^natera)
— no other pledge of his sonship, but the Spirit. To introduce outward
acts of this kind is, in their estimation, entirely to misapprehend the reh
gion of the Spirit, which Christianity undoubtedly is ; to renew a Jewish
ceremonial service, and to relapse into Judaisra ; nay, to approximate to
Heathenism ; for such mere outward things, as we call sacramenta,
have sprung out of the sarae spirit as the Heathen worship ; whereas,
Judaisra observed holy rites prescribed by God. Accordingly, the Qua
kers assert, that the sacraments are not even to be considered as pledg
es of Divine promise left by Christ to his Church — nay, not even as
erablems and aids to the remerabrance of spiritual and historical facts
-—but as absolute misconceptions of actions and expressions of Christ
— misconceptions absolutely inexcusable, for, they were the offspring of
a Heathenish sense.
The baptism, which Christ ordained, is, in their opinion, raerely the
inward baptism of fire and the Spirit, whose existence renders utterly
superfluous the watery baptism of John. Nay, they were even of opin
ion, that the water extinguishes the fire— -that attention to the external
rite draws off the eye from the interior, which is alone necessary. Bap
tism, accordingly, in their opinion, is nothing more than tho ablution
and purification of the spirit frora the stains of sin, and the walking in
newness of lifc.f The Scriptural proof for the proposition, that Christ
* Vol ii. c. vii. srct. ii p. 193. " This spiril of God ... . is so powerful, in its
operations, as to be able to lead him to perfection."
t Loc. cit p. 3il. "Sicut unus est Deus, et una fides, ita et unum baptisma,
non quo carnis sordes abjiciuntur, sed stipulaiio bonje conscientiEE apud Deum per
resurrectioncra Jesu Christi, et hoc baptisma est quid sanctum ct ppirituale, scilicet
baptisma SpiritCis et ignis, per quud cunsopuiti sumus Christo, ut a. peccatis alluti et
purgati novam vitara arabulemus."

BETWEKSr CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 465
has instituted no outward act of baptism, is managed with uncommon
art, and is full of the most striking, singular, and forced constructions.
Moreover, the writings of Faustus Socinus, were much used by Barclay
in this article of doctrine"? although, by this remark, I do not wish the
reader to conceive it to be ray opinion, that George Fox, the unlearned
founder of the sect, had any knowledge of Socinian writings, and was
anywise led by the sarae to the adoption of his views. Being a shep
herd and shoemaker, such literary productions were totally inaccessi
ble, or at least unknown to him : but his really great, though perverted,
mind was led only by the general connexion of ideas to his pecuUar
view of baptism. But Barclay, who undertook to demonstrate Fox's
propositions, made, for this end, in the article in question, very evident
use of the writings of Socinus.
The body and blood of the Lord is, according to the belief of the
Quakers, perfectly identical with the divine and heavenly, the spiritual
ly vivifying seed — with the inward light, whereof we had occasion to
speak above.* They corapare the words in John i. 4, " In him was
the life, and the Ufe was the light of raen ;" with the other text (vi. 50),
" 1 am the living bread, which carae down from heaven, and the bread,
which I wUl give, is my flesh for the Ufe of the world ;'' and they ac
cordingly take " light," " life," " bread of life," and "flesh of Christ,"
and the inward Christ as synonymous terms. The Lord's supper, there
fore, they describe as the inward participation of the interior man,
in the inward and spiritual body of Christ, whereby the soul Uveth to
God, and man is united with the Deity, and remaineth in communion
with Him.f
§ LXIX — Contmuation of the sarae subject. — Rejection of a distinct order of
ministry . — Preaching. — Public worship.
Carrying out their fundamental principle stiU further, and graduaUy
drawing into its circle every thing else, the Quakers lay down, respect
ing public worship, the following raaxiras. No act of divine service is
acceptable to God, which is produced and consummated by human ac-
* Loc. cit. p. 380. " Corpus igitur hoc, et caro et sanguis Christi intelligendus
est do divino et coelesti semine ante dicto " P. 378. " Si quseratur quid sit illud
corpus, quid sit ille sanguis ? Respondeo, coeleste illud semen, divina ilia el spiritu
ali substantia, hoc est vehiculum illud, seu spirituale corpus, quo hominibus vitam et
<alutem communicat."
+ Loc. cit. p. 383. " Ita interna participatio est interioris horainis de hoc interne et
spirituali cor|)ore Christi, quo anima Deo vivit, et quo homo Deo imitur, et cum eo
eocietatem et communionem habet."
30

466 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
tivity and importunity : the Divine Spirit— the inward Ught, must be
immediately efiicacious, and alone determine, move, and conduct raan.
Hence, prayer and the praise of God, as well as exhortatory, instruct
ive, and solacing discourses, must be the pure result of inspirations,
which occur in the right cases, when, and where, and in so far as the
utility of man requires.* Hence, very important consequences en
sue. 1. There is no distinct order of ministry, because the members of
such an order, receive from men the qualification for their functions,
whereas, this qualification can proceed only frora the Spirit. By the
institution of specific teachers, fhe huraan principle in the Church, re
ceived not only a preponderance over the Divine, but entirely superse
ded the same. The preaching of fhe Gospel is degraded info an art — ¦
nay, into a trade, which is learned and practised by long preparatory
training ; though it should be only an outpouring of high inspirations.
To enable the preachers of the Church to say but soraething, they are
supplied with a multitude of notices, gathered from the four quarters of
Ihe world, and often bearing a Heathenish stamp. And such things
are to supply, or to communicate the Spirit of God ! Hence, the dis
courses of such preachers are no words of life — -no manifestations of
higher power ; and as they proceed not from a heart filled with God,
they are incapable of rousing any one. It is a dry, dead, unfruitful
ministry, which we have in the Church.f Even vicious men, deeply
* Loc. cit. p. 237. " Omnis verus cultus, et Deo grains, oblatus est spiritti sno
movcnte interne, ac iraraediate ducente, qui nee locis, nee teraporibus, nee personiu
priescriptis liraitatur : nam licet scraper nobis colendus sit, quod oporteat indesinenter
timere coram illo, tamen, quoad significationem externam in precibus, elogiis, aut
prasdicationibus, non licet ea perficere nostra voluntate, ubi et quando nos volumus ;
sed ubi et quando eo ducimur mota et secretis inspirationibus Spiritus Dei in cordibuB
nostris ; quoe Deus exaudit et acceptat, qui nunquam deest, nos ad precandum mo
vere, quando expedlt, cujus ille solus est judex idoneus. Omnis ergo alius cultus, elo-
gia, preces sive praedicationes, quas propria voluntate suique intempestivitate homi
nes peragunt, quas et ordiri et finire ad libitum possunt, perficere vel non perficere, ut
ipsismet videtur, sive formae praescriptfe sint, sicut Liturgia, etc. sive preces ex tem
pore per vim facultatemque naturalem conceptae, omnes ad traum sunt cdtus super-
stitiosus, Greece i%ik'j%eii(rxiix, et idoldatria abominabiUs in conspecttl Dei, qute nunc
in die spiritualis resurrectionis ejus deneganda et rejicienda sunt."
t XjOc. cit. p. 275. . . . " Et magna quidem causa est, quod tam aridum, mor
tuum, siccura, et sterile rainisterium, quo popdi ek sterilitate ferraentantur, hodie tan-
toperfc abundat, et in nationibus etiara Protestantibus diffunditur, ita ut praedicatio et
cultus eorura, sicut et integra conversatio a Pontificia vix discemi possit aliquo vivaci
zelo, aut spuitCis vutute eos comitante, sed mera differentia quarundam notionum et
ceremoniarum extemarum." P. 229 ; " Vita, vis, ac virtus verse religionis inter eoe
multum periit, eademque, ut plurimum, quE in ecclesia. Romana mors, aterilitas, sic-
citae, et acaipia in mmisterio eorum reperitur."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 467
Jjlunged in sins, can become and reraain preachers, provided only they
have a human calling ! Frora such men the Spirit cannot come out,
because they are void of its influence. Lastly, through the establish«.
ment of a separate ministry, the preaching of the doctrine of salvation,
Was debased into an instrum.ent to the meanest ends ; since, rich reve*.
nues and certain advantages of outward rank and social position, were
connected with it. The Lord wiU have another kind of preaching 5
and whosoever, young or old, raan or woman, high or low, learned or
unlearned^ shall be raoved by the Spirit, may, and ought to preach, pray,
and praise God publicly in the congregation.*
2. Another equaUy natural consequence from the aforesaid premises,
is, that all set forms of liturgy are proscribed ; as every prayer must
spring immediately out of a heart, moved and incited by God. The
meetings for divine service are, according to Barclay, solemnized in
the following manner. In a plain, unadorned room, filled only with
benches, in which no outward object can excite any religious feelings,
the Friends of Light sit in the profoundest silence, in order to withdraw
the mind from all earthly distractions, to free it from all connexion
with the relations of every-day life, and by this inward recollectedness,
to fit it for hearing the voice of heaven. The spirit, however, in this
abstraction from all outward things, ought not to strive after independ
ence ; nay, it must renounce itself, and act quite passively, in order to
receive, in their untroubled purity, the Divine inspirations. This so
lemn stillness raay last a half or whole hour, without experiencing any
tither interruption, save the sighs or groans of sorae souls agitated by
the Spirit, until, at last, some member shall feel himself moved, by heav
en, to communicate in a discourse or a prayer, according as the Spirit
directs, the inward revelations he has received. It may even happen,
that the raeeting separates, vrithout any individual having been moved
to hold a discourse. Yet, nevertheless, the Quakers assure us, that
their souls have, in the raeantirae, been saturated, and their hearts filled,
with raysterious feeUngs of the Divine power and the Divine Spiritf

• The English Protestants required of the Quakers, that, aa they despised the ex
istmg mmistry of teachers, they should prove their mission by miracles, as, at an
earlier period, the German Protestants had demanded of the Anabaptists. Their an
swer was the same, as that which Luther had given to the Catholics. Barclay, p.
245, " Yet, in order to preserve the purity of doctrine, the Quakers saw themselves
'compelled, by degrees, to admit a kind of itinerant teachers, and even to exercise a
superintendence over them, by means of human ordinances." See Clarkson, vol. ii.
Rel. 0. x.-xi. p. 217, 276.
t Barclaius, p. 297, " Imo stepe accidit integras quasdam conventiones sine ver.
¦be transactas fuisse, attamen animae nostrae magnopere satiatae, et corda mire secreto

468 EXPOSITION OP DOCTRINAL DiEFERENCfiS
It also sometimes happens, that, when, the images of thfis lower worlJ
wiU not depart from a soul, that is looking forward to the manifestation
of life (viim appariiionem expeciare,) a violent, convulsive struggle en
sues, wherein the powers of darkness wrestle with those of light, Uke
Esau and Jacobin the womb of Rebecca. The inward conflict (-prcBli'
um) is outwardly evineed in the heaviest, most deep-felt groans, iff
tremblings, in the most convulsive movements of the whole body ; un
til at last victory inclines to the side of light, an d, in the excess of lir-
minous outpourings, manifests itself with holy jubilee. In virtue of the
union of aU the members of a community in one body, the agitations of
an individual, particularly if he be one of the more excited, are fre
quently iraparted to the whole congregation ;• so that (to use the words
of Barclay) " a most striking, and fearfully sublirae scene is displayed,
which of itself has irresistibly drawn raany over to our society, before
they had obtained any clear insight into our peculiar doctrines." From
such trembling and quaking, the Quakers have derived their name.'"
In this way, they think to get rid of all superstition in cereraonies, and
of aU man's wisdom, which might so easily intrude into divine service,
to abandon all things to inspiration from heaven, and to establish a pure
worship of God in Spirit and in truth. f
divinae virtutis et Spiritds sensu repleta fuerunt, quae virtus de vase in vas transmiss*
fuerit." Clarkson gives the following accoimt (vol. ii. Rel. c. xii. p. 279 :) — " For
this reason (that men are to worship God only,- when they feel a right disposition to-
do it,) when they enter into their meetings, they use no hturgy or foim of prayer-
Such a form would be raade up of the words of man's wisdora. Neither do they
deliver any sermons that have been previously conceived or written down. Neither
do they begin their service immediately afler they are seated. But when they «if
down, Ihey wait in silence, as the apostles were commanded to do. They endeavour
to be calm and coraposed. They take no thought as to what they shall say. Thuy
endeavour to avoid, on the other hand, all activity of the imagination and everything
that rises from the will of man. The creature is thus brought to be passive, and the
spiritual faculty to be disencumbered', so thaf it can receive and attend to the spiritual
language of the Creator. If. during this vacation from all mental activity, no im
pression should be given to them, they say nothing. If impression should be afforded
10 them, but no impdse to oral delivery, they remain equally silent. But if, on the
other band, impressions are given to thera, with an impulse to utterance, they deliver
to the congregation, as faithfully as ihey can, the copies of the several images, which
they conceive to be painted upon their minds."
* Loc. cit. p. 3IJU. Olhers give other explanations ; Clarkson, for instance, (vol.
i, Introduct. vii.) says with other writers, "George Fox, on one occasion, called up
on a judge to quake before the word of God ; whereupon the judge called him a Qua
ker." X Loc. cit. p. 297. " Hujus cultas forma itanudaest et omni mundana et externi
gloria expers, ut omnem occasionem abscindat, quo hominis sapientia exerceatur, ne
que ibi superstitio et idoldatria locum habet." — Compare pp. 293, 304.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 469

^ i,xx. — Peculiar manners and customs of the Quakers.
We must now draw the attention of the reader to certain peculiari
ties of the Quakers, which have reference merely to civil life, and to
certain habits and customs in their social intercourse. They refuse
taking oaths to the civil magistrate, (to whom, however, except in mat
ters of religion, they confess they owe obedience;) and for conscience'
sake, they abstain from aU military service. The austere spirit of
¦Quakerism totally interdicts games of hazard, since a being, endowed
with the faculty of thinking, should be asharaed of them, and still more,
because they are beneath the dignity of a Christian. With equal rea
son they add., that such like games awaken passions, that obstruct the
reception of reUgious impressions, and establish a habit imraoral in itself.
Not content with this, they declare theraselves averse from games of
every kind ; — a declaration which we should be disposed to praise, did
they not conderan, without restriction, all holding a different opinion in
this raatter. On the other hand, they are much to be eensured for
banishing, from their society, all rausic, vocal as well as instrumental.
This, indeed, wiU not surprise us, when we consider that they employ
neither kind of rausic for awakening a.nd eherishing religious emotions
(§ 68 ;) and that any regard to the refining of the feelings, and to the
culture of the sensibilities in general, still less any appreciation of mu
sic as an art, was not of course to be expected from the Quakers.
Attendance at all theatrical shows, which on account of their connexion
with idolatry, and of their gross nature, not seldom shocking every tender
feeling, were formerly interdicted in the ancient Church during her con
flict with Heathenism:;* and which from their, at all events, equivocal

* Lact. Instit. div. i. hb. vi. c. xx. " Si homicidium nullo raodo facere licet, nee
dnteresse omnino conceditur, ne conscientiam perfundat dlus cruor  comicT fa-
bulae de stupris virginum loquuntur, aut amoribus meretricum : et quo magis sunt
¦eloquentee, qui flagitia ilia finxerunt, feo magis sentcntiarum elegantia persuadent, et
facilius inhaerent audientiura raeraoriae versus numerosi et ornati. Item tragicae his-
toriae subjiciunt oculis parricidia, et incesta regum malorum et cothumata scelrea de-
monstrant. Histrionum quoque impudicissimi motus, quid aliud nisi libidines docent
et instigant ? Quorum enervata corpora, et in muliehreni incessum habitumque raol-
lita, impudicasfffiminasinhonestis gestibus mentiuntur. Quid de mimis loquar cor-
ruptelarum praeferentibus disciplinam ? Qui docent adulteria, dum fingunt, et simu-
iatis erudiunt ad vera. Quid juvenes aut virgines faciant: cura et fieri sine pudore,
etspectari libenter ab omnibus cernunt? Admonentur utique, quid facere possint,
ct inflammantur libidine, qus aspectu raaxirae concitatur : ac se quisque pro sexCi in
illis imaginibus praefigurat, probantque ilia, dum rident," etc. When Louis XIV., an
admuer of the theatre, once asked Bossuet, whether attendance at the same were per-

470 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
moral tendency, have, in subsequent ages, been ever regarded with a
suspicious eye by raen of piety ; attendance at all theatrical shows,
we say, is in the comraunity of Quakers likewise not tolerated. In
this particular they were certainly led by a good spirit. With the pro
gress of intellectual cultivation (to view the subject only from a lower
point of view,) theatrical entertainments will certainly disappear, or at
least will be abandoned to those, who are not more enlightened than
the men, who flatter theraselves with being, in our time, the represen
tatives of civilization. Were dignity and amenity of manners coupled
with sincerity — were various knowledge and inteUectual conversation
more prevalent in the social circles, than fhey really are, many of those,
who may now be termed passionate friends and patrons of the theatre,
would prefer to derive the enjoyment they so highly value, rather from
real life, than from the so troublous sphere of fiction, and would leave
such entertainments to the uneducated or less educated, who think
thereby to raise themselves above the crowd. In fact, nothing is more
fit to e.xhibit, in all its nakedness, the utter insignificancy and void of
conversation in cities, than frequent attendance at the theatre. The
Quakers wUl one day be praised as fhe leaders of those, who, like them,
but not precisely from the same motives, renounce the theatre, as they
would a child's doll, and with indifference abandon its entertainments
to the populace.* Even dances of every kind and without restriction,
are, with most undue severity, considered an abomination by the
Quakers, and not merely novels and romances of a certain description,
but this whole class of poetry is banished from their society. It is easy
to perceive that many things, which Catholic and Lutheran, as well as
Calvinistic moralists disapprove, or even positively forbid, and which
an incalculable number of individuals in all these religious communities
wiU not sanction, is made a fundaraental maxim in the Quaker sect,
and with the more facUity ; for on one hand it comprehends only a few
thousand men, and on the other, it is confined alraost exclu-sively to the
lower classes of society, to whom many things, condemned by Quaker
ism, remain naturally inaccessible.
Of a different nature are the foUowing traits, which contain obscure
indications of a levelUng system of social equaUty, and evince the strong
tinge of democracy, peculiar to this sect. The usual salutations, "your
Majesty," " your. Lordship," "your Reverence," the Quakers ascribe

mitted, the prelate replied, " there are incontrovertible reasons against, but great ex
amples for it."
* Clarkson (in Mor. Educ. vd. i. u. 1. ix. p. 1-158,) sets forth and defends the va
rious customs we have been describing.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 471
to an unchristian arrogance, to a vain, worldly spirit. They believe
the greeting, " your obedient servant," and the like, sprang out of
hypocrisy, and they firmly act up to this belief in life : as, in the same
way, they hold it to be a sin to fake off the hat to any one, to address
him in the plural nuraber, and the like. They deraand, fo^, all these
things, proofs from Holy Writ, without which they will not sanction
them, especially as the Spirit has never inspired them to doff the hat,
to salute the King as Majesty, and the like.*

§ LXXI. — Remarks on the doctrinal peculiarities of the Quakers.
With the utmost impartiality have we stated the doctrinal system of
the Quakers, without being in anywise prepossessed against thera ; nay,
we encountered them with a sort of predilection ; for their earnest
striving after an interior religion of the spirit and the heart — their fear
less opposition to the spirit of the world, even where that opposition is
petty and pedantic — their longing after the true celestial nourishment,
and fhe inward unction by the Divine Spirit — their consciousness that,
in Christ, a power is iraparted, powerful enough not only to solace and
to tranquillize man, but truly to deliver hira frora sin, and to sanctify
him — all this has filled us with sentiraents of the sincerest respect. We
think, therefore, we are in a condition to investigate, with unpreju
diced eye, the errors, whereon the system of Quakerism is founded.
The view of the Quakers respecting the relation of the Heathens to
God, is, doubtless, far more tender than that of the Lutherans and the
Calvinists — it originated in a purer and less narrow-minded perception
of the moral phenomena in the pagan world. But, their peculiar ex
planation of the better eleraents in Heathenisra, proceeded from a de
sire to set aside the opposition, which many facts in the history of fallen
huraanity, as well as the dictates of Christian feeling, raise against
their views, as to the consequences of the fall ; without, however, that
explanation being at all well-founded in itself, or rising above the level
of a mere arbitrary hypothesis. The description, which the Quakers
give of fallen man, is, in itself, quite the sarae, as that set forth by the
Lutheran formularies; and, therefore, the history of man will irapose
upon thera, the solution of the sarae difficulties. But the raode, wherein
they solved this problera, effaced the characteristic distinction between
the Christian and the unchristian periods ; and, on this account, it
was, in the very beginning, objected to the Quakers, that by " the Di-

* Clarkson, vol. i. Peculiar Customs, ch. i. vii. p. 257.386.

472 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
vine seed," " the inward light," fhey understood merely the light of
natural Reason, and did uot at all believe, that the divine image in man,
had been injured through the fall, and was again renovated in Christ
Jesus only. And, in fact, raaturer reflection subsequently led many
Quakers to such an opinion. The injustice of the reproach made to
them, consisted only herein, that they were charged with an intentional
deception of their contemporaries — with a crafty concealment of their
real opinion ; whereas, it should have been only pointed out to them,
that their views led necessarily to the assuraption, that subsequently, as
well as prior to his fall, man enjoyed precisely the sarae spiritual
gifts ; so that redemption in Christ was thereby rendered totally un
necessary. In truth, it would be very difficult, nay, impossible, for fhe Quakers
to give a satisfactory answer to the question, whence it coracth to pass,
that since the advent of Christ, the victory of light, over all fhe powers
of darkness, hath, in all respects, been so decisively prominent ; if, be
fore his incarnation, Christ had already worked in the souls of all men
in the same raysterious way, as since his ascension into heaven ? The *
reason, wherefore the worship of nature hath ceased among Christians,
polytheism disappeared, and the whole spiritual life of man become so
far other than it is, among strangers to their creed, must, according to
the view of Quakerisra, reraain a perpetual enigraa. In any change,
that in the lapse of ages may have occurred in the constitution of human
nature, the Quakers cannot look for the cause of this phenoraenon ; be
cause we can in nowise discover, wherefore huraan nature, before the
incarnation of the Logos, was worse and raore unsusceptible of reform,
than afterwards. But the mysterious, inward divine principle, which
in Christ renovated humanity, cannot have brought about the great
eventful era in history, because, according to the genuine doctrine of
Quakerism, this principle ever evinced its operation before Christ also,
and in the sarae raode, as at present.* To the knowledge of the incar-

* Barclay on this matter has a very reraarkable passage (p. 145,) where he appepls
to a Scriptural text. Frora this we may see how the Quakers applied .Scripture to
their own views :— " Ad ea argumenta, quibus hactenus probatum est, omnes mensu
ram salutiferae gratiae habere, unura addara, idque observatd dignissimum, quod exi-
mium illud Apostoli Pauli ad Titum dictum est ii. II, ' Illuxit gratia ilia salutifcra
omnibus hominibus, erudiens nos, ut abnegata impietate et raundanis cupiditatibus,
teraperanter et juste et pie vivamus in praesenti sa3culo ;' quo luculentius nihil esse
potest, nam utramque controversiae partem comprehendit. Primo, declarat hanc non
esse naturalem gratiam, seu vim, cum plane dicat esse salutiferara. Secundo non
ait, paucis illuxisse, sed oranibus. Fructus etiara ejus, quam efficax sit, declarat,
cura totum hominis officium comprehendat ; erudit nos prirao abnegare impletatem et

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 473
nation of the Son of God, and of the works he wrought, during his
earthly rainistry, the Quakers could not be disposed to ascribe the
great transformation of the world ; for it is precisely fo the history of
Jesus Christ, and to an acquaintance with the same, that they attach
no very great iraportance. And by the adoption of what they call
the objective revelation, they hold preaching and Scripture, consi-
dered in themselves, to be everywhere superfluous ;* since the inward
light breaks out of itself, and is described not only as the first, buf in
case of necessity, as even -the only source of truths, which (in their es
sence) are the very sarae, that Jesus outwardly proclaimed, and com
mitted to his Church.f The later Quakers appear likewise fo feel the
obvious difficulty here adverted to ; whether it be, that they themselves
first observed it, or whether their attention were drawn to it by others.
Be this as it raay, Clarkson remarks in a note, " The Quakers believe
that this Spirit was more plentifully diffusefl, and that greater gifts were
given to raen, after Jesus was glorified, than before." To this conces
sion, they were driven by the force of evidence; but in their systera we
cannot find a place, where it can possess an organic connexion with
fhe whole. It is no ulterior developraent of what already exists, but
an unsuitable interpolation. f
mundanas cupiditates; et deinde totum nos docet officium, primo, temperanter
vivere, quod compreliendit aequitatem, justitiara, et honestatera, et ea, quae ad proxi
mum spectant. Et denique, pie, quod comprehendit sanctitatem, pietatem, et devo-
tionera, eaque omnia, quas ad Dei cultum, et officium hominis erga Deura spectant.
Nihil ergo ab homine requiritur, vel ei necessarium est, quod haec gratia non dneeat."
" Barcl. lib. 1. p. 110. "Credimus enim, quod sicut omnes participes sunt mali
fructus Adas lapsus, cum malo illo semine, quod per eum illis communicatum est,
proni et ad malum proclives sint, licet millies mille Adae sint ignari, et quomodo pro
hibitum fructum ederit, ita multi possint sentire divini hujus et sancti seminis virtu
tem, eaqu a malo ad bonum converti, licet de Christi in terrara adventfi ; per cujus
obedientiae et passionis beneficium hac fruantur, prorsus ignari sint."
t Lib. 1. p. SO. ^ Quod nunc sub litera venit illud est, quod postremo loco affirra-
avimus, scil. idem perraanere et esse Sanctorura fidei objectum in hanc usque diera."
It is not uninteresting to notice the Scriptural proofs, which Barclay adduces in sup
port of his views. For instance, he says : " Si fides una est, unum etiam est fidei
objectum. Sed fides una est ; ergo. Quod fides una sit, ipsa Apostoli verba pnibant
ad Eph. iv. 5." Then he goes on: "Si quis adrainistrationis objiciat diversitatem :
Respondeo, hoc nullo modo objectum spectat. nara idem Apostolus, ubi ter hanc
varietatem nominat, 1 Co. xii. 4, 5, 6, ad idem objectum semper recurrit. Sic ' idem
Spiritus idem Dominus, idem Deus.' Praeterea nisi idem et nobis et illis erit fidei
objectum, tunc Deus aliqtio alio modo cognosceretur, quam spiritti ; sed hoc absur
dum ; Ergo." And so he goes on at considerable length. And the inward Christ
again naturally teaches, that ihcse texts must be so interpreted ; although, according
to all rules of interpretation, they bear quite a different sense.
t Clarkson, vol. ii. Rel. ch. vii. sect 2, p. 187. The Quakers believe, however.

474 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
If, frora what has been said, it foUows, that the confradictions, where
in the orthodox Protestantisra is involved with incontrovertible facts in
human history, the Quakers only exchange for other contradictions
against that history ; we must now demonstrate that their theory is, in
itself, perfectly unsatisfactory, and does not even escape those difficul.
ties, which they principally aim at avoiding. They wish, as we have
already perceived, to escape, in the first place, frora the Calvinistic doc
trine of absolute predestination, by asserting that to every raan the
inward light is proffered, and a day of visitation vouchsafed. They
would fain, at the same time, escape from Pelagianisra and serai-Pela-
gianism, which they ascribe to the Catholic Church, by deducing all
the in an^'wise laudable acts that the heathen world once achieved, and
still achieves, not in any degree from the spiritual nature of man, but
solely from the inward word — the inward light."' Thereby they would
fain show, thaf fallen man h3.s every cause for humility ; as he posses
ses nothing, not fhe least quality, which, in respect to divine things,
can be active or efficacious ; as every thing must be accounted for,
solely and exclusively, by the inward Christ in each raan. Alas ! the
Quakers, in wishing to attain one thing, render the other irapossible ; so
that their combination is utterly untenable. Fallen man, according to
thera, has been so utterly bereaved of all higher faculties and powers,
that the good which fakes place in him, is wrought so very independently
of him, that not even in his wiU, stUl less by means of his will, doth
grace consumraate it.f
The inward Ught of the Quakers is that sense for divine things,
which in Adara all raankind had lost ; yet by this, they understand not
merely the restoration of a pre-existing, though torpid and paralyzed
faculty, to its original activity, but the entirely new creation of the
faculty itself In one word, it is the faculfy of knowledge and of will
in reference to divine things. Hence Barclay c.aUs the inward light a
new substance imparted to man, in opposition to an accidental one ;
and employs the expression, man receives thereby the aptitude for
that this spirit was more plentifully diffused, and that greater gifts were given to
men, after Jesus was glorified, than before.
* Loc. cit. p. 103. '' Conlradicit et enervat falsam Pelagianorura, Seraipelagia-
norura et Socinianorura doctrinam, qui naturae lumen exaltant et liberum hominis
arbitrium ; dura omnino naturalem hominem a vel minima in salute sua parte exclu
dit, uUo opere, actH vel mold suo, quoad prirao vivificetur et actueter spiritfi Dei."
t Loc. cit. p. 189. " Posteriora opera (sc. gratiae seu evangelii) sunt spiritas gra
tiae in corde, quae secundura intemara et spiritualera legera facta sunt ; quee nee in
hominis voluntate, nee viribus ejus fiunt, sed per vim spirittis Christi in nobis." What
then doth Barclay raean, when he says at tiraes, that Divine grace is designed to
resuscitate and excite anew the human faculties ?

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 475
righteousness.* It raust be obvious to every one, that the Quakers
have only here renewed the old Lutheran opinion respecting the divine
image, — its utter obliteration through the fall, and its restoration in
Christ. There is here, as is evident, but this difference, — that the
Quakers fix this restoration of the divine iraage immediately after the
faU, and ascribe to it a far greater power against sin. Hereby they be
came involved in the same inextricable difficulties, with which the Lu
theran theory had to contend. They set the natural man too low, to
enable them to escape from the doctrine of absolute predestination.
They say, indeed, like the Lutherans, man is able to resist, or not to
resist, divine grace. But if, by his resistance, he is to incur guUt, he
must be allowed the faculty of independently discerning, by the aid of
grace, that a truth presented to hira conduces to his salvation : he must,
accordingly, embrace this truth with his own will. But such faculties
the Quakers deny to fallen man ; and therefore they have no alterna
tive, than, either to refer to God alone, the overcoraing of resistance,
and thereby to subscribe to the tenet of absolute predestination, which
they so strongly condemn in Calvin ; or to irapute it to accident alone,
when grace triuraphs or is resisted. But accident is only another word
for fate.f
* Lib. 1. p. 72. " Quis enim cum aliqua rationis specie autumare potest, tale cor
ex se habere potestatem, aut aptitudinem, vel aptura esse hominem ad justitiara per-
ducendi?" It is worthy of remark, that the Protestants in their controversy with
the Quakers, appealed to the text in Romans (c. xi. 14,) in the very same sense, as
Cathohcs had once done in arguing with the Protestants. But Barclay says, at p.
530 : — " Respondeo, ' haec natura,' intelligi nee debet nee potest de natura propria
hominis, sed de natura spirituali, quae procedit a semine Dei in homine  Ita, ut
bene concludamus, naturara, cujus hoc loco, raeminet Apostolos, qua gentes dicuntur
facere ea, qu^ legis sunt, non esse comraunera hominura naturara, sed spiritualem
naturara, quae ex opere spiritualis et justiE legis in corde scriptae procedit : fateor eos,
qui alteram extreraura tenent. quando hoc testimonio a Socinianis et Pelagianis (si
cut etiam a nostris, quando hoc testimonio ostendiraus, quoraodo ex gentibus aliqui
luraine Christi in corde salutera adepti sunt) prerauntur, et ad angustias reducuntur,
respondere, quasdam reliquias ccelestis imaginis in Adamo relictas esse. Sed cum
hoc absque probatione affirraatum sit, ita et dietis suis alibi contradicit, quo etiam
causam suam amittunt."  P. 108: "Non intelligimus hanc gratiam, hoc luraen
et semen esse accidens, ut plerique inepte faciunt, sed credimus esse realem, spiritu
alem substantiam, quara aniraa hominis apprehendere et sentire potest."
t Clarkson on this, as on other points, differs considerably from Barclay. He en.
deavours not only to supply the gaps in the system of the Quakers, but to render that
systera more scriptural, and thereby more rational, than it is in itself; but in this
attempt he introduces not only contradictions into it, but very harsh discords into his
own productions. He may, nevertheless, record the views of more sensible, yet in
consistent Quakers. Clarkson fills up Barclay's statement in respect to the condition
of the Paradisaic Adam ; because to this subject, willingly or unwillingly, men must

476 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Upon the so. called objective revelation, we have raany doubts to sug
gest ; thev are chieflv as follows. — .^11 outward special Revelations, and
even the Incarnation of the Logos, are, by that objective Revelation
rendered, not only superfluous, but even inexplicable. For, if God's
Spirit is to reveal iraraediately, to every raan, the fit raeasure of truths,
— if thus the voice of God is, in this way, to go forth to all raen, what
ever recur. In imitation of Catholics, Clarkson distinguishes a two-fold image of
Gnd in man — a r motor, and a more proximate one, yet in a different sense from us.
The former is the human mind, called "the mental understanding — the power of
Reason." (Revelation, etc., vol ii. c. i. p 114) This faculty he describes as that,
" by raeans of which raan was enabled to guide himself in his temporal concerns.''
thus there would not exist in man, as such, any faculty having reference to God and
to the supermundane. The proper image of God in man Clarkson then describes,
as a spiritual faculty independent of huraan Reason, (the words understanding,
powf r of discernment, and the rest, are, in his opinion, synonymous terms. )^ This
faculty is a portion of the very life of the Divino Spirit — an emanation from Divine
Life, wherebv man discerns his relation to God, and keeps up coraraunion with his
Creator. " But he gave to raan at the same time, independently of his own intellect
orundcrstandinsf, a spiritual faculty, or a portion of the life of his own Spirit, to re.
side in hira This gift occasioned m.in to become more immediately, as it is express
ed, the image of the Alraighty. It set him above the animal and rational part of
his nature. It raade hira spiritually. rainded. It enabled hira to know his duty to
God, and to hold a heavenly intercourse with his Maker. . . . Adam, then, the (irst
man, independently of his rational faculties, received from the Almighty into hisown
breast, such an emanation from the life of His Spirit  " According to these
statements, it cannot, in the first place, be absolutely asserted, that, through the
Fall, man has lost the Divine image ; for, even after that catastrophe, he would still
retain the mental powers having reference to earthly life — the remoter image of God,
and even, according to Clarkson (as above stated,) still a part of the likeness unto
God, in the ftrict sense. Secondly, these stateraents would very well explain the
cause, wherefore it is possible for the Quakers to deduce entirely, from divine inspi.
rations, all true religious instruction — all genuine prayer, etc. ; for, according to this
system, nn human faculty would have any relation whatsoever to superrairadane
things. Thirdly, this theory would agree very well wilh that of Barclay ; it would,
indeed, contain raore than the latter had stated; but nothing which he might not
have advanced, without introducing any change in his principles. But, araong the
above raentioned propositions, expressions like the fd'owing, occur : " It (the image
of God in the strict sense) made him know things not intelligible solely by his reason."
The things of earth, therefore, would not be the only sphere, within which reason
would have to move ; but only it could not, by its unaided efforts, apprehend God.
But, if the co.operation of reason were necessary to the knowledge of God ; then it
would be every where indispensable ; and thereby the whole view of the Quakers,
respecting preaching and the rest, would fall to the ground ; and yet, Clarkson puts
forward as Quakerish, the very same views as Barclay. Lastly, if the activity of
Eeason be unavoidable, when the knowledge of God is concerned, so is the coopera.
tion of the will equally indispensable, when the love of God is the question. But
this, according to Barclay, the Quakers will by no means admit ; while Clarkson
asserts the contrary. — Ibid. p. 188.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 47'?
end can He still propose in His special Revelations ? If all men bs
prophets, then, a distinct prophetic ministry must needs be abolished*
And in fact, in order to prove their so-called general objective Revela
tion, the Quakers appeal, with the greatest boldness, to the particular
revelations, which were vouchsafed to the prophets of old.
But, it is principally to the self-consciousness of man, and the laws
and conditions, under which it is formed and unfolded, fhe doctrines of
Quakerisra run counter. It can be deraonstrated, that, without an intel
lectual excitation, and an extraneous influenee, the self-consciousness of
man cannot be developed — a law which, so far from being set aside, is
directly confirmed, by the historical Revelations of God. Hence, if
man is to attain to the true knowledge of the Deity, the inward,
Divine Light must ever be cissociated with the outward Light ; the ex
ternal raust correspond to the internal Revelation ; and the inward in-
spiration can be understood, only by means of the outward communi
cation. Even in respect to the prophets, and envoys of God, whora the
Christian recognises, it can be proved, that, their inward iUurainationa
were not without all external msdia, — whether the Spirit revealing
Hiraself to them assumed a sensible shape ; or whether He annexed
His revelations to long pre-existing doctrines, and expectations. It is
only the Son of God, whora we must except frora this rule ; for here
the absolute Spirit, exempt frora the liraitations of mere relative beings,
appeared in the world, and conjoined Himself with a huraan nature in
the unity of one consciousness. Tet, it cannot be proved frora the
Scripture- History, that the human mind of the Redeemer had been de-
veloped, without any external human influence.
The question now occurs, how have the Quakers come to their re
markable opinion, that the consciousne.ss of God can be forraed inde
pendently of outward teaching, nay, of aU outward influence what
ever ; and whether this view raay not be considered, as a necessaiy de
velopraent of the errors of the Reformation. If, in conterapt of all the
laws of the human mind, Luther taught that, in the regenerated soul of
man, new faculties were implanted, through an absolute exercise of di
vine influences ; surely, it was inconsistent to prescribe to these facul
ties, thus absolutely imparted frora within, outward conditions for their
insertion. If, in the interior of the human raind, these faculties needed
no poiats of contact — -if, in order to becorae the property of man, they
presupposed no kindred qualities— if they worked in the soul, in a man
ner contrary to the constitution of man— if they were exceptions from
the whole order of human nature ; with what justice could it be said,
that the conditions of external excitation and teaching, in other re
spects requi-site to the development of the human mind, were here

478 EXPOSITION OP DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
necessary ? How could those acts of Divine power preserve the ttS'
sumed character of absoluteness, if they were subjected to liraUafions t
Was it no contradiction to let the Divine Principle Work uncondition
ally on one hand, and conditionally on the other ? Thus the Lutheran
exemption of the Divine influence from all infernal conditions, implant
ed in the huraan spirit, involved also, by a necessary connexion of
ideas, an independence of this influence on all outward conditions ;
and now only, could harmony and completeness be introduced into the
system. Hence, from this point of view, Quakerisra raust be denom
inated the consummation of Lutheranism ; and to that expression of the
Witteraberg Reforraer, " God teacheth man only inwardly," it first
assigns a true meaning.
We must look at the matter thus. All instruction, which mail re
ceives through the instruraentality of man, or which he acquires for
himself, by reading books, is founded on the supposition, that he is en
dowed with certain still dorraant faculties, which, set in raotion by those
exercises, are resuscitated and becorae living ; so that, what is pre-
established — what already exists in raan as a prototype, is, through ex
ternal influence, brought home to his consciousness. But now, the
Lutherans deny to fallen man the Divine iraage— the religious capabih-
ty. What possible effect, preaching, or the reading of Holy Writ, could
produce for the awakening of the soul, we are at a loss to understand ;
since raan had nothing more than to be awakened. The system,
wherein the necessity of outward teaching could be proved, was a far
different one from the Lutheran, which, instead of the training of the
religious faculties, imagined a new creation of the same ; wherein, there
fore, instruction, through reading and writing, could as little find ita
place, as in the creation of the aforesaid qualities in the first man. By
no instruction can the faculty, for any kind of knowledge, be infused
into the mind of the pupil ; as for instance, an aptitude for the mathe
matical sciences is not given by tuition. Luther's doctrine, accordingly*
as to the necessity of outward teaching for regeneration in Christ, had
no sort of connexion with his propositions respecting the Fall of man.
The Quakers understood, or, at least, felt this inconsistency ; and while
they asserted, that through Adara, fallen man was deprived of all re
ligious faculties, capable of being excited and trained by any external
agency, they declared likewise against the necessity of any outward in
struction ; and, thereby, established the fairest symmetry in the doc
trinal edifice, laid down by Luther, clearly revealing at the sarae time,
however, the utter hoUowness of its foundations.
But, hereby also, the ground was corapletely cut away frora the out
ward, historical Revelation of God in Christ. The Quakers, indeed,

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 479
uphold the doctrine, that for the sake of Christ's merits, that inward,
supernatural light hath been vouchsafed to man. But the sacrifice,
which Christ offered up for the sins of the world, considered in itself,
is utterly untenable in the system of the Quakers ; and as regards this
matter alone, we might just as well say, the Son of God, without its
being necessary to make this known to men, raight, in some obscure
corner of the earth, or in the planets Mars, Uranus, and the rest, have
undergone any suffering, and atoned for our guUt. That the love,
which God evinced in the mission of His Son, should be brought to our
knowledge- — that we should be instructed in the sentiments of God —
that we should be taught our own destiny, are things, which indeed,
necessarily appertain to the work of Redemption ; but which yet can
not be established, by the principles of the Quakers. Hence, they make
a reply devoid of all solidity, when, in answer to the objection, that they
deny the knowledge of Christ's History to be necessary to our true con
version to God, they declare they hold the same to be not requisite for
those only, who are beyond the pale of Christianity, for, these are
taught all truth by the inward Christ ; but that, as to those living within
the bosom of the Christian Church, they inculcate the necessity of their
making theraselves acquainted with the history of Christ,* and of be
lieving in the sarae.
This answer, we say, is futile ; for, it is impossible to discover, where
fore what is absolutely necessary for the one, should be unnecessary
to the other, for the attainment of the same object. Hence, a celebrat
ed raeraber of the sect, Keith, was in several synods, declared devoid of
the spirit of the Quakers, and was forbidden to preach ; because he
could not convince hiraself, that Faith, in the death and the resurrec
tion of Christ, Was not necessary to salvation. And Spangenberg, the
celebrated bishop of the Herrnhutters, in his biography of Count Zin
zendorf, thus speaks from a personal knowledge of the Quakers : " the
doctrine of Christ crucified, and that in His sacrifice alone raen can
find grace, and deliverance frora all sins, is to them, as to all the sages
of this world, a mere foolishness, and is beyond their discernment.f
• Loc. cit. p. 110. " Sicut credimus, omnino necessarium esse iis historiam ex
ternam Christi credere, quibus Deus ejus scientiam voluit aliquo modo communicare ;
ita ingenue fatemur, hanc externam scientiam esse consdabundam illis, qui subjecti
aunt, et hoc intemo semine et lumine acti : nam non solum sensd mortis et passion-
em Christi humiliantur, sedet et in fide confirmautur, et ad sequendum priEStantissi.
mura ejus exemplum animantur  nee non saepissirae reficiuntur et recreantur
gratiosissimis sennonibus, qui ex ore ejus procedebant."
t But from this it must not be inferred, as has sometimes been done, that the
Quakers never believed in Christ's death of atonement. On this point Barclay's Ian-

480 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
We therefore are not surprised, when we are informed, that many Amer
ican Quakers explain away the whole history of Christ into a raere a|.
legory ; and what Barclay so often said, respecting the Christ crucified
through sin in every man, respecting the inward Word suffering through
the pressure of sin, &c., served to pave the way for the opinion, which
sees, in the historical Christ, only a philosophical, anthropological, reli
gious Mythos.* An historical, visible Christ cannot consist wilh the
invisible, purely spiritual Church of these one-sided spiritualists of Chris
tianity ; a Redeemer graciously condescending to the wants and infirm
ities of our nature stands in too abrupt a contrast, with these high-flying
idealists, to allow them to revere Him as their Master, in aU the fulness
of conviction. Hence, as in ecclesiastical history, we often encounter
similar deductions from similar principles ; they were compelled also to
reject the outward, visibly self-manifesting Christ, and to transform Him
into soraething purely spiritual — a raere naked idea, in order that the
disciples might not be ashamed of their Master, and the foundation
might be made to harmonize with the superstructure of their Christian
ity. Thus was Protestantism, when pushed to its farthest point, for
mally converted into a species of Gnosticism ; so that Christ could he
regarded by the Quakers, exactly in the same light as by the Jewish
Docfclae. The humanity of Christ is the necessary and essential form
of His divinity, as the Author of Revelation in the new Covenant. In
the same way, and even for thai very reason, the Church, with her fun
damental institutions, is the essential form of the Christian Religion :
and if we separate tliu form frora the substance, then the latter will, in
the end, inevitably dissolve into a mere phantastic void, and retroac
tively, Christ will sink into a mere creature of the brain.
In perfect conformity with its fundamental principles, the false spirit
ualisra of the Quakers manifests the most decided hoslility against all
theological science ; and they are at a loss to find words to express
their sentiments of detestation towards it, as well as to testify their re-

guage permits no manner of doubt. He says (p. 109 :) " Per hoc nullo modo intelli
gimus, neque volumus minucro, nee derogare a sacrificio et propitiatione Jesu Christi,
sed e contra magnificamus ctexallamus illam," etc. Compare p. 148-*164, and other
numerous passages. In Clarkson, ibid. p. 3d0, we find also the following passage ci.
ted from a Quaker, Henry Tuke : " So far as remission of sins, and capacily to re
ceive salvation, are parts of Justification, we attribute it to the sacrifice of Christ, in
whora we have redemption Ihrough his blood, the forgiveness of sins according to
the riches of his grace."
* A friend of mine, who, a few years ago, raet two Araericin Quakers in the
West Indies, has assured me, that, in conversing with thera on religion, he found
they allegorized the whole history of our Lord." — Trans.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 481
gfet, that it should have passed from the times of apostacy (as they tall
the ages prior to the Reformation,) over to the period of Protestantism.
But, herein also, they continue only raore violently, and push to the
furthest extreme, that condemnation of all severe scientific cidture,
which, at the coramenceraent of the revolution in the Church, was so
often expressed by the Lutherans. Scientific labours are not possible
without human exertion ; but it is precisely ali human activity which
the Quakers wish to banish frora the sphere of theology.* They are
on that account, averse from all which wears the aspect of a settled,
definite religious notion ; and, therefore, urged by an insiinct, which,
according to their views, is perfectly correct, they avoid all the techni
cal expressions of the School and the Church, and only on certain sub
jects, on which they cannot otherwise make themselves generally intel
ligible, they permit a deviation from this rule. But, hereby it happens
that they mostly revolve in vague religious feeUngs, foster a doctrinal
indifferentism ; and, as many among them are utterly unconscious of
any thing deserving the title of real Christianity, so, the whole system
of Quakerism would, by degrees, dissolve into dull, hollow phantasies.
Were it not, from time to time, brought back to the positive doctrines of
Christianity, by some extraneous influence, as this appears to have been
recently the case.f

* Clarkson (and the language of Barclay is still stronge) a.'s, I c. eit. p. 94!t :
" They reject all school divinity, as necessarily connected with the ministry. They
believe, that if a knowledge of Christianity had been obtainable by the acquisition of
the Greek and Roman languages, and through the racdium of the Greek and Roman
philosophers the Greeks and Rjraans themselves would have been the be.«t profi
cients in ic ; whereas, the Gjspel was only foolishness lo many of these." Here we
find truth and falsehood intermixed.
¦•¦ Clarkson (loc. cit. p. 313,) says in a tone of approval : " The Quakers have ad
hered, as strictly as possible, to Scriptural expressions, and thereby they have escaped
from many diffioulries, and avoided the theological controversies, which have dis
tracted the remainder of the Christian Church." In the Heathen warships also, we
find no doctrinal controversies, precisely because they had no doctrine, and furnished
no subject-matter for thought, but only for fancy and for feeling. Had the primi.
tive Christians been so like the Quakers, as the latter flatter themselves, Christianily
would have long since disappeared. For this depends upon a doctrine pronounced by
the Suprerae intelligence : notions and ideas Uo at the bottora of its facts ; so that,
through the former, it calls up genuine feelings and true life. I have, moreover, sel
dom known any one, who censured the phraseology of the Church, without discover
ing at the same time, that he was tolerably indifferent about dogmas. For it is only
m a very few cases, that a reverence for the Bible, pushed to superstition, leads to the
conduct we conderan, and which would hold the words of Scripture alone as holy,
and every thing else as profane — a superstition, besides, with which the other views
31

482 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
How little, in fine, their peculiar conceptions of Baptism, the Lord's
supper, and divine worship in general, agree with the essence of an out
ward, historical Revelation, and with the nature and the wants of the
human mind (even overlooking here their, in truth, highly afllicting
distortion of Scriptural testimonies ;) it were alraost needless to exam
ine. But the truth to be found in their doctrine on those matters, to
wit, that baptisra is no mere bodily ablution, but a baptism by fire and
the Spirit, and that the Lord's supper should lead to an inward com
munion with God, is by no means peculiar to these sectaries. What
mortal weariness, vacancy of mind, and dullness ; what sickly fancies
most of their members labor under, during the silence in their religious
meetings, God knows, and every raan raay infer, who has acquired any
knowledge on this subject, frora his own personal observation, or the
experience of others.* In order fo draw, frora itself, food for raedita-
tion, great extent of knowledge and great ability — a soul perfectly im
bued with faith are requisite. But even this the Quakers will not have —
absolute revelations are what they look for, during thaf silence. The
Divine Spirit annexes its inspirations only to what pre-exists in the
soul ; and it is a thorough illusion, though easily to be accounted for,
when they think that the thoughts and the feelings, which arise during
this self-coUectedness of the spirit, are pure and iraraediate creations of
the inward Light.f On the contrary, they are only tho resuscitations

of the Quakers, as to Holy Writ, do not well coincide. They do not, for example,
use the words " Trinity," " Persons," and the rest, when they speak of Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, and their mutual relations ; but, on that very account, their doctrine,
on this matter, is so loose and indefinite, that Arians, Sabellians, Photinians, and
even disciples of Paul of Saraosata, codd make use of their formulas of cxprcsBion.
No occasion is, indeed, furnished for disputes ; but only because no matter exists for
investigation. They say, " they find the word ' Trinity' neither in Justin Martyr,
nor in Irenaeus, nor in Tertullian, nor in Origen, nor in the Fathers of the first three
centuries of the Chmch." p 314. Truly, if they will not read the books of these fa
thers, Ihey will find nothing in them; for, otherwise, they would have met with the
word in question, in Theophilus of Antioch, Tertullian, Novatian, Origen, Dionysius
of Rome, and Dionysius of Alexandria.
* A writer observes : " Hence it comes to pass, that, in a Quaker meeting, yon
find a museum of stupid faces ; and yet, araong the members of that meeting, there
are but very few blockheads. Many Quakers appear, like Jacob, to expect heavenly
apparitions in sleep ; for, in every Quaker meeting, I have found sleepers. Others
sit with a countenance, on which weariness herself has evidently fixed her throne."
X Clarkson (vol. ii. p. 146) has a passage which gives a beautiful and instructive
psychological explanation of the manner, in which the Quakers arrived at their opi
nion, that, vrithout any exertion of the huraan mind, higher thoughts and feelings are
inplanted within us. The fact, that not seldom, man is quite involuntarily raised np

SETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 483
»of good, by the medium of what has long pre-existed, of what has been
communicated from without, and inwardly received and retained by the
human mind. However much they protest against human agency, they
must have it ; and, under all forms, it will manifest itself. For the
little ones, in mind as well as body, such a religious service wiU, in ev-
eiy instance, be totally unproductive of fruit ; and the iUusion that the

to God ; that without any conscious preparation on hife part, he sinks into rehgious
meditations, and inwardly rejoices in his God and Redeemer, furnished them occa
sion for their theory. As the passage we have in view evinces, at the same time,
the tender feelings of the Quakers, we think it expedient to cite it. " The Society,"
says Clarkson, " considers the Spirit not only as teaching by inward breathings, as
it were, made iraraediately and directly upon the heart, without tbe intervention of
outward circumstances, but, as making the material objects of the universe, and many
of the occurrences of life, if it be properly attended to, subservient to the instruction
«f man, and as enlarging the sphere of his instruction in this manner, in proportion
as it is received and encouraged. Thus, the man who is attentive to these divine
fiotices, sees the animal, the vegetable, and the planetary world with spiritual eyes.
He cannot stir abroad, but he is taught in his own feelings, without any motion of his
will, some lesson for his spiritual advantage ; or he perceives, so vitally, some of the
«ittributes of the Divine Being, that he is called upon to offer some spiritual incense
to his Maker. If the larab frolics and garabolsin his presence, as he walks along, he
may be made spiritually to see the beauty and happiness of innocence. If he finds
the stately oak laid prostrate by the wind, he may be spiritually taught to discern the
emptiness of human power ; while the same Spirit may teach him inwardly the ad
vantage of humility, when he looks at the little hawthorn, which has survived the
storm. When he sees the change and the fall of the autumnal leaf, he may be spi
ritually admonished of his own change and dissolution, and of the necessity of a holy
life. Thus, the Spirit of God may teach raen by outward objects and occurrences in
the world. But, where this Spirit is away, or rather where it is not attended to, no
such lesson can be taught. Natural objects, of themselves, can excite only natural
ideas ; and tbe natural man, looking at tbem, can derive only natural pleasure, or
draw natural conclusions from thera. In looking at the sun, he maybe pleased with
its warmth, and anticipate its advantage to the vegetable world. In plucking
and examining a flower, he may be struck with its beauty, its meehaniBm, and its
fragrant smell. In observing the butterfly, as it wings its way before him, he may
•smile at its short journeys frora place to place, and admire the splendour upon its
wings. But the beauty of Creation, is dead to him, as far as it depends upon con.
necting it spiritually with the character of God ; for, no spiritual impression can arise
from any natural objects, so that these should be sanctified to him, but throuoh the
intervention of the Spirit of God."
Great and iraportant, and universally admitted truths are here professed. It is
only to him, who is already awakened and illuminated by Divine Grace, that nature
truly testifies of God and of all things divine ; nay, every particular thought, that
springs fresh and joyous up to God, and warms the heart, even if it be occasioned
only by outward objects, is still excited by God's grace. But, without the human
spirit and its concurrent activity, no ray, whether it light ou us from without or from
within, ean possibly impregnate; and this truth the Quakers themselves involuntaiily

484 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFEERENCES, &e.
Divine Spirit here evinces an absolute creative power, is, in this respeftf/
most strikingly evident ; for, if the Quaker-view be correct, what hin
ders the Spirit from selecting, at tiraes, a child six weeks old, for the of
fice of preaching and prayer ? If, in the mind of man, nothing pre-ex'
ist, to which the spirit can annex its inspirations — if, that spirit be to
create all anew, a child can then surely be its organ, as well as an adult.
What the Quakers teU respecting the struggle between the Divine
inward Light, and the powers of darkness, that during their religious
assemblies, seek to entangle and to retain them in worldly distractions^
it is not difficult to understand. The human mind can enter, far more
easily and more deeply into its own interior, and be brought into a
more beneficial train of feelings, when it fixes its attention on a mat
ter, presented to it from without, exercises its reflection on the same^
and then makes an independent attempt at meditation.
But, according to the method adopted by the Quakers, it is only the
minds of very few thaf can remain free frora distractions ; whereupon
they are naturaHy thrown into great anguish, terror and trembling ; sff
that what they take to be a sign of the proxiraity and visitation of the
Divine Spirit subduing the powers of Satan, is an evident symptom of
the perversity of the whole sect.

admit, since they raust annex the Condition : " -who is attentive ta these Divine no
tices, who sees the world wilh spiritual eyes."
Note of the Author.
We see, from the above-cited passage of Clarkson, how on this point also, the ten.-
der-thoughted Quakers approximate to our I'hurch ; for this habit of making nature
a medium for spiritual contemplations, ia one recommended and practised by Cathohc
ascetic writers. — Trans.

CHAPTER III.
THB HERRNHUTTEES, OE THE COMMXJNrTY OF BBOTHERS, AND THE
METHODISTS.

§ LXXII. — Historical remarks. — ^The Moravian brethren.
The doctrinal peculiarities of the party, fo which we are now to de
vote our attention, were forraed out of the union of the principles of
the Moravian brethren, with those of Spener's pietistic school. It will,
therefore, be incumbent on us, inthe first place, to give a short account
of the two last-named religious parties. In despite of all attempts to
bring about a union between the Catholics and the Hussites, a consid
erable number of the latter continued separated frora the Church, down
to the period of the Refermation, which inspired thera with new hopes,
and infused fresh life and youthful vigour into their body.
The Hussites and Luther early recognized their spiritual affinity, and
entered into a close outward union with each other ; in consequence
whereof, the former embraced the doctrinal views of the latter, as being
the sfronger party. The doctrine of fhe non-united Hussites needed, in
fact, a considerable change, to enable them to join with the German re
former ; for John Huss and Martin Luther, however they raight agree,
in their notions of the Church and the necessity of a Reformation, that
would undermine its fundamental law, were yet, in some essential doc
trines, diametrically opposed. We shall now take a brief survey of the
mutual relations between Luther and the later Hussites, who under the
narae of the Bohemian and Moravian Brethren protracted their exist
ence. The Bohemian Church-Reformer had no idea of that doctrine of jus
tification, put forth by the Saxon ; and, accordingly, his view of human
works and conduct was essentiaUy different. Huss laid down the most
rigid maxims, in matters of ecclesiastical discipline ; of whose iraprac
ticable severity we may form an. idea, when we recaU to mind, that
among the four conditions, which his disciples proposed to the Catholics,
as a basis for a reunion, there was one, that all mortal sins, under which
they included " gluttony, drunkenness, incontinence, lying, perjury,
usury, the receiving of any money for mass and confession, and the
like," should be punished with death ! A party among thera even de
sired that the power of inflieting the penalty of death on any one, whom

486 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
he should see polluted with one of the above-mentioned sins, .should be
conceded to every private individual. Huss, doubtless, had not pro
ceeded fo such lengths in his refornnug zeal ;, yet, the excitement he'^
raised, was of a nature necessarily calculated to lead to such unheard-of
excesses of fanatacism. That no prince, or prelate guilty of any griev
ous sin, is entitled to obedience, was even an opinion formaUy inculca
ted by Huss. With such passionate exclusiveness, did these sectaries
turn to the practical side of religion, that, not content with the demand
just adverted to, they had also the assurance to require of Catholica, to
hold as a heathen any man who should let himself be nominated mas
ter of the Uberal arts, as well as to annihilate all scientific institutions.
The soothing influence of tirae, maturer reflection on the constitution
of human nature, and a calraer temper of mind — brought about by want
and misery — produced, however, by degrees, many in all respects bene
ficial changes among the disciples of Huss. On the other hand, those
among them, who were known under the name of the Bohemian and
Moravian brethren, adopted, in their intercourse with the Waldensest
doctrinal errors, totally unknown to Huss, as well as to the Calixtines
and their ecclesiastical head, Roxyccana. From the latter, who, by de
grees, were to be distinguished from Catholics raerely by a ritual differ
ence — the use of the cup in coraraunion — the Bohemian and Moravian
brethren, separated in the year 1460, denied (if we may at least so infer
from an apology published in fhe year 1-508, and from some eariier
documents) not only fhe doctrine of transubstantiation, but also that of
the corporal presence of Christ in the Eucharist ; and professed, if any
definite meaning is to be drawn frora their expressions, nearly the same
theory, as was afterwards put forth by Calvin on this subject. They
retained, moreover, the seven sacraments, yet, as we may conceive,
without admitting Catholic ordination ; since Christ, according to them,
is the immediate source of all ecclesiastical power. Lastly, they reject
ed purgatory and the veneration of saints. They were ever distin
guished by a very rigid moral discipUne, and by the vigorous use of
excommunication. According to the custom of the old Waldenses,
they numbered three classes — the beginners, the advancing, and the
perfect ; and according to the measure of his spiritual growth, placed the
individual in one of these grades. These are now the doctrinal and
the disciplinary peculiarities of those Hussites, denominated Bohemian
and Moravian Brothers, and at the moment, indeed, when they formed
a conjunction with Luther.
Contrary to his usual course, Luther treated with great indulgence,
the opinion of " the Brothers " on the Lord's Supper, and thereby ser
ved his own ends uncommonly weU. For they agreed, in the year

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 487
1536, to subscribe to the belief in the presence of Christ's body and
blood in the Eucharist,* and adopted the fundamental points in the Lu
theran doctrine of justification ; though, on the necessity of sanctifica
tion and of good works, they held a far more distinct and forcible lan
guage than Luther.f This occurred in a public confession, delivered
to King Ferdinand. Frora this tirae, the league between the Brothers of
Wittemberg and of Boheraia was soleranly concluded, and Luther formed
a very advantageous opinion of the latter. In the preface, which he pre
fixed to the edition of their symbolical writing, just adverted to, he says,
" he had forraeriy been asharaed of the Picards," (for so his present
friends were once called,) " but now, they were rauch more agreeable,
courteous, he might say, sounder, correcter, and better in their conduct. '
It by no means redounded to their dishonour, that they sent an embassy
to Luther, with the purpose of calling his attention to the scandalous
morals of his disciples, and of strongly urging on him the necessity of
a reformation in this matter. " The Bohemian Brothers," (these are the
words of Francis Buddeus, the Lutheran theologian,) " as they easily
perceived thai In the Reformation much importance was not attached io
strictness in matters of discipline and conduct, thought they were justi
fied to press, by a new embassy, this subject on Luther's attention."!
Even the fact, that the Bohemian Brothers constantly retained eccle
siastical celibacy, under the conviction that, thereby, their rainisters
could, with less impediment, live up to their calUng, did not tend to dis
turb the harmony of the new associates. Subsequently (in the year
1575) the union between the theologians of Witteraberg and the Bohe
mian Brothers was renewed, yet, without leading to a forraal and out
ward comraunion between the two Churches.
However courteous and agreeable Luther might find the Picards
(their readiness to erabrace his doctrine did not certainly a little con
tribute fo produce this favourable irapression), the Austrian government

* Confess. Boheraica Art. xm. in Augusti floe. cit. part ix. p. 20.5.) " Itera et
hic corde credendura ac ore confitendura docent, panem co3na3 domlnicae, verum
Christi corpus esse, quod pro nobis traditum est, calicemque verum sanguinem ejus,
etc Docent etiara, quod his Christi verbis, quibus ipse panera corpus suum, et vi
num speciatim sanguinem suura esse pronunciat, nerao de suo quidquara affingat,
admisceat, aut detrahat, sed simpliciter his Christi verbis, neque ad dexterara neque
ad sinistram declinando credat."
t Art. vi. p 284. Compare Art. xi. p 300.
X " Thoughts ou the Constitution of the Moravian Brothers," by Francis Budde us,
in Count von ZinzendorPs smaller writings. Frankfort on the Main, p. 229, 1740 .
" The principal work on this period of the Hussites, is Joachimi Camerarii Historica
Narratio de fratrum orthodjxorum Ecclesiis in Bohemii, Moravia, et Polonia."
Heidelberg, 1605.

48S EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
did not experience from these sectaries, such dispositions towards itself,
as to induce it to show them any marks of peculiar favour. In the sect,
a deep hatred to the Imperial House continued to glow, and, on every
occasion, broke out with the most hostUe fury. Hence, its merabers
saw themselves compelled, from tirae to tirae, to emigrate ; they betook
themselves to Poland, where they became acquainted with tbe peculiar
errors of the Reformed, and even with those of the Anabaptists. Even
so late as at the commencement of the eighteenth century, the stream
of emigration frora Bohemia and Moravia still continued to flow. Sev
eral eraigrants frora the latter country settled, in the year 1722, on the
estates of Count von Zinzendorf, in Lusatia, and principally at a place
called the Hut-berg. Discontented Protestants also, Lutherans and
Calvinists, repaired thither, in order to preserve the freedora of religious
worship. The settlement itself was called Herrnhut.

§ Lixiii. — Continuation of the same subject. Spener and the Pietists.
We have now reached the point, where we have to mention a reli
gious movement, among the Gerraan Lutherans, a moveraent, with
which the Boheraian brothers came into iraraediate contact, and which
gave a new shape to their e.xistence. Philip James Spener, born at
Rappoltsweiler, in Alsace, in the year 1 635, censured, in the theology
of his German fellow-religionists, the want of a scriptural basis — a
heartless and spiritless attention to mere dead forraulas — the absence of
all warmth, unction, and interior spirit — and, as a necessary conse.
quence, the raost evident sterility in regard to practical life, where he
lamented the prevalence of raoral laxity and grossness. In the serraons
of his day, he found only the successful echo of acaderaical lectures ;
a polemical violence, dogmatizing dryness, petrifying coldness ; an in
capacity so to treat the doctrines of faith, as to move fhe heart and wiU ;
and in the great majority of preachers, men who had never experienced
the regenerating power of the Gospel, and who did not even hold such
to be necessary, in order to draw down a blessing on their announcement
of the Divine word ; for, as to the calling of a pastor, they entertained
totally mistaken notions.* Spener, however, was far from ascribing all
the abuses, to a raere accidental error of his tirae. On the contrary, his
* In these and still stronger colours, do Protestants themselves depict those times.
Compare the work entitled, "Philip James Spener and his Times," an historical
narrative by William Hosbach, evangelical preacher at the Jerusalem Church al
Berhn. Beriin, 1828. Part i. p. 1-185.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 489
unprejudiced judgment and acute perception discovered, in the funda
mental doctrines of his Church, a strong occasion to such abuse?,
although he never openly confessed, that the former necessarily led to
the disorders of his Eige, and, under a self-delusion, even imagined he
was only reviving the original maxims of the Reformation. On the
nature of faith and its relation to works ; on the reference of both to
salvation; on the possibUity of fulfilling fhe Divine comraandraents;
on the moral perfection of raan, as required by the Gospel, and on the
extent and the depth of the purifying and sanctifying power of the
Divine Spirit, in the souls of the Faithful ; in like raanner, on the rela
tion between nature and grace, and the co-operation of man ; on all
these subjects, we say, Spener entertained opinions, which ran directly
counter to the principles of the symbolical books, and especially to the
errors of Luther.
During his rainistry in the cities of Strasburg, Frankfort, Dresden,
and Berlin, Spener, in opposition to that dead, heartless course, above
described, foUowed up his systera with the raost abundant success, and
in several writings, especially in a work entitled Pia desideria, which
appeared in the year 1675, he frankly stated his convictions, before aU
Protestant Gerraany. Many and influential as were the adversaries he
found, who took the Lutheran orthodoxy under their protection ; ho-
nourably and openly as the theological faculty of Witteraberg pointed
out the contradictions into which he had fallen, with the fundaraental
doctrine of his Church, publicly characterising as erroneous the opinion
of Spener, that regeneration consisted in the transforraation of the whole
man, and censuring hira, for describing faith without holiness of life, as
a deceptious faith, for representing the good works of the true and living
believer as perfect, and for declaring absolution frora sins, without true
and hearty repentance, to be ineffectual, and so forth j in despite of all
these censures, Spener won, ever more and raore, on public opinion,
and as subsequent events ever raore clearly evinced, shook the founda
tions of Lutheran orthodoxy in Gerraany.* When Doctor Deutschman

* See Hosbach's " Spener and his Times." Part. ii. p. 61 Cespecially p. 221-232,)
where the differences between the Orthodox Lutherans and Spener, on the point of
justification, are explained; but he will not even concede to the former, the raerit of
having vindicated the orthodox doctrine of the Lutheran Church. Hosbach will
pardon us, if, while we pay a just tribute of acknowledgment to his various learning,
his historical art, and his deeper religions feelmgs, we tell him that he does not accu
rately understand the Lutheran orthodoxy. Almost all the definitions, which he
gives of the doctrines here discussed, are wanting in precision ; so that we are not at
all surprised, when he asserts, at p. 229, that the whole controversy is a mere strife
of words. But the theologians of Wittemberg, as also Schelwig of Leipzig, knew,

490 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
of Wittemberg, together with his colleagues Loscher, Hannecken, and
Neumann, censured in so Gerraan (Deutsch) a raanner the doctrines of

very well, that the question turned on things, and not on words. At p. 244, we find,
on the question of the necessity of works, a judgment pronounced in favour of Spe.
ner, which is expressly conderaned by tlie " Formulary of Concord." At p. 240, the
author asserts : "This intemperate zeal led the orthodox theologians to hazard many
strange and utterly untenable propositions: for instance, as when the Divines of
Wittemberg, in contradiction to Spener, said, the Christian cannot at all fulfil tho
law, and in general, can perforra no good works ; whereupon Spener replied, tliat it
was a stigraa on the Lutheran Church, to have teachers, who codd venture on such
an assertion, and thus absolutely to contradict Luther, as well as the Symbolical
Books; (!; or when these divines dared to put forth the proposition, that the good
works of the regenerate were not so much really good, as only less evil than sin
itself ; or when they called on the Pietists, to prove from Scripture and experience,
that any regenerated man has constantly kept himself free frora all predominant
sins, and when they, at the same time, asserted, that to refrain from all deliberate
and mortal sins, during his whole life, wais an irapossibiUty even for the regenerated
man." These assertions of the orthodox Lutherans are, undoubtedly, when con
sidered from the Scriptural point of view, strange and untenable. But how, on the
other hand, within the pale of the Lutheran Church, they can be considered strange
and untenable, we are at a loss to understand ; nay, it was Spener's doctrine that was
there singular and strange, and contrary to the Symbolical writings, on which the
whole dispute hinged. Had Spener shaken off the authority of Luther and of the
Symbolical books, then, indeed, in his controversy with the orthodox theologians, on
the above-mentioned questions, he would have had full right on his side ; but, as in
his defence, he rested on the authority of the former, asserting them to be only erro
neously understood by his opponents, he was clearly in the wrong. The accounts of
the Protestant Church Historians — Walch, Schroekh, and many others, labour under
the same defect, which we here charge on Hossbach.
It was only respecting the Church — the universal priesthood of all believers, and
the subjects connected therewith, Spener entertained Luther's earliest principles, as
the latter set them forth in his Instruction to the Bohemians. Hence, when the
Theological Facdty of Wittemberg, enumerated araong Spener's errors the following
ones : — namely, ' that he regarded the symbolical books as raere huraan writings,
whose authors God indeed preserved frora errors, but in which, however, things not
conformable to the Divine Word raight be found : that he declared believers free
frora all human authority, in matters of faith; that he hold not the Chureh, but Ho.
ly Writ, to be the sole keeper of God's Word, and asserted, that the Chureh had done
well to frame no new symbolical writings ;" so it is evident that Spener, in order to
justify his own opposition against the Lutheran Church, defended the very same
opinions, which Luther proclaimed, when he unfurled the banner of opposi tion against
the Catholic Chureh. But, as the Lutheran Church held the systera of belief, com.
municated to it by Luther, as irreformable, (which must ever be the case, so long as
any belief, however erroneous, exists ;) so Spener departed frora the faith of the
Church founded by Luther ; and when the theologians of Wittemberg urged this
charge against hira, they were decidedly in the right. In s'lort, here, too, is discern.
ible, that hiconsistency, inherent in the very essence of Protestantism, wherein men

BETWEEN CATHOLIC^ AND PROTESTANTS. 491
Spener, their conduct should not have been so ill interpreted. Who
was able to show, that they had not endeavoured to uphold the pure doc
trine of Luther 1
Doubtless, Spener, that remarkable and meritorious man, had very
great defects. Of the inward nature and importance of the Church, he
entertained only very confined views, and promoted, in a great degree,
a spirit of opposition fo all ecclesiastical institutions. However much
he insisted on a living faith, rooted in the regenerate wUl, yet, he threat
ened it with utter destruction, by diffusing a certain disgust for all defi
nite and settled religious notions, for the enlightenment of the under
standing, and by raisapprehending the real value of a sound intellectu
al culture. Hereby, too, he not only introduced the sickly, trifling,
sentimentalising spirit of the Pietists, but also prepared the way, for a
most pernicious indifference to all dograas. His views, respecting phi
losophy and speculative theology, were, in like raanner, extreraely nar
row and UUberal. In Spener's raental cultivation we discover, with
out doubt, a certain universality, which preserved hira, personally, from
great aberrations ; but the mystical tendency, which in him was, by
far, the most predominant, was rarely transraitted to his disciples, with
the counteracting qualifications ; and so, araong the latter, errors of ev
ery kind could not fail to ensue. Lastly, a tincture of an arrogant spi
rit of sectarianism, is undeniably manifest in Spener. However much
he might be in the right, when he characterised the whole Protestant
Church, as " the outward, corrupt body," it did not thence follow,
" that one should leave it and bid it adieu," and be content with gath
ering together " a little Church within a Church." It was from this
presumptuous view, which was mixed up with his well-meant efforts, that
in part proceeded his Collegia Pietatis, or associations " of sorae pious
souls" for special edification, which were established, in the year 1670,
during his abode at Frankfort, and from which the name of Pietists has
been derived. These form, without absolutely seceding from the Lu
theran Church, a closer association among themselves ; and are, with
all their one-sided views, their manifold pedantry, their hypocrisy, and
often hollow, fantastic, and canting piety, the real salt of that Church.
What more especially characterises the Pietists, is the opinion, which
Spener himself, however, impugned ; that the true believer raust be con
scious of the moment wherein his justification (the iUapse of grace) has

are to believe indeed, but at the same time not believe, that their belief is infallible ;
in other words, that they have absolute and immutable possession of revealed truth.
By requiring us to believe m ihe fallibility of our belief, a principle destructive to all
faith, is conjouied with it.

492 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
taken place. That it is very easy to perceive this moment, they enter
tain not the slightest doubt, for, they are of opinion, that every indivi-
dual must, for once, be afflicted with the anguish of despair at the Di
vine judgments ; whereupon the solace through faith arises, and produ
ces a sense of joy and felicity, that gladdens with super-mundane ful
ness the heart of raan, a sense whereof, previously, he had no antici-
pation. This opinion may be attended with the worst spiritual conse
quences. For those, who are not and cannot be conscious of such a
moment, as having in childhood, been blessed with a Christian education,
the doctrines of the Gospel have raade so deep and vivid an irapression
on their hearts, that, on one hand, they have ever loved God as the
all-raerciful, and, on the other, have never been guilty of grievous trans
gressions ; these, we say, may, on that account, be easily precipitated
into an agitation of soul bordering on despair, because these terrors of des
peration, and this frightful torment of fhe conscience, for the violation
of the moral law, will not arise ; yet these terrors, and this anguish, are
represented as the universal condition fo the true peace of the soul, and
the joy in God and Christ. Or, should any one, by artificial means,
bring on this anguish of the soul, what will be the consequence, but that
his whole inward life will be the sport of Ulusion and self-deception.
Who doth not perceive that all these conceptions are only a further de
velopment of the course of justification, traced out by Lufhrr ? His
individual experience he exalted into an universal law, and in such a
way, indeed, that, for instance, he wrote to Witteraberg, from the cas
tle of Wartburg, on the subject of the Anabaptists, and their new rev
elations, that they should be examined as to whether they had endur
ed those violent spiritual struggles ; and, on the result of that investi
gation he wished to make fhe recognition of their divine mission, in
part at least, depend. If we consider, moreover, that Luther maintain
ed, that it was only on man's return fo God, his spiritual organisra be
carae again coraplete, we shall see that his docfrine, necessarily, led fo
the error, that every believer must be able accurately to mark the day,
hour, and minute, when his moral renovation took place. With the
doctrine of an objective communication of grace, through holy baptism,
this error is, doubtless, totally incompatible ; for the Divine Spirit, once
received, cannot, in every instance, remain fruitless in respect to the ul
terior progress of raan. But, it was precisely such an objective com
munication of the Spirit, that Luther originally rejected, when he most
spoke of these struggles of desperation.

UfiTWEElSf CJATHOLICS AND PROTESTaNTS. 493
J fcixiv. — Combination of the dodtrinal pecilliarities of the Moravians and the Pie.-
tistSi
In this Pietistic school, and, indeed^ in one of its principal seafs-i— in
Halle, where the opinions of Spener had been promulgated, from the
academic chair-^-Count Lewis von Zinzenderf,* and his friends, Fred-"
erick von Watfeville, and Spangenberg, who were the souls, and suc^
Sessively the Bishops, of the Moravian Brethren) asserabled in Hernn-
huf, received, in the leading points at least, their religious education*
The one-sided, practical spirit, and the sectarian arrogance, which the
tibovenaraed leaders aud partisans brought, in an equal degree, into
the society) formed the element connecting the two parties. The Bo
hemian Brothers brought a rigid external discipline, as their peculiar
characteristic ; and Zinzendorf, Watteville, and Spangenberg) " the so-
called theology of the cross and blood." The peculiar doctrines of the
Herrnhutters seem to have been coraposed of these three eleraents.
In Consequence of the one-sided, practical tendency we have describ
ed, and which was coraraon to both parties. Count Zinzendorf was ena
bled to persuade his vassals) who were divided by many differences in
matters of faith, especially by the Moravian, Calvinistic, and Lutheran
tenets, to disregard the prevailing diversities of opinion, as they yet
agreed in " the fundamental articles," and to induce the Moravian Bro'
thers to follow his advice. Zinzendorf really entertained the notion,
that all, who raerely believed in redemption) through the blood of
Christ, were of one faith, as if this doctrine could even be believed, and
maintained unconnected with oth r dogmas. To remove, however, as
far as possible, all injurious consequences and evil reports, he divided
his coraraunity into three tropes— ^the Lutheran, the Calvinistic, and
the Moravian. With reason did the Lutherans accuse the society of a
doctrinal indifferentism, and assail it on all sides»f

* Respecting Zinzendorf, the reader raay donsult the very lively, and even impari
tial sketch of him, which Varnhagcn von Ease has traced in his work, entitled Leben
des Grafen von Zinaendorf Beriin, 1830. Spangenberg left behind him a large
work on Zinzendorf; smaller ones were coraposed by Reichel and Duvemoy. He
was born at Dresden in the year 1700, and died in 1760.
+ To the well-known judgment of the Faculty of Tubmgen on the Herrnhuttersj
Zinzendorf remarks (p. 2U5, Collection of his smaller writings:) "He (Melanc
thon) required unity only on the principal articles, and if these principal articles
Were but once settled, then the matter raight be so arranged, that men could bear and
communicate, and unite with each other. But eviry man will make his own point,
forsooth, a secondary point, when he is charged wilh heresy, and every haretifex of

494 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
That Zinzendorf also wished to found the comraunity of Herrnhut
ters, on the basis of sectarian pride, is proved by many incidents in his
life, as weU as by the strongest declarations on bis part. lie, too, look
ed upon the Lutheran Church, as, on the who'c, irrecoverably lost ;
and all his efforts were directed to the planting, every where, branches
of the community of Brothers, into which the yet sound portion of Lu
therans might be received, while the by far larger incurable remnant
might be suffered to perish. " The Lutheran Church, in bis words,
was to be so sucked out, unsalted, unspiced, that nothing but a mere
skeleton should reraain."* Even subscription to the Augsburg Con
fession he delayed tiU the year 1748.
In virtue " of the cross and blood theology," (a favourite expression
with the Herrnhutters theraselves, but which has been ridiculed by mo
dern Protestants, in a very unchristian manner,) the disciples of Zin.
zendorf were, in their public discourses and writings, almost exclusive
ly occupied, with the exposition and meditation on the bloody death of
our Redeemer on the cross. The death of Jesus Christ being the cen
tre-point of the Chrstian faith, the religious discourse of Christians,
though not always expressly, should certainly, by implication, ever pro
ceed from, and revert to this cardinal mystery. The Herrnhutters, in
deed, represent the great sacrifice of atonement, offered up for us too
exclusively, in its iraraediate, outward form, and do not sufficiently
bring out its idea, through the mediura of reflection. Wishing to fos
ter sensibiUty, they strive, too exclusively, to picture the external fact
of the crucifixion to the fancy ; and thus it cannot fail to happen, that
they revolve in a very narrow, uniforra circle of expressions, and figura
tive representations, which frequently produce only undefined, hollow,
and empty sentiments. It should never, however, have been deniod,
that from this theology, the Herrnhutters, especially in the i'nst period
of their history, which was raost obnoxious to censure, derived a raoral
energy, highly deserving of estcera, and which, in their missionary la.
hours, displays itself under the most favourable aspect. But yet, there
were not wanting among them deeper eraotions, and beautiful eviden
ces of experience in the interior life, as, fo furbish a proof of this, we

his opponent's doctrine mill make that a fundamental error." How productive this
idea might have becorae, had it been only adhered to ! The views expressed by
Zuizendorf, in regard to Catholics, on occasion of the persecutions he had to endure
from the Lutherans, are well entitled to attention.— See his hfe by Vamhagen, pp. 49,
143, and elsewhere.
» Compare Bengel's Life and Mmistry. By Frederick Buck, n. 380, Stutgart,
1831. From p. 276 to 402, the relation of Bengel to the Commu.iity of Brothers ie
very well pointed out.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 496
may appeal to the brief, but very pleasing description, which an unedu-
cated Herrnhutter gives of the inward unction of the spirit.* This the
ology has, raoreover, in its moral influence on ordinary life, produced
the most beneficial effects. And how could it be otherwise ? Who
can meditate with love on the passion of the Saviour, without loving
him ? And he who loveth him, will keep his commandments. The
physical part in our Lord's sufferings forms the substratura, and the
point of contact for meditation, with, which the believer connects his
sorrow for sin, and his sense of gratitude for redemption. Love will
not quickly remove from the beloved object, and it dweUs, too, with
complacency on minute particulars ; and, therefore, it argues a pro
found ignorance of the wants of the human heart, to make it a matter
of reproach against the Herrnhutters, that they dwell, with devout con
templation, on the several wounds of the Redeemer, and so forth."]" The
error consists only herein, that this devotion is too exclusive — that ev
ery meraber of the sect is trained up to these uniforra practices of pie
ty — and that a free developraent of the peculiarities of different minds,
is not encouraged, nay, not even permitted. What an inexhaustible
fund for conteraplation, doth not the death of our Lord present to the
unlearned, as well as to the learned ; to the raan of tender sensibility, as
well as to the severe thin ker ! Hence, in the Church this wealth re
veals itself, according to the different capacities of individuals. But,
it is a character proper to sectarianisra, to protrude only one side of a
mighty whole.
As regards the ecclesiastical discipline of this religious community —
the exclusion of irreformable members from its bosom — the separation
of the sexes into bands and choirs, even out of the times of divine ser
vice — the washing of feet, which is considered something raore, than
a mere siraple function — and other institutions, rites, and custoras ; the
description of these appertains not to this place. But, it is worthy of
remark, that, in studying the peculiarities of this society, we are often
reminded of raany phenomena in the early history of the Church. The
elections of superintendents by lots, recall to mind the ordeals of the
middle age, far more at least than the election of Mathias by the
Apostles. The prayers from midnight to midnight, or even during, the
whole night, once, and perhaps even stiU, practised by thera, reraind us
of the Akoimetae ; and the disgusting and obscene figures of speech,
which Zinzendorf indulged in, have a paraUel in the practice of the

* See JZinzendorf's Collected Works, p. 235, et seq.
t The raost singular observation of this kmd has been recorded by Vamhagen, in
his Life of Zinzendorf, p. 283.

496 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Manicheans, who set forth their opinions, by images drawn even from
the nuptial relations. It is worthy of remark, also, that whereas the
sects, which, in other countries have grown out of Protestantisra, took
a far more spiritual course than the elder and orthodox Protestantism
itself; the Herrnhutters, on the contrary, the only sect that in Germany
remained perraanently separated from the Lutheran Church, adopted a
very raaterial forra, and even, in the social relations, so subordinated
the individual to the coraraunity, that all spontaneous moveraent was
paralyzed. The society selected even the bride for the bridegroom !
In the Catholic Church, all are, in a like degree, subject to the truth,
frora which no one can nor dare to depart. But, in aU other respects,
there is the desirable freedom restricted by nothing, save the measures,
which are absolutely necessary for the maintenance of truth and of
Christian morals. But, among tbe Herrnhutters, it is precisely in the
department of truth, that a delusive freedom is announced — a depart
ment, where necessity alone must reign, with unlimited sway.
Lxxv. — The Methodists. Religiuus state of England at the beginning of tho
eighteenth century. Profound degradation of public morals. The MethodiBts
wish lo bring about a reform. Coraparison between the reforming efforts of
CathoUcs and Protestants, at sirailar epochs.
The religious fanaticisra of the Grand Rebellion in England, pushed
even to frenzy, and to the most atrocious crimes, was followed by a
period of general spiritual laxity, which, passing through various grades
of transition, sank, at last, into the most frivolous unbeUef. England
had seen a Parliament which furnished a proof that an excess of dis
tempered religious feelings can be as deeply revolling to God and to
reason, involving even the crime of regicide, as the absence of all reli»
gious principles The Parliament had been succeeded by another,
whose illegal convocation Crorawell dared to justify, by the pretended
interference of an immediate Divine agency; a Parliament which, to
the opening speech of the deceitful fanatic, bore testiraony " that, from
the very tone in which it was spoken, it might be inferred, that the
Holy Ghost worked within him ;" and, which opened its deliberations
with religious solemnities of its own device, whereat the member.s con
fessed that " they were filled with a peace and joyfulness, and had a
sense of the presence of, and an inraost fellowship, with Jesus Christ,
such as they had never before experienced."* This period of fanati-
* Villeraain, Histoire de CromweU d'apres les mimoirea du temps et les recueils
Parl^mcntah-es. Bruxelles, 1831, tora. xi. p. 6. Of CroraweU's opening speech to the

6ETWEi:N CATHOLICS AND tROTESTANTS. &y
'«sm was followed by a generation, in whose higher circles, the
principles of a Shaftesbury evergained ground ; and a state of morals
prevailed, which Fielding has depicted in his Tom Jones. The
'populace, which had recruited fhe Cromwellian array with preachers,
¦enthusiasts, seers, and prophets ; that had rejected an established
ministry, as totally unnecessary, and as destructive to evangelical free
dom ; lay now as deeply buried in the mire, as it had been previously
¦exalted into a dizzy elevation. The Anglican clergy, on the one hand,
.despised, and, therefore, repelled by the blind and excited people, had,
on the other hand, learned Httle from their times, of persecution. AH
enthusiasm, life, activity, deep conviction of the magnitude of their
calUng, remained, for the most part, ever alien from their minds and
liabits; so that, on the whole, they looked with a stupid, indilTerefit eyie
¦on the ever-growing depravity.*
During the long period of her existence, the Catholic Church has,
not unfrequently, had to suffer from like disorders in her clergy. But,
it hath ever pleased the Lord to raise up men, endued with sufficient
courage and energy, to strike terror, and infuse new life, into a torpid
•priesthood, as well as into a degenerate people. According to the dif
ferent character of different times, the mode of their rise and action
Was different ; but, the conviction was universal, that mere laws and
ordinances, under such circumstances, were fruitless ; and only living,
practical energy was capable of infusing new life info an age diseased.
On fhe one hand, we see numerous individuals, at the instigation of
the heads of the Church, who were acquainted with their powers of
energetic persuasion, travel about as preachers in reraote districts,
awakening, among high and low, a sense of their misery, and stirring
up the desire for deUverance from sin ; or, on the other hand, we behold
founders of mighty orders arise, whose raembers made it their duty to
undertake the instruction of the people, or their moral resuscitation (two
very different things), or both these offices together, neglected, as they

farliamelit of 1655, Villemain says : — "'C'est ime espfece de sermon, rempU dunom
¦de Dieu, et de citations de I'Ecriture. II exhorte les deputes k 6tre fiddes avec leg
Saints, et les felicite d'etre avou^s par Jesus Christ, et d'avouer Jesus Christ. C'^toit
une addresse assez remarquable d'61uder ainsi I'dcction populaire par la vocation di.
vme, et de flatter cette assemble au nom de ce qu'U avoit d'ill^gal et d'inusitd dans
sa reunion," etc. The Appendix to ViUemain's first v.ilume (pp. 3i39-332,) will
give the reader full insight into Cromwell's artful character.
* See Dr. Southey's Life of Wesley. In vol. i. p. 261 (German translation,) he
gives an interesting picture of the times, in order to account for the spread of Metho
dism. We findthere little else to blame, except his ignorance of the history of the
Cathohc Church, and his vain attempt to excul|iate the Anglican.

498 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
had been, by the ordinary pastors. Happy for the Church, if its
episcopacy, raisled by a partial feeling of gratitude for the services of
such coraraunities, in the tirae of their bloora and strength, had not
prolonged their existence, when they were becorae morally dead, and
Were scarcely susceptible of renovation. As new orders sprang up,
most of the elder ones were ordinarily forced to disappear.
The end, which several of the smaller Protestant sects, and particu
larly the Methodists, proposed to themselves, was nearly the same as
that, which led to the origin of the monastic institutes adverted to. It
appears even, not unv/orthy of attention, that, precisely, at the time,
when the Pietists were rapidly gaining ground, and Zinzendorf, as weU
as the founder of Methodism, were flourishing ; there arose in the
Catholic Church a less celebrated indeed, but not less active, and, (as
regards the religious life of Italy,) not less influential personage, — I
mean St. -\lphonsus I^iguori, a native of the Neapolitan territory, who
took compassion on the neglected people, and devoted himself to their
religious and moral culture.* The iraportant distinction, however, is
not to be overlooked, that such Catholic institutes spring frora the con
viction, that the spirit of the Church only is to be infused into indi-

* See Jeancard, Vie du Bienheureux Alphonse Liguori, ^vfique de Ste. Agathe de
Goths, et fondateur de la Congregation des Prfitreg Missionaires du trtss saint Rcdcmp-
teur. Louvain, 1829. Born inthe year 1696, of an old and noble family, Alphon
sus Liguori was ordained priest in 1726. Touched witti the deepest compassion at
the sight of the Lazzaroni, he united himself with other ecclesiastics, in order to de
vote his energies to the care of this neglected raultitude. He founded pious congre
gations, which still subsist, and at present amount at Naples to the nuraber of sev
enty-five, each consisting of one hundred and thirty to one hundred and fifty persons.
(See p. 47-51.) During a residence in the country, he discovered the rude and
utterly neglected condition of the peasantry. " L'abandon presque gfinfirat," says
Jeancard, " dans lequel Alphonse cut alors occasion de reconnoitre que vivaicnt les
habitans des carapagnes, le toucha d'un sensible chagrin ; il Iui en resta une impres
sion prqfonde, dont la Providence, qui la Iui avoit menag^e, se servait dans la suite
povu' I'exfecution des grands desseins dont elle voulait que ce digne ouvrier ^vang^-
lique fut I'instrument." — P. 82. He now founded an Order, which was destined to
meet these crying wants. The idea which led to its establishraent, is this : it usually
happens that the ordinary rainistry of souls, though not conducted badly, is yet car
ried on in a dull and drowsy fashion. With the priest, the parishes, too, slumber.
Hence from time to time, an extraordinary religious excitement and resuscitation are
very desirable, which then the local clergy can keep up. This extraordinary religions
excitement the raissions, undertaken by the Redemptionists, are designed to produce.
From the sarae views, an Englisli Parliament once wished to do away entirely with
all stationary clergymen. They were all to be constantly changing residence, in or
der that the parishes might receive new ones, and thus be kept in a constant state of
life and excitement. This was another extreme.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 499
Viduals, or to be carefully awakened and cherished ; while the above-
named sects, in a greatei or a less degree, ever assailed the fundamental
doctrines of the religious community, out of which they arose, and
strove to set the same aside. The origin of Protestantisra itself is here
feU ; for, as the Reforraers acted against the Catholic Church, so the
community, founded by them, was, in turn, treated by its own children
in the Uke manner. The want of reverence towards father and mother
(for such is fhe Church to us in a spiritual relation,) is transmitted from
generation to generation ; and the wicked spirit, that first raised the
son up against his fatber, goes out of the son as soon as he becomes a
parent, and, in turn, goads his offspring on to wreak bloody vengeance
upon him.
The man, upon whose heart the spiritual misery of the English people,
at the commencement of the eighteenth century, had raade a deep*
impression, was John Wesley, distinguished beyond doubt by great
talents, classical acquireraents, and, (what was stiU better,) by a burning
zeal for the kingdom of God. Rightly doth his biographer say, that, in
other times and other circumstances, he would have been the founder
of a religious order, or a reforming pope. With his brother Charles,
and some others, — araong whora the eloquent, gentle, kind-hearted,
but in every respect far less gifted, Whitfield, soon became emi
nent, — John Wesley, from the year 1729, lived at Oxford, as a student
and assistant teacher, devoted to the most rigid ascetic exercises, and
careless, as was right, about the remarks of the world. From the strict
observance of a pious raethod of life, which evinced itself, in the pro
motion of an interior spirit, the pious associarion obtained at first in a
weU-meant sense, and then by way of ridicule, the name of Methodists,
which then becarae generally attached to them.*

5 LXXVI. — Peculiar doctrines of the Methodists. Marks of distinction between them
and the Herrnhutters. Division of the sect into Wesleyans and Whitfieldites.
StiU holdinof to the Thirty-nine Articles of the Anglican Church, and
fully retaining its Uturgy and constitution, the Methodists, at first,
propagated through smaller circles, out of Oxford, only their asceric

* Southey vol. i. p. 49. " They were sometimes called, in ridicule, Sacraraenta
rians, Bible.canters, Bible-moths, and even the Holy Club. A certain mdividual,
who, by his knowledge and religious feelings, rose superior to the multitude, observed,
in reference to the methodical, regular mode of hfe of these despised men, that a new
sect of Methodists had sprung up." Allusion was here raade to a medical school of
that name.

6C0 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
practices, their fasts, their hours of prayer, their Bible-readings, and
their frequent coramunions. Their mode of teaching, at first, diflfered
frora the ordinary one, only by the great stress they laid on moral per
fection, which they held to be possible to the regenerated. The energy
and enthusiasm of their sermons, delivered, as they were, from the
pulpits of the AngUcan Church, attracted, in a very short time, crowds
of auditors ; so that, encouraged by success, they soon selected the
open fields, for the theatre of their exertions, and, indeed, principally
such places as had been the scene of every sensual excess.
The acquaintance of John Wesley with sorae Herrnhutters, princi
pally with David Nitschraann, whom, as a fellow-passenger on a voyage
out to Araerica, his brother Charles had, in the year 1736, learned to
know and esteem ; then his connexion with Spangenberg — his visit to
lhe Hernhutt communities in Germany and Holland, occasioned a new
epoch in the history of his interior life. He became acquainted with
fhe doctrine, that after the previous convulsive feelings, the clearest
consciousness of grace before God, accompanied with a heavenly, in
ward peace, must suddenly arise in the soul ; and this doctrine obtained,
for a long time at least, his fullest conviction. Yet it was only some
years after, he was favoured with such a moment, and (as he himself
declares) on the 29th May, 1739, in Aldersgate-street, London, at a
quarter before nine o'clock. How, amid such violent, inward emotions,
the time could be so accurately observed, the striking of the clock
heard, or the watch attended to, is, indeed, marvellous fo conceive I
This genuine Lutheran doctrine was, thenceforward, embraced with
peculiar ardour, was everywhere preached up, and never failed to be
attended with sudden conversions. The impressive eloquence of Whit-
field, especially, was very successful in bringing about such moraentary
changes of life, that were, very frequently, accompanied with convulsive
fits, the natural results of an excessive excitement of the iraagination,
among a people, for the greater part, totally ignorant, and deeply de
luded. Phenoraena of this kind were called " the outward signs of
grace," and were even held to be miracles.* The pulpits of the Estab-

» Southey relates, in vol. ii. p. 478 (German translation,) that the teachers of »
Methodist Latin school at Kingswood, would not permit boys, of from seven to eight
years of age, to have any rest, " until they had obtained a clear feehng of the pardon
ing love of God." The poor children were driven to the verge of insanity ; and, at
last, the inward despairing contrition arose, and thereupon the full consciousness of
Divine grace ensued 1 Wesley, who was himself present at this act of extreme foUy
inK ingswood, approved of and encouraged it. Of course, in a very short lime, no
trace of any such a regeneration was any longer to be discerned ; and hereupon

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 501
lished Church were refused to the enthusiasts and fanatics, as the
Methodists were now called ; and, thereby, the occasion was afforded
to the latter, to constitute themselves into an independent body. Wes
ley now raised himself to the episcopal dignify, and ordained priests :
a pretended Greek bishop, called Erasmus, then residing in England,
was also solicited to impart holy orders. The separation from the
Anglican Church was now formally proclaimed, and the most strenuous
opposition commenced.*
The friendly relations between the Herrnhutters and the Methodists
were also soon disturbed. A weighty cause for this, as Southey justly
observes, was, doubtless, to be looked for in the fact, that neither Zin
zendorf nor Wesley were disposed to hold a subordinate position, one
to the other : and two chiefs could not be honoured in the same com
munity. But, there also existed strong interna! motives for this oppo
sition, and they were the two following. In the first place, according
to the Herrnhutters, all prayer, all Bible-reading, all benevolent actions
prior to regeneration — ^that is to say, prior to the occurrence of the
above described turning point in life, are not only fruitless, but even
deadly poison ; — a doctrine, indeed, often put forth by Luther, but
which Wesley rightly held to be untrue in itself, and productive of the
most fatal consequences. An English HerrRhutfer, or Moravian Bro
ther, said, that for twenty years he had faithfully observed all the
ecclesiastical precepts, but had never found Christ. But hereupon
having becorae disobedient, he immediately contracted as intimate an
union with Christ, as that which joins the arms to fhe body.f The
second stumbling-block, in the way of union, was on the part of the
Methodists. They taught, that, by the evangelical perfection, which
the regenerate possess, a moral condition is to be understood, wherein
even aU the irregular motions of concupiscence — every involuntary
impulse of sensuality stiraulating to evil, are utteriy unknown. Against
such a doctrine the Herrnhutters protested with reason ; and Spangen
berg replied as follows : " So soon," says he, " as we are justified, (or
taken into favour by God,) a new man awakes within us. But, the
old man abideth, even to the day of our death ; and in this old man

Wesley testifies his astonishment in the following passage : " I passed an hour among
the children at Kingswood. Strange enough! What is become of the wonderful
work of grace, which God, last September, wrought among the boys? It is gone!
It is vanished !" &c. &c. uv u j
* Yet subsequently there were Methodists, again, who adhered to the Established
Church. 1 Southey, vol. i. p. 309. Compare an equally remarkable passage in p. 313.

502 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
reraaineth the old, corrupt heart. But, the heart of the new man is
clean, and the new raan is stronger than the old ; so thaf, albeit cor
rupt Nature ever continues to struggle, it can never conquer, as long as
we can retain our eyes fixed upon Christ."* The form of this reply
has undoubtedly much, that is objectionable ; for, we are expressly
required to put off the old man, and to put on the new one. The same
idea is also expressed by the words, " new birth," " new creation," and
the like ; hence, we are to have not two hearts, but only one. But,
on the other hand, this reply to the Methodists, is, in substance, per
fectly correct ; although the degrees, in the life of the regenerate, are
not minutely traced, the setting forth whereof might have rendered
possible a reconciliation between fhe Methodists and the Herrnhutters.
That Spangenberg, too, should, in so unqualified a manner, have repre
sented the new raan, as being able to conquer, and the regenerated, as
really triuraphing in the struggle against the incentives fo grievous sin,
proves the great revolution of opinion, which Spener had brought about
in the Lutheran Church, and wherein the Herrnhutters had also taken
part. The controversy adverted to, divided, also, Wesley dnd Whitfield.
The latter, Uke the Herrnhutters, combatted the exaggerated views of
the former, respecting the perfection of the regenerate, and, in this re
spect, chose the better part ; but, on another point, Wesley defended
fhe truth against Whitfield. The latter was a partisan of the raost
rigid predestinarianism, which fhe former classed among the most
abominable opinions that had ever sprung up in a human head, and
which could by no raeans be tolerated. In this way, not only did the
mutual approximation between fhe Herrnhutters and the Methodists
faU of terminating, in fhe desired union, but, the one sect of Methodists
broke into two, that opposed each other with bitter animosity.
These sectaries, however, by their mode of reasoning with each
other, excite in the raind the raost painful feelings. It is not without
a sense of insuperable disgust, that we see Spangenberg appeal against
Wesley to his own experience, and thaf of the other Herrnhutters ;
whence, nothing else could be inferred, than that ihey had such par
ticular experiences, but by no means, that such things must so be.
The Wesleyans, in their turn, brought forward men and woraen, who
appealed to their own experience, and thence proved that the regenerate
no longer perceive, in themselves, the disorderly motions of sensuality,
and are in every respect free frora sin or even failing. f The most
* Southey, vol. i- p. 317. Zinzendorf s Exaggerations, p. 321.
t Southey, vol. i. p. 318.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 603
egotistical exaltation of oneself, to be a pattern to all, meets us here in
its most repulsive, appalling forra, against which the slightest spark of
shame, we should think, would rise up, and kindle into a flarae. Lastly,
Whitfield, too, carae forward with a shocking arrogance, denominated
by him humility, and appealed to his inward experiences, in proof of
the theory of absolute predestination.*
The prevalence of Antinomian principles, even araong the Wesleyan
Methodists was of very iraportant consequence. Wesley distinguished
between justification and sanctification, although he aUowed both to
take place, at the sarae raoraent. But, in despite of an asserted inward
connexion, between the two things, the mere assumption, that Divine
Grace could be annexed to any other principle, in our spiritual life,
than that whereby raan manifests his obedience unto God, necessarily
led to a conterapt of the law ; so that, even here also, the doctrine that
man is justified by faith only, betrays its essentially Antinomian charac
ter. The following account, coming, as it does, frora a quarter per
fectly friendly to the Methodists, cannot lie under the suspicion of
misrepresentation. Fletcher, — a very reraarkable, active, and araiable
disciple of Wesley, — says, in his Checks to Antinomianism : " Antino
mian principles have spread like wildfire araong our societies. Many
persons, speaking in the raost glorious raanner of Christ, and their
interest in his complete salvation, have been found living in the grossest
immoraUties How few of our societies, where cheating, extorting, or
some other evU, hath not broke out, and given such shakes to the Ark
of the Gospel, that, had not the Lord interposed, it raust have been
overset ! I have seen them, who pass for believers, follow the strain of
corrupt nature ; and when they should have exclaimed against Anti
nomianism, I have heard them cry out against the legality of their wicked
hearts, which they said, still suggested, that they were to do something
for their salvation," (that is to say, the voice of their conscience ever
cried out against their immoral conduct; but, they held that voice to
be a temptation of Satan, who wished to derogate from the power of

t Southey, vol. i. p. 337. " Pardon me," -wrote Whitfield to Wesley, " that I ex
hort you, in humility, no longer to resist, with this boldness, the doctrine of election,
since you yourself confess, that you have not the tesriraony of the Spirit within you,
and are thus no competent judge in this matter. This hving testimony, God several
years ago granted to me ; and I stand up for elecrion  Oh ! I have never read
a syllable of Calvin's wrirings ; my doctrine I have from Christ and His apostles;
God himself hath announced it to me ; as it pleased Him to send me out first, and to
enlighten me first, so I Ijope he gives me now also the hght." The separation of the
two occurred in the year 1740.

5fl4 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
faith.) "How few of our celebrated pulpits," continues Fletcher,.
" where more has not been said for sin, than against it !"
Fletcher cites fhe Methodist Hill in particular, as asserting, "That
even adultery and murder do not hurt the pleasant children, but rather
work for their good : God sees no sin in believers, whatever sins they
may commit. My sins raay displease God, my person is always ac
ceptable to Him. Though 1 should oufsin Manasses, I should not be
less a pleasant child, because God always views me in Christ. Hence,.
in the raidst of adulteries, murders, and incests ; He can address rae
with ' thou art all fair, my love, ray undefiled ;. there is no spot in thee.'
It is a raost pernicious error of the schoolraen, to distinguish sins accord
ing to the fact, not according to the person. Although L highly blame
those who say, 'let us sin, that grace may abound,' yet adultery, incest,
and murder, shall, upon the whole, make me holier on earth, and mer
rier in heaven ;" that is to say, the more !¦ need the pariloning grace of
God, the stronger becomes my faith, fhe holier I become.*
John Wesley was extreraely concerned at the spread of such opinions..
He therefore summoned a Conference, in the year 1770, which took
into deliberation the principles, hitherto professed by the Methodists,
and justly acknowledged, that all the evil entirely originated in the
opinion, that Christ has abolished the raoral law ; that believers are
thus not bound to its observance ; and that Christian liberty dispenses
them frora keeping the Divine Comraandraents. The following re
marks of Wesley, at the sarae conference, as to the raerit of works, to-
which he was by necessity urged, are well entitled to attention. "Take
heed to your doctrine ! We have leaned too rauch towards Calvinism.
With regard to man's faithfulness : our. Lord himself taught us to use
the expression, and we ought never to be ashamed of it, 2. With
regard to working for life: this also our Lord has expressly commanded
us.. Labour, t^ya^ih, literally, work for the meat that endureth to-
everlasting life. 3. We have received it as a maxim, that a man is to
do nothing in order to justification. Nothing can be more false. Who.-
ever desires to find favour with God, should cease from evil, and learn
to do well. Whoever repents, should do works meet for repentance.
And if this is not in order to find favour, what does he do them for V
Is not this salvation by works? Not by the merit of works, but by
works as a condition: What have we then been disputing about, for
these thirty years I I am afraid, abcmt words. As to merit itself, of

* See Fletcher's Checks to Antinomianism, vol. ii. pp. 22, 200, 215. Works ; vol.
iii. p. 50 ; vol. iv. p. 97. Compare Dr. Milner's End of Religious Controversy, Let
ter yi.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 505
which we have been so dreadfuUy afraid, we are rewarded according to
our works, -yea, because of our works. How does this differ frora for
the sake of our works ? And how differs this from secundum merita
operum, as our works deserve ? Can yoii split this hair 1 I doubt I
cannot."* Wesley was evidently very near the truth. Thus rauch as
to the pecuUarities of the Methodists, so far as they faU within the
scope of the present inl[uiry.
We shall conclude with observing, that the Methodists have acquired
great merit by the instruction, and the religious and moral reforra, of
rude and deeply degraded classes of men ; as for instance, the colliers
of Kingswood, and the negro slaves in Araerica. Their wild way of
preaching, which is not entirely the result of their doctrines, has evinced
its fitness for the obtuse intellect and feelings of auditors, who could
only be roused to some sort of life, by a violent method of terrifying the
imagination. It is worthy of remark, that on one occasion, fo a rainis
ter, who declared it impossible to convert a drunkard, and who said, that
at least no exaraple of such a conversion had ever come to his know
ledge, Wesley replied, that in his society, there were many converts of
that kind. There are certain moral and intellectual capacities and
conditions, which only a certain style of preaching suits ; and on whicli
every other makes no impression. Hence, it is to be considered a
great misfortune, when, in any place, all things are modeUed after a
uniform plan. This is to render the Spirit at once inaccessible and
inoperative, for many preachers and raany descriptions of people ; for
the Spirit delighteth, at times,"even in eccentric forms.
• Southey, vol. ii. p. 366.

CHAPTER IV. o:

§ LXXVII. — Some preliminary historical Remarks.
One of the raost mysterious phenomena in history, is the director of
mines, Emanuel Swedenborg, the son of a Swedish bishop, and who
departed this Ufe in the year 1772. He was, on one hand, distinguished
for acuteness of inteUect, and for a wide range of knowledge, — parti
cularly in the raathemafics and the natural sciences, which he culti
vated with great success, as is evinced by many writings, highly prized
in his day ; and on fhe other hand, he was noted for his full conviction,
that he had held intercourse with the world of spirits, whereby he be
lieved that he obtained information on all matters in anywise claiming
the attention of fhe religious man. He imagined himself to be trans
ported into heaven, and to be there favoured, with oral instructions by
the Deity and His angels, as to the Divine essence — the emanation of
the world from God — the purport of the Divine revelations, and the
consummation of the Church — the nature of heaven and hell, and
many other things.
Professor von Gorres has, in his work, entitled, "Emanuel Sweden
borg, his visions, and his relations to the Church," and likewise in his
Introduction to the writings of Henry Suso, newly edited by Diepen-
brock, very convincingly proved, that, from the very high character of
this visionary, acknowledged by his contemporaries to be pure and
blameless, the idea of intentional deceit, on his part, cannot be at all
entertained ; and that his ecstacies may best be explained by aniraal
magnetism. As I am unacquainted with fhe nature of this latter
science, I must abstain from offering any opinion on the matter ; par
ticularly, as the object of this inquiry demands no elucidation of
Swedenborg's psychological state. We are here merely engaged with
his peculiar doctrinal and ecclesiastical views, and will leave out of
question his theosophistical, cosraogonic, and other like theories ; for,

» This article I inserted in the fourth number of the Quarterly Review of Tiibin.
gen, for the year 1830. It appears here wilh only a few alterations and additions.

EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &e. 507
these form no part of the tenets of faith constituting the New Church.
These doctrines we shall now set forth, chiefly as they are stated in his
last writing, published shortly prior to his deafh, and entitled : " True
Christian Religion, containing the Universal Theology of the New
Church."* The relation, wherein Swedenborg placed hiraself in regard to the
new coraraunity he fwpded, is the first thing which claims our atten
tion. He considers himself, not only to be a restorer of primitive
Christianity, and to be a divine envoy, in the same coraprehensive
sense, as Luther ; but, he was under the firra conviction, that he had,
in the raost solemn way, been commissioned by God in heaven, to in
troduce a new and imperishable era in the Church. The second cora
ing of the Lord, which is promised in the Gospel, was to take place in
him. Not that he held himself fo be an incarnation of the Deity ; on
the contrary, he taught that God could no more appear in a human
forra, and that the foretold second advent of the Lord must be inter
preted, as only the general and victorious establishment of His truth
and love among men — as His manifestation in the word. This con
summation of the Christian Church, he caUs the new heaven and the
new earth, the new celestial Jerusalera, whereof the Scripture speaketh. "j"
This new kingdora of God on earth began, according to Swedenborg,
on the 19th June, 1770 ; — precisely the very day after the termination
of the work, from which we have taken the above statements, and
which was to go forth into all the world, and win over the elect. For,
as soon as, according to our authoritv, the last words of this book were
written down, Jesus Christ sent his apostles throughout the whole
spiritual world, to announce to the same the glad tidings, that hence
forth He, whose kingdom hath no end, shall reign for ever and ever ;
and aU this, in order that what stands written in Daniel (vii. 13, 14,)
andin Revelations (.xi. 1-5,) might be fulfilled. The aforesaid mission
of the apostles, was also foretold in Matthew (xxiv. 31. )J
" " True Christian Rehgion ; containing the Universal Theology of the new
Church." By Emanuel Swedenborg, servant of the Lord Jesus Christ. Translated
fi'om the original Latin work, printed at Amsterdam, in the year 1 77 1 , vd. ii. 5th edi
tion. London : 1819. The Latin original I have not been able to procure.
t Loc. cit vd. ii. p. 502.
X hoc. cit. p. 547. •• After this work was finished, the Lord caUed together His
twelve disciples, who followed Him in the world ; and the next day He sent thera
throughout the whole spiritual worid to preach the Gospel, that the Lord Jesus Christ
reigneth, whose kingdora shall endure for ever and ever, according to the prophecy in
Daniel, c. vu. 13, 14; and in the Revelations, o. xi. 15; and that they are blessed,
who corae to the marriage supper of the Lamb." — Revel, xix. 9. This was done on
the 19th day of June, in the year 1770. ^

508 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
§ Lxxviii. — Practical tendency of Swedenborg. — His judgment on the Reformers,
and his account of their destiny in the next life.
The doctrinal system of the Swedish prophet has by no means, as we
should be disposed to beUeve frora raany of his speculations, a mainly
theosophistic tendency, but on the contrary, an eminently practical
one. It sprung out of an opposition (o the Protestant principle of justi
fication, and the ulterior doctrines therewith connected ; for, Sweden
borg also held this whole body of Lutheran and Calvinistic tenets fo be
subversive of morality, and extremely pernicious to practical Christi
anity. From this polemical spirit, all the virtues and the defects of
this sectary are fo be deduced. That such is really the case, is mani
fest from the very great and unwearied attention, which, in lengthened
portions of his writings, he devoted to the consideration of the above-
mentioned doctrines of the Reforraers, as well as from the fact, that on
every occasion, and when we least expect, he recurs to the subject, and
sets forth the pernicious influence of these errors, on moral and religi
ous life. Swedenborg is wont to support his pecuUar tenets, by an ap
peal to the iraraediate teaching of the higher spirits, wherewith he had
been favoured. Hence, to the several articles of doctrine he affixes an
appendix, wherein he gives a description of these celestial conferences,
often with great rainuteness, and entering into raany subordinate cir
curastances. But, none of his doctrinal views does he uphold by such
numerous visions, as that of his hostility to the Protestant doctrine of
Justification.* Angels inform fhe visionary, that not faith alone, but
together with the same, charity also justifies and saves. In proof of
this, he relates the substance of a dialogue heard by hira, and which oc
curred between sorae angels and several Protestants, who had arrived
in the other world. To the most various questions the latter con
stantly replied, that for them faith must supply the place of all things,
and hence they received the final sentence, — that they were like an
arrist, who could play but one tune, and therefore showed them
selves unworthy of the society of superior spirits. In contrast with
this, the following conversation between angels, and some other new
comers from this worid, is given. " What signifies Faith ? To believe
what the Word of God teacheth. What is charity 1 To practise what
that word teacheth. Hast thou believed only what thou hast read in
the word, or hast thou acted also according to it ? I have also acted
according to it. My friend, come with us, and take up thy dwelling in

Forinstance, vd. i. p. 314, 317, 647, 649 ; vd. u. p. 80, 92, 100, 169.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 609
the midst of us." With Luther and Melancthon, also, Swedenborg, in
his celestial travels, made acquaintance, and he gives us the following
account of them. Luther (when Swedenborg visited the spiritual
kingdom,) was not in heaven, but in a sort of purgatory — an intermedi*
ate place, where attempts for his iraprovement were practised on him.
When Luther, we are further told, arrived in the next world, he found
himself in a locality, which Swedenborg honoured with a visit, and
which perfectly resembled his domicile in Wittenberg. With the
greatest self-complacency, Luther collected around him all his disciples
and adherents, as they successively entered into the spiritual kingdom,
and in proportion as they had evinced more zeal and penetration in de-
fence of his doctrine, he honoured them with a seat nearer to hiraself
as their leader.
With the greatest enthusiasm, and firmest confidence, Luther was
incessantly setting forth his doctrine of Justification by faith alone, be
fore this circle, when he was suddenly disturbed by the inforraation,
that that doctrine was thoroughly false, and, that if he wished to enter
info beatitude, he must utterly renounce it. For a long time he would
not yield, until at last he began to doubt, whether he were in the truth.
Swedenborg, on his departure, received from an angel the consolatory
assurance, that Luther seemed really to perceive his errors, and afforded
every hope of a thorough amendment, Swedenborg assigns the follow
ing reason for this. Before the beginning of his Reformation, Luther
was meraber of a Church, which exalts charity above faith. Educated
in this doctrine from infancy, he was so thoroughly imbued with it,
that, though without a clear consciousness of if, it ever regulated his
inward spiritual life ; and, on this account, even after he had declared
war against the Catholic Church, he was enabled to give such excellent
instruction in respect to charity. His own doctrine of Justification by
Faith alone, on the other hand, so little set aside the conviction of his
youthful days, that it belonged more to his external, than internal man."'
It was otherwise with his disciples, who had been confirmed in his doc
trine. As an illustrative instance, he recounts the destinies, which

* Vol. ii. p. 553. " I was informed by the examining angels, that this chieftain o ^
the Church is in a state of conversion, far before many others, who have confirmed
themselves in the doctrine of Justification by faith alone ; and that, because in his
youthful days, before he began his work of Reformation, he had received a strong
tincture of the doctrine, which maintains the pre-eminence of charity : this was the
reason, why, both in his writings and sermons, he gave such exceUent instruction in
regard to charity ; and hence, it came to pass, that the faith of Justification with
him, was implanted in his external natural man, but not rooted in bis internal spirit
ual man."

510 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
after his death, befell Melancthon. He, too, was no inhabitant of hea
ven ; — on the contrary, he must previously abandon his opinions respect
ing Justification by faith alone, before he can enter into eternal life.— •
Philip Melancthon was seen by Swedenborg, as he was zealously en
gaged in the composition of a book ; but, he was unable fo make any
progress in his work. He was ever writing down the words ; "Faith
alone saves ;" when the words as often again disappeared. The reason
of this phenomenon is, that they are utterly devoid of truth, and iu the
next world no error can endure. All attempts to bring this Reformer
to a better way of thinking, have hitherto failed. On one occasion, in
deed, he wrote down the proposition, " Faith together with charity,
justifies ;" but, as that proposition did not spring out of the inmost feel
ings of his soul, but had only been taught him, it could be attended
with no success. In vain we seek for an assurance, that Melancthon
too, could look forward to a termination of his painful state ; Calvin
experiences a still worse fate, because he was always, as Swedenborg
says, a sensual man ; and, beside fhe Lutheran doctrine of Justification,
maintained also the revolting error of an absolute and eternal predesti-
nation of some to beatitude, and of others, to damnation. Swedenborg
saw him, on thaf account, thrown down into a pit, filled with the most
abominable spirits.
The CathoUcs, too, according to our seer, raust, in many respects
change their convictions, before they can quit the iraraediate state in
fhe next life, and enter into a higher sphere. Strangely prejudiced,
however, as Swedenborg is, against the Catholic Church — ill as he is
wont to speak about popes, bishops, and saints, he yet coraraunicates
the information, that if Catholics perform works of charity only in sim
plicity, and think more of God than of the pope, their transition to pure
truth, and thereby to eternal feUcity, is as easy, " as it is to enter into
a temple, when the doors are thrown open ; or, into a palace, by passing
between the sentinels, who keep guard in the outer courts, when the
king enjoins admission ; or, as it is to lift up the countenance and look
toward heaven, when angelic voices are heard therein."*
Evident, as it now is, that Swedenborg's reforming zeal was particu
larly directed against the errors in the Protestant doctrine of Justifica-
tion ; yet, his attempts to undermine the same, were conducted with a
destructive ignorance ; for he undermined withal, the very foundations
of Christianity. Looking for the connexion, wherein the notion of
faith, as prevalent among his forraer fellow-religionists, stood with other

Vol. ii. p. 578.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 511
dogmas, he fell into the error, that fhe doctrine of the Trinity was the
basis of the former opinion, and hence, he thought it incumbent upon
him to subvert it. Secondly, he observes (and in this instance with
perfect justice,) that the Lutheran and Calvinistic doctrine of original
sin, forms the ground-work of fhe Protestant theory of Justification-
He rejected, accordingly, the article of the fall of man in Adam ; and,
human freedom, which the Reformers had denied, he exalted to the
highest pitch. Lastly, he assaUed the doctrine of the vicarious death
of Christ, in order to cut off the last Unk, which could connect the
notion of Justification, by faith alone, with any other dogma. A nearer
investigation of these three points will, therefore, be our next task.
§ LXXIX. — Swedenborg's doctrine on the Trinity.— His motive for assaUing that
of the Church.
The connexion, which Swedenborg established between the dograa of
the Trinity, and the Protestant doctrine of Justification, attacked by
hira with such extreme vehemence, is as follows : — " After raen had
discovered three persons in the Deity, they were forced to allot to each
a separate office. The first Person, accordingly, was regarded as the
One which had been offended by mankind ; and the second, was con
sidered to be the Mediator. By the establishment of so powerful a medi
ation, the Father has been involved in the necessity of bestowing uncon
ditional pardon ; that is to say, without regard to moral worthiness,
through faith in the merits of the Son alone.* In order to prevent fhe
possibUity of the very idea of such an intercession, the new Reforraer
turned against the doctrine of the Trinity itself, and, indeed, with that
decided hostility, which, whenever a dogma is assailed from a practical
point of view, is ever wont to arise. Swedenborg says, the falsity of
the doctrine of three Divine Persons, is clear from the fact, that the an
gels, with whom he held intercourse, declared to him, that it was impos-

* Vol. i.p. 255. "That this idea conceming redemption and conceming God,
pervades the faith, which prevails, at this day, throughout all Christendom, is an ac
knowledged truth ; for, that faith requires raan to pray to God the Father, that He
wodd remit their sins, for the sake of the cross and the blood of His Son, and to God
the Son, that He would pray and intercede for them ; and to God the Holy Ghost,
that He' would justify and sanctify thera," &c. Vol. ii. p. 319 : " Since a mental
persuasion of three Gods has been the resdt, it was impossible for any other systera
of faith to be conceived or forraed, but what was applicable to those three Persons, in
their respective stations; as for instance, that God the Father ought to be approach
ed, and implored to impute the righteousness of His Son, or to be merciful for the
sake of His Son's suffering on the cross," &c.

612 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRIlifAL DIFFERENCES
sible for thera to designate in words that opinion, and that if any one
approached thera, with the intention of giving utterance to it, he was
corapelled to turn away frora thera ; and that if he really uttered fhe
opinion, he was iraraediately transformed into a block in human shape.
A man, who seriously, and with full conviction professes the Church
doctrine of the Trinity, he compares, in consequence, to a statue with
moveable limbs ; in whose interior Satan lodges, and speaks by ifs arti
ficial mouth. The old Christian faith in a Triune God he, accordingly ,
places on a level with Atheism ; for there is not, in fact, he says, a
God-head with three Persons, or, as he expresses himself, there are not
three Gods.*
He teaches, on his part, that in the Divinity there is but one Person,
the Jehovah God (probably the Jehovah Elohim) of the Old Testament.
The same hath in Chrisf assumed human nature ; and the energy of
this God-Man, that is ever working for our retovation, is fhe Holy
Ghost, whora Swedenborg calls the Divine Truth, and the Divine
Power, which worketh the regeneration, renovation, vivification, sanc«
tification, and justification of man. Hence, he adopts, indeed, a Trinity
of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit ; but in his language, he explains it to
be three objects of one subject, or three attributes of one Divine Per
son."}" In other words, he conceives the Trinity, to be three different
manifestations of one and the sarae Divine Person, who, in the Father,
reveals Himself as Creator of the world, in the Son as the Redeemer,
and in the Spirit as the Sanctifier. He refers, moreover, the expres
sion, " Son of God,'* to the humanity, which Jehovah assumed, and
then compares the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, with the soul and body,
and the operations of man, resulting from the union of the twoj
Of vvhat is called Scriptural proof, Swedenborg has not the slightest
notion. It is a mere accident, if in support of any one, even of his
truest propositions, he assigns satisfactory exegetical grounds. He
usually heaps passages upon passages, without much troubling himself
about usage of speech, the context, parallel passages, or in general, the
strict application of hermeneutic rules, although with these, he was not

* Vol. i. p. 46 . . . p. 339. " The present faith of the Church  is a faith in
three Gods." — Compare p. 45, p. 335.
t Loc. cit. p. 327. " Hence, then, it is evident, that there is a Divine Trinity,
•consisting of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit But, in what sense this Trinity is to be
understood, wheiher as consisting of three Gods, who in essence, and consequently
in name, are one God, or, as three objects of one subject, and thus that what are so
naraed, are only the qualities, or attributes of one God : human reason, if left to
itself, can by no means discern."
t Loc. cit. p. 330.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 513
unacquaitited. It is so in the matter under discussion. Let any one
only read the passages he cites from Isaiah, Jeremiah, Osee, and the
Psalms, in order to prove, that it was not the Son begotten of the Father
frora all eternity, but he, whora he calls Jehovah, that became Man and
Redeemer ; and, such a one must be convinced, that with a like course
of reasoning, any conceivable fancy of the brain, might be supported
by Scripture*
Swedenborg's total ignorance of ecclesiastical and dogmatic history,
and his presumption, in despite of this ignorance, to allege their testi
mony in support of his opinion, are particularly afflicting. He ventures
on the assertion, that from the tirae of the Apostles, down to the Coun
cU of Nice, his notion of the Trinity, was the prevailing belief of the
Church, till of a sudden in this Council, the true belief was lost ! ! It
is reraarkable, withal, that elsewhere he includes araong the heretics of
the first ages the Sabellians ; although it is precisely among these that
he raight have found the most accurate resemblance to his own errors.
In truth, had he known, that in the second and third centuries, the very
few persons, who professed principles similar to his own, were menaced
with exclusion from ecclesiastical communion, if they refused to re
nounce their opinions, utterly repugnant as they were to the universal
doctrine of the Church : — had he been aware, that Praxeas was forced
to exhibit a document, wherein he revoked his error ; that Beryllus, at
the Synod of Bosfra, was prevailed upon by the Arabian bishops, as well
as by Origen, whom they had summoned to their aid, to take the same
step ; and, that SabeUius excited such great agitation in the Egyptian
Church, and became the object of such general abhorrence ; — how could
he have had the hardihood to put forth the assertion, that down to the
CouncU of Nice, his opinion was the faith of the Church ! If, in mod
ern days, many since the tirae of Souveran have asserted, that the ante-
Nicene period was addicted to the Arian heresy ; a superficial study of
authorities, at least, might have led to such a result ; but Swedenborg's
assertion, presupposes the utter absence of all historical inquiry. Yet a
book, in which such gross and palpable errors are found, he dares to
extol as a work of such Divine contents, that on its completion, the
Apostles entered upon a mission through the whole spiritual world ; that
on its publication, the very salvation of futurity depends ; and that
with it commences the new eternal Church !
In respect to the reasoning of Swedenborg, it bears occasionally, in
its main features, a striking resemblance to that of the earlier Arians,
especially JEtius and Eunomius, except only that these two Arian lead-

* Loo. cit. p. 163.
33

514 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
ers evince far raore acuteness and dexterity. If is equally certain, that;
those Unitarians, in the eariiest period of the Church, who bear raost
affinity to Swedenborg, knew how to allege, in behalf of their tenets,
far raore plausible and more ingenious Scriptural arguments, as we may
perceive from the work of TertuUian against Praxeas, frora the frag-
raents of Hippolytus against Ncetus, and of the Pseudo- Athanasius
against the followers of SabeUius. Whosoever, therefore, possesses but
the slightest acquaintance with the writings of Athanasius, Hdary,
Basil, Gregory Nazianzen, Gregory of Nyssa, and Augustine, (who,
with such decided superiority, have defended the doctrine of the Church,
against the earlier and the later Arians, as well as against the Sabel
lians,) raust consider with araazeraent the efforts of Swedenborg, who,
with powers immeasurably inferior, attempted to undermine the belief
in a dogma, which, in consequence of the defence that it had met with,
on fhe part of these intellectual giants, had received even a stronger
scientific demonstration.

§ L.X.XX. — Swedenborg denies the fall of raan in Adara. — Contradictions in his theory
on this matter.
We pass now from fhe most striking peculiarity in Swedenborg's
theology* to his Anthropology, where, however, it wiU be only his doc
trine on human sinfulness, and particularly original sin, that will engage
our attention. The latter, as we remarked above, he denies ; but, he
falls into the raost singular self-contradictions. The account in the
Bible, respecting the fatal disobedience of our first parents, he explains
a's an allegory, and regards Adara and Eve, not as real personages, but
only (to use his own words,) as personifications of the primitive Church. "f
And he adds, that " if this be well understood, the opinion hitherto re
ceived and cherished, that the sin of Adam is the cause of that evil,
which is innate in man from his parents, wiU fall to the ground.":): Swe
denborg doth not deny, however, that a propensity to sin is transmitted
from parents to children ; yet, he adds, that it is to be deduced from
the parents only, as he says, " hereditary evil, ray friend, is derived
solely from a man's parents;" and elsewhere, he even asserts, with
great exaggeration, " that man from his mother's womb is nothing but
evil."§ If on one hand, the progagation of an evil by descent be ad-
* The word Theology, is here used by the author in a primitive sense, as doctrines
that treat of the natme and the attributes of God. — Trans.
t Vol. ii. p. 110. " By Adam and his wife is meant the most ancient Church,
that existed on our earth."
t Loo. cit. p. Id6. § Loc. cit. p. 195.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. gl5
toltted, and on the other, the universality of the evil itself be not called
in question, how can we stop at the parents of a child ? The question
necessarily arises 5 how then did the parents corae by the evil ? And
if doubtless, it be answered, that they received the bad heritage from
their parents, and these again from theirs, we shall certainly, at last, ar
rive at the first man, called in the Sacred Writings, Adam ; and shall
be obliged to confess, that the universal phenomenon hath a primary,
and withal, universal cause, and, consequently, that sin in the human
race, is only the development of sin in Adam. How can We therefore
say, that children inherit from their parents a principle of sin, without
recurring to the first man ? By fhe allegorical explanation of the Scrip
tural narrative of the Fall, nothing is gained. For, in fhe first place,
admitting even such an explanation, still the sexual propagation of raan
must have certainly had a beginning ; and, as even according to Swe
denborg, the development of sin keeps equal pace with the sexual pro
pagation, we are thus compelled to recur to some beginnings— to some
first sinner, in whose fall the others were subsequently involved. In the
second place, if, with Swedenborg, we even take Adam to be a mere
collective name, yet it must, at all events, be admitted, that the later
race of raen have inherited from the earlier a principle of sin, since its
sexual transmission our seer does not pretend to deny. To Adam, ac
cordingly, we must even go back, whether by that narae we understand
an individual, or a generation of men. But, whether Holy Writ teach
the former or the latter, no one, who reveres St. Paul's epistles as cano
nical, can for a moment doubt ; for in Romans, c. v. 12-14, Adam is
very clearly designated as he, by whose fall, the fall of all others has
been determined; and he is expressly characterized as one person
(Si hei ai^quirtv.) From whatever side, therefore, we contemplate
Swedendorg's doctrine, it appears full of obscurities and inconsis
tencies. The cause of these contradictions lies, as we said above, in his mis>
guided opposition to the Lutheran doctrine, which regards original sin
as a total depravation of man, wherein all free-wiU is utterly destroyed.
Swedenborg now endeavouring, on one hand, to save free-will, and to
discover, in the personal abuse of freedom, the guUtiness of individuals;
and, on the other hand, withheld, by a deeper feeling, from regarding
the individual as merely isolated, and possessing evidently a glirapse of
the truth that no raan liveth for himself, nor severed from mankind, but
is vitaUy involved in the destinies of the organic whole,— Swedenborg,
I say, fell into such like inconsistencies, that, in one moment, set up a
proposition, and, in the next, subverted it again. He perceives, if we may
so speak, an universal flood of sin ; but he dreads to examine it closely.

516 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
and conceals from hiraself its source. We cannot, by this theory, un
derstand how sin came into the world ; nor can Reason be satisfied
with a doctrine of an evil, being inherited by children frora their pa
rents, when that evil is considered as a mere accident, and is referred
to no primary cause. Or does Swedenborg derive this evil propensity,
transraitted by sexual propagation, from the original constitution of
man? Then, undoubtedly, the undeniable fact would not be represented,
as a raere accident ; but, we find in Swedenborg's writings no syllable
to justify such a supposition. On the other hand, Gustavus Knos, pro
fessor of the oriental languages at the University of Upsal, who died
some years ago, and who was by no means a slavish follower of Sweden.
borg, has, in his soliloquies on God, man, and the world, set forth evil,
as something necessarily connected with the finite nature of man. But,
the question recurs, whether the other Swedenborgians will subscribe
to so perverse a doctrine. Without this tenet, their theory of here
ditary evU is the most incoherent rhapsody, that can well be im
agined. i LXXXI. — Incarnation of the Divinity, — Objects of the Incarnation. — Relation
between grace and free-will.
We must now describe fhe objects of the Incarnation of the Divinity,
as set forth by Swedenborg. The rejection of the great dograa of the
Atoneraent, through Christ's bloody sacrifice on the cross, so essentially
Christian, so clearly founded in Scripture and Tradition, is intimately
connected with the misapprehension of the origin of human sinfulness.
The Scriptural opposition between the first and the second Adam, is de
void of sense, in the system of Swedenborg. Having once abandoned
the Scriptural point of view, he was no longer able to discover, in the
condition of mankinds any adequate cause to account for the incarnation
of the Logos. He, accordingly, in order to assign sufficient motives
for this great event, looked for the causes, beyond the sphere of hu
manity. The huraan liiindis urged by an indomitable instinct, fo con-
sider itself an integral member of a great spiritual kingdom extending
over aU worids, and to connect the prosperity of the divine institutions
established on earth, as well as the disorders and concussions, which
interrupt their normal development of Ufe, with occurrences in the next
worid, and to regard thera as a continuance of the vibrations of the lat
ter. Of this fact, the Myths of the Indians, and the reUgious doctrines
of the Parsi, wiU furnish us with priraitive proofs. Christianity, also,
points to a connexion between the faU of the huraan race, and the pre-
cipitation of higher spirits into the abyss ; and speaks, with the utmost

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 617
clearness, of their continued efforts, fo maintain and extend the corrup
tion, which, by their means, had been introduced upon our earth. On
the other hand, it teaches the active interest, which the spirits, who re
mained faithful, as well as the souls, who here below died in coraraunion
with Christ, and are glorified in the other world, exert for the diffusion
of God's kingdom, and its consolidation on earth. But, in Scripture
and the Tradition of the Church, all this is set forth, in a very simple
and general outline. But, in the hands of the fantastic Christian
Gnostics, particularly the Valentinians, the simple doctrine of the
Church was transformed into a vast and connected, but fanciful drama.
They taught that the empire of Eons was disturbed by the passionate
desire of Sophia — that the latter has been redeemed, and the forraer re
novated ; yet, that it was only through the re-establishment in Christ of
aU the Pneumatic natures, which, in consequence of the aforesaid per
turbations, had been transferred into this temporal life, perfect harraony
has been restored even in the world of spirits. In the Gnostic, as well
as in the Manichean systems, the darker powers are brought into a
more or less artificial, and often utterly inconceivable connexion with
occurrences in the Kingdom of Light, which has to be secured against
their strenuous efibrts to invade its frontiers, and to conquer it. Now
a sirailar course Swedenborg pursues. He says, " Redemption consisted
in reducing the hells into subjection, and bringing the heavens into an
orderly arrangement, and renewing the Church on earth by this means ;
and there is no possible method, by which the omnipotence of God
could effect these purposes, than by assuming the huraanity ; just as
there is no possibility for a man to work without hands and arras ; where
fore, fhe humanity is called in "the word, ' the arm of Jehovah.' "* —
Jos. xi. 10 ; xiii. 1.
Swedenborg gives the following raore detailed description of the dis
orders, that, in consequence of the invasion of Satanic powers, had
broken out in the kingdom of happy spirits, and of the deliverence from
this danger, by the mediation of the Redeemer. The Church terres
trial, says he, forms, together with the orders of Spirits in the next
world, an organic whole, so that both may be corapared to a man, whose
entire raembers sufierj when one only is diseased. The merabers of
God's community on earth, constitute, as it were, the feet of this great
body and its thighs ; the celestial spirits, are the breast, the shoulders,
and so forth. The continued growth of raoral corruption here below,
has, accordingly, exerted the most disturbing influence on the whole
spiritual world, and placed it in a condition similar to that of a raan.

• Vol. i. p. 168.

618 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
obliged fo sit on a throne with a broken footstool. The dominion of
Satan has, raoreover, been so prodigiously enlarged, by the very great
imraigrations from the earth, that his subjects dared to penetiate be
yond the frontiers of the blessed, and even threatened to drag these
down with them into the abyss. Now the incarnate God delivered the
good spirits from this importunity of the demons, as He drove them
back within the liraits of hell ; for, as beasts of prey retreat into their
dens ; as frogs dip under water, when their enemies approach ; so fled
the deraons, when the Lord carae out against them.* We see how
Swedenborg here abused the Apostolic doctrine of Christ's descent
into hell.
He further observes, that, by this judicial action, by this rigid sepa
ration of the good from the wicked, the Lord hath exhibited hiraself as
righteousness itself; but by no means in rendering perfect obedience,
during his earthly Ufe in the room of men, and, in this way, becoraing
their righteousness. His obedience in general (he continues,) and his
crucifixion — the last teraptation of the Lord in his huraanity, especially,
have racrited for the latter, only perfect glorification, thaf is to say, the
perfect union with the Deity. No merit of Christ, therefore, according
to Swedenborg, is imputable to man — no vicarious satisfaction can
exist. In his opposition against Lutheran orthodo.xy, which a])peared
to him to undermine all vital Christianity, he went so far, as even fo
deny that evangelical dogma, from which the Christian derives an in
exhaustible moral strength — that dogma, which hath conquered tho
world. In the great disfigurement, which that doctrine had, doubt
less, experienced in the confessions of the Lutherans, he could not dis
cover the simple, great, and profound truth — he misapprehended,
especially, its psychological iraportance, and even proceeded so far, as
to uphold a rederaption, in part, at least, depending on the application
of mere mechanical powers. f
* Vd. i p. 237.
t Mohler says, that according to Swedenborg's theory, "Redemption, in part at
least, depended on the application of mere mechanical powers." How so ? Because
the Swedish prophet makes Redemption to consist, chiefly, in the reducing the hells
into subjection, in delivering the blessed spirits frora the importunity of demons, and
in producmg, by this means, the renovation of the Church. The Cathohc Church,
on the other hand, teaches that the object of the Redemption, was the restoration of
fallen man, his dehverance frora siu, and especially original sin. This is the doc
trine clearly inculcated in Holy Writ — See Luke xix. 10 ; John iii. 14 ; Gal. iv. 4, 5 ;
Heb.v. l.seq.; John 1.29; Rom, v. 12, 15, dl; vi^vii.; 1 Cor. xv. 21,22. Thus,
according to Swedenborg, Redemption produced, as it were, a raere outward mechan
ical change in the raoral condition of raankind ; but, according to Cathdic doctrine,
it brought about a livhig, internal, and organic change. — Trans.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 519
But here Swedenborg could not rest ; and the mode, wherein he still
describes the necessity of the Incarnation of the Deity, for the regene
ration of raankind, is certainly entitled to the epithet of ingenious.
His view is not new, and was already unfolded by fhe Fathers of the
Church, and the Schoolmen, and with greater clearness, copiousness,
and precision, than by Swedenborg ; but, as we have, however, no
ground for supposing, that he was acquainted with the labours of ante
rior times on this raatter, we ought not to refuse hira the merit of an
original discovery. He says, without the condescension of God in
Christ, faith were comparable to a look cast up towards the heavens,
and would be utterly lost in the vague and the iraraeasurable ; but
through Christ it hath received its proper object, and is, thereby, becorae
raore definite. Some fathers of the Church express this thought in the
following manner : to wit, that by his own powers, man is unable to
rise above a mere void, meaningless, unconscious yearning, and that it
IS only through revelation this yearning is satisfied, and is blessed with a
true object. Swedenborg adds (in comraon with Cardinal Cusa, who
has treated this subject in a most intellectual manner,) that, in the re
lations of man to God, the huraan and the divine, the earthly and the
heavenly must every where pervade each other ; that, by communion
with the incarnate Deity, faith and love receive their higher and eter
nal sanction ; but, that as God hath lived among us in a human shape,
those virtues have, thereby, obtained their right foundation, and then
only became our own ; for, the Divine in itself would remain inacces
sible to us.* The one great work of Divine Mercy, we may contem
plate from many points of view ; and the more comprehensive is our
contemplation of that work, the deeper will be our reverence and ado
ration. But, that so important principle in the Incarnation, which is
so clearly expressed in Holy Writ, so distinctly asserted through all
centuries of the Church, and plastically stamped, if I may so speak, on
her public worship — the principle, that the death of the Lord is our life
— ought never to be thrown into the back-ground, rauch less absolutely
rejected. What the northern prophet says as to the duties, required on the part
of raan, in order that he should realize, within hiraself, the regenera
tion, designed for him by God, has much resemblance with the doctrine
of the Catholic Church. In Christ, says Swedenborg, Divine truth and
love became manifest. Hence, man must approach unto him, and re
ceive the truth in faith, and walk according to the sarae in love ; faith
without love, or love without faith, has no value. Hence, respecting
* Vd. i. p. 552;

520 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Justification, he has nearly the same idea, which the Catholic Church
has ever inculcated ; and in his opinion, it is essentially identical with
the sanctification, and inward renovation, produced in faith in Christ.''
But here the great distinction is to be observed, that he deduces not the
forgiveness of sins frora the raerits of Christ. The relation between
Grace and Free- WUl is pretty well set forth ; and in such a way, that
he deviates not into Pelagianisra, and scarcely into Semi-pelagianism —
a circurastance, which from Swedehborg's opposition to Luther's doc
trine, must really excite surprise.
But the historian of dograas will be filled with astonishment, when, on
these raatters, he turns his attention to Swedenborg's historical observa
tions. In order fo justify fhe connexion, which he has assumed be
tween the doctrine of the Trinity, and that of the vicarious Satisfaction,
he asserts, that with the Council of Nice, the Protestant doctrine of the
imputation of Christ's merits has been introduced and maintained.!
This assertion involves a two-fold error ; in the first place, because, be
fore the aforesaid council, an imputation of Christ's merits can be prov
ed to have been the universal belief of the Church ; and secondly, be
cause from that councU down to the sixteenth century, the peculiar Lu
theran theory on this subject, with the exception of some slight and
scattered traces, is not to be found. Luther himself never vaunted of
this concurrence with the doctrine of the Church, subsequently to the
Council of Nice. On the contrary, he raade it his glory to have caught
a deeper insight into the meaning of St. Paul, than all the fathers of
the Church. Swedenborg need only have read the commentaries on
St. Paul's Epistles, which Chrysostom and Theodoret, in the Greek
Church, and Ambrosiaster and Jerome, in the Latin, have composed,
to see the faUacy of his strange conceit. As to the theologians of the
raiddle age, every page of their writings will refute the assertion of Swe
denborg. How then, would the opposition between Catholics and Pro
testants be explicable, if, on the article of belief in question, fhe forraer

* Vol. i. p 283. " By means of divine truth originating in good, that is, by
means of faith originating in charity, man is reformed and regenerated, and also re
newed, quickened, sanctified, justified ; and, in proportion to this progress and
growth in these graces, is purified from evils; in which purification consists the re
mission of sins."
t Vol. iii. p. 317. " That the faith, which is imputative of the merit and righte
ousness of Christ the Redeemer, first took its rise from the decrees m the Council of
Nice, conceming three Divine Persons from eternity ; which faith, from that time
to the present, has been received by the whole Christian world." P. 312 : " That im
putation and the faith of the present Church, which alone is said to justify, are one
thing."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 521
had ever put forth the same doctrine as the latter ? Swedenborg does
not even adduce a single historical testiraony, in support of his asser
tion, and contents himself with mere round assurances, without reflect
ing that, in matters so important, proofs, and not mere assurances, are
required. Swedenborg was not aware, that we can believe in an im
putation of the merits of Christ, without being in the least forced to
adopt the peculiar theories of the Reformers of Wittenberg and of Ge
neva. In other places, where he treats of the separation of Protest
ants frora the Catholic Church, and of their peculiar doctrines, in con
sequence of that schism, he even contradicts hiraself, forgets, at all
events, the broad distinction, which, according to what has been already
recounted, he had laid down between Catholics and Protestants, as to
their capability for embracing in the next world, the entire truth, and
precisely in regard to the article of Justification.
Upon his doctrine of Free-will, also, Swedenborg did not a little pique
himself, under the supposition that it was utterly unknown to the whole
Christian Church ; and his English editor, in all seriousness, points to
this notion, as to something quite new and unheard-of. Truly, if we at
tend only to fhe Formulary of Concord, from which Swedenborg raakes
long extracts, as well as to the writings of Calvin, we should be justified
in believing, that the doctrine of Free-will, is nowhere any longer
known. But how rauch soever Swedenborg descants on Free-will, he
gives, araid alt his iraages, no very clear notion of it, although it is not
to be doubted that this idea floated before his mind.'*
§ Lxxxn. — Swedenborg's Doctrine relative to the Sacraments.
Swedenborg's doctrine on the Sacraments, has, independently of its
peculiar language, nothing very striking, although he thinks the con
trary, and opines, that without knowledge of the spiritual sense, that is
to say, the mystico-allegorical meaning, and especially of the corres
pondences between heaven and earth, nothing solid can be adduced even
on this article of belief. Moreover, the two sacraments. Baptism and
the Lord's Supper (for more he doth not acknowledge,) are, in his opin
ion, very precious ; and he strives, with all his powers, to promote a
lively reverence for, and worthy reception of fhe same. Of baptism,
he teaches, that, through three stages, it is designed to work an inward
purification. In the first place it conducts into fhe Christian Church ;
secondly, by its means, the Christian is brought to a knowledge and re
cognition of the Saviour and Redeeraer ; and, thirdly, in it man is born
* Vol. i. pp. 108-156. See also Vol. ii. p. 273.

622 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
again through the Lord. But, these three objects of baptism, are, in
themselves one and the sarae, and are in the same relation one to the
other, as cause and effect, and the medium between the two.*
But the knowledge of celestial correspondences, above all, serves to
initiate Christians into the essence of the holy communion. Flesh and
bread are the earthly signs of the Divine love and goodness (holiness ;)
blood and wine the emblem of God's truth and wisdom. Eating is like
to appropriation. But now, flesh and bread in the holy comraunion,
are the Lord himself, considered in the character of love and goodness-
Blood and wine, in like manner, the Lord himself in His truth and wis
dom. There accordingly are, as Swedenborg expresses himself, three
principles, which, in this sacrament especially, are interwoven into each
other : — the Lord, his Divine goodness, and his Divine truth ; and con
sequently, it is evident, that in the Lord's Supper, all the blessings of
heaven and the Church are, in an especial manner, included and ira
parted ; for, in these three principles, which constitute the universal,
aU particulars are contained. Thus God, and with Him faith and
charity, are the gifts vouchsafed to man in the participation of this sac
rament. That the glorified humanity is here present, together with the
Divinity, Swedenborg, in a special section, very clearly shows, and ob
serves, at the sarae time, that the Eucharist is a spiritual food, for the
very reason that the glorified huraanity is there proffered to us.
In order to prove fhe possibiUty of such a participation, Swedenborg
observes : every sound soul has the faculty to receive from the Lord
wisdom, that is to say, truths, and to augment the same to all eternity ;
in like raanner to receive charity, and to increase perpetually in the
same. But now, the Lord is charity and wisdora itself; consequently
man is able to unite himself to Him. It is here evident, that wisdom
and charity are regarded by Swedenborg as something substantial — as
the subtlest emanations from the Deity, and the Deity itself : inthe
same way, as in the other world, he beheld God as a sun, from which
alone Ught and heat are emitted, that is to say, wisdora and charity.
To avoid probably pantheistic views, fhe prophet adds, the Divinity it -
self cannot be identified, but only united with man ; in the sarae raan
ner as the sun is not conjoined with the eye, nor the air with the ear,
but are only adjoined to those organs, in order to render the senses of
seeing and of hearing possible. "("

* Loc. cit. p. 389. " In a like raanner as a first cause, a middle cause, which is
the efficient, and ultiraate cause, which is the effect, and the end, for the sake of
which the former causes were produced."
t Loc. cit. p. 445. " StiU, however, as mau is a finite bemg, the Lord, divinity

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 523
In fhe sarae way, continues Swedenborg, as baptisra introduces us
into the Church, the holy communion introduces us into heaven. For,
the Lord and Saviour who is present in the sacraraent, has necessarily
heaven also in his train, and opens it to those, who worthily partake of
the divine repast. It is otherwise with the unworthy coraraunicant.
To the worthy, God is, in this feast, inwardly and outwardly present :
inwardly, by His love and truth : outwardly by His omnipresence,
which determines the existence of all things. In the wicked is found
the mere general omnipresence of God, without the forraer. To mere
carnal and mere natural men, who withdraw frora obedience to God,
and only know and speak of the Divine Truth, but never practise it,
the Lord, in despite of existence, reveals not heaven. One might feel
disposed to conclude from this, that Swedenborg agrees with Calvin,
when he teaches, that to the reprobate, fhe glorified body of the Lord
is not imparted. Swedenborg, however, is utterly opposed to the Ge
nevan Reformer, for, according to the latter, the food of eternal life is
not imparted to him, who is predestined to eternal death ; but, accord
ing to fhe former, it is only not received by the unworthy coraraunicant,
that is to say, not imbibed in the inmost life of the spirit, although prof
fered fo him.* What Swedenborg teaches, besides, respecting the
Eucharist ; fo wit, that it worketh an union with the Deity, and is the
stamp of the sons of God, and so forth, is only a further consequence
of what has been hitherto stated. Moreover, in his exposition of the
doctrine of the Eucharist, Swedenborg entirely passes over the relation,
which the sarae bears to the death of our Ijord, and fo the forgiveness
of sins, clearly as that relation is pointed out in Holy Writ. The rao
tives, for this his omission, are to be sought for, in the above mentioned
view, which he takes of Christ's passion and death.
§ Lxxxiii. — Swedenborg's revelations from the other world.
With fhe information, which Swedenborg brought frora the next
world, respecting its state aad its relations, and which he has recorded
in his writings, we wish not to amuse our readers ; though to many,
undoubtedly, the investigation of this subject would be, precisely, the
most attractive. We shall only communicate so much as appears ne
cessary, partly to complete our knowledge of the Swedenborgian doc-

itself, cannot be conjoined with him, but adjoined." At. p. 70, the author says, that
" conjoined," signifies an unity like that of the fruit with the tree, but " adjoined,"
a more external union, as when fruits are bound to a tree."
* Loc. cit. p. 396.

624 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
trines, and partly to explain much, that has been hitherto stated.
When souls quit the visible worid, they go to a locality hovering be
tween heaven and hell ; and feeling themselves by degrees irresistibly at
tracted to their kindred spirits, they gradually advance into heaven or holl.
The husband, with haste, seeks his spouse, and rice versa ; andin
general, each one the corapamons of his earthly sufferings and joys,
araong whora alone he finds himself at home. In these descriptions,
Swedenborg indisputably displays a very subtle psychology. Those,
moreover, who are neither ripe for heaven, nor find joy in hell, are in
structed and educated, until by the use of their freedom, they attain un
to pure truth and charity, whereby heaven becoraes accessible to them.
The members of every religion, confession, and sect, receive teachers of
their own party, and the Heathen, Jew, and Mohamraedan, are not ex
cluded from this school. But, if they resist all attempts for their im
provement or perfection, they are then swaUowed up by hell. We do
not see why Swedenborg should have manifested such a decided hostil
ity against the Catholic doctrine of purgatory, although, undoubtedly,
between the latter and fhe intermediate place of the Swedenborgians,
iraportant differences are to be found.
The relations in the next world, according to the depositions of our
eye-witness, perfectly resemble those on earth. There also, are houses,
and palaces with rooms and furniture ; there, too, are mountains and
valle5's, rivers and lakes. Tirae, also, and a very substantial space, rule
the world of spirits. Nations and individuals retain their peculiarities;
hence, in the next world, the Dutch still carry on coraraerce. The only
difference is, that all things are in a more glorified and spiritual shape,
than here below, for the gross body of fhe present life is thrown off;
and even the resurrection of the flesh, according to Swedenborg, does
not take place. The new body, however, retains quite the forra of the
old one, so that many who pass into the next life, perceive not that they
no longer possess their former corporeal integument.
In 1757, the last judgment was held, and Swedenborg, as an amazed
spectator, assisted at it. The same is also held from tinie to time.
Even the damned could be deUvered, if they wished. Swedenborg saw
one of them, who had once been a highway-robber, and had been guil
ty of adultery, and who, soraehow or other, had strayed among the
angels. These endeavored to work on his understanding, and he really
understood what they said and wished. But, on their demanding him
to love the truth, which he recognized ; he replied, he would not,, and
returned to hell. The phenomenon Swedenborg makes use of, in order
to prove Free-wUl. Here, the penetrative man evinces his sagacity ;
for, certainly, there are reprobates, who will not be happy, and there-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS, 52S
fore cannot be so. This narrative agrees very weU with the other doc
trines of Swedenborg, that God is perpetually present with man so long
as he lives, and exerts a constant influence over him to procure his
conversion ; but, that those who die in the wickedness of their heart,
are irreformable, " because the interiors of their minds," says Sweden
borg, " are fixed and determined."
§ LXXXIV.— Biblical Canon of Swedenborg. Allegorico-mystical Exegesis.
With Swedenborg's peculiar views on Holy Writ, we must now make
our readers acquainted.* On perusing his writings, we are soon very
painfully surprised with the fact, that he makes no doctrinal use of St.
Paul's epistles. At least, we cannot recall to our recollection, that we
have ever found any notice taken of thera, even on those points, where
such would be indispensable ; as in the articles of Justification, and of
Faith, and of its relation to Works. This fact we, at last, found clear
ed up, " by the chief articles of faith of the New Church," subscription
to which is required, as a condition, from all those who desire to enter
into the community, founded by Swedenborg. In these " chief articles,"
we find the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaraent enumera
ted ; but, among the component parts of the latter, the four Gospels and
the A[iocalypse are alone reckoned."f The influence which Sweden
borg's dogmatic system exerted on the framing of his Biblical Canon,
no one can deny. Hence, before we could speak of the latter, it was
necessary to set forth his doctrines. The rejection of the dogmas of
original sin, of the vicarious satisfaction of Christ, of the resurrection
of the flesh, and so forth, led him to expunge, from the catalogue of the
sacred writings, the Epistles of St. Paul, the Acts of the Apostles, in
short, every thing which, even by the raost forced interpretation, could
not be raade to harmonize with his own errors. In the Acts of the
Aposdes, especially, the account of the real descent of the Paraclete,
who was to lead the Church into aU truth, and to abide with her for ever,
must, undoubtedly, have been a great stumbling-block in his way. In
fact, the Swedenborgians endeavour to represent their master as him
who has at last communicated what originally was inaccessible, or un
intelligible, to believers. I have discovered, at least, that Swedenborg's
disciples, in proof of the divine mission of their teacher, have appealed
to those promises of a Paraclete, recorded in St. John's Gospel. When,

? Vd. i. pp. 373-460.
t " Divine Revelations made knovm by Swedenborg, translated into German by
Emanuel Tafels." Vol. ii. Tubingen, 1824,

526 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
moreover, the apostle saith : " No eye hath seen, no ear hath heard,
nor hath it entered into the heart of man to conceive, what God hath
prepared for those who love Hira ;" he raust certainly have appeared not
very entitled to credence, in the estimation of one, who, in his ovvn per
son had observed the joys of the blessed, and in his writings had lifted
up for the edification of mankind, the veU, which the apostle had fain
have thrown over the realms of eternity. When Swedenborg rejected,
also, the Epistle of St. James, and other scriptures, as uncanonical, he
was driven, for consistency's sake, to this step.
If, together with this arbitrary mode of dealing with the canon, we
consider the foUowing hermeneutical principles of Swedenborg, we shall
not bc surprised, that the most fantastic doctrines should have been pro
pounded by hira as Christian. Swedenborg says, that, in fhe literal
sense of Holy Writ, the Divine truth is contained in all its plenitude,
holiness and power ; and to the demonstration of this truth, he devotes
a special treatise. Yet, he supposes a mystical sense, which he calls
the spiritual one, to be concealed in the letter of Scripture ; so that the
entire truth is comprised in its every word, nay, often in its every syl
lable I This doctrine Swedenborg establishes in the closest connexion
with those correspondences, that, according to him, exist between heaven
and earth, and he gives several interpretations of texts from the Apoca
lypse, whereby he endeavours to render his view more evident. These
theories, considered in themselves, are not so very obnoxious to censure ;
they, on the contrary, are based on a great truth, and, to a certain ex
tent, are justified by those relations, which, according to the most ex
plicit declarations in the New Testament, exist between the Scriptures
of the Old and the New Covenant. To this raode of interpretation, as
an exercise for mystical acuteness (if we dare use such an expression,)
we even cannot entirely deny all value. It is, likewise, a well-known
fact, that, according to the character of different ages, and the peculi
arities of individual men, it has had great influence in awakening reli
gious feelings, and, at many periods, has guarded Holy Writ against
the contempt of arrogant, carnal-minded men, or against the neglect of
men, pious, indeed, but utterly unacquainted with the laws of a gram
matical and historical, yet spiritual, exegesis. But, if such a mode of
interpretation, when not practised by inspired writers, opens, under all
circumstances, boundless scope to the play of an irregular fancy, or to
the effusions of mere individual feeUng, it is sure to lead to the grossest
errors, when it is made the medium for discovering, and establishing,
articles of doctrine. Dogmas, which by the most unhistorical method,
men had perhaps stumbled on, may, by self-delusion and a sraall portion
of wit, be found stated in every text of Scripture. This was now ac-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 527
tually the case with Swedenborg, who could discover fhe strangest
things in the Bible. Lastly, the presumptuous ignorance, with which
he judges the history of the allegorico-mystical interpretation of Scrip
ture, appears highly censurable. The higher the estimation is, in which
he holds the latter, the greater the earnestness wherewith he asserts,
that it was all but unknown, as well araong the Jews, on account of
their carnal sense, as among fhe Christians of the first three centuries,
on account of their too great simplicity, and among those of subsequent
ages, from the general corruption. He insists, that it was only by a
ipecial revelation he was made attentive to it, or at all events favoured
with the true key for its right use. But what is his distinction between
the various senses of Holy Writ, other than the Sod (body,) the De-
rusch (soul,) and the Phaschiith (spirit of the Cabala ;) — senses which
themselves correspond to the rajfia, the -4-vx^, and the ^tsu/itt, of Philo ?*
And wherein do the Swedenborgian correspondences between heaven
and earth, so essentially differ frora the celestial and terrestrial Jerusalera
(the «v« and the xxra ^Upava-itXiiiA.,) the carnal and the spiritual Israel
(the 'Is-faijA trct^xixoT and 7rvet>ft«Tixa'f,) with which the same Philo has
made us acquainted ? And what shall we say fo the astounding asser
tion, that in the first centuries of the Church, the allegorico-mystical
exegesis was unknown ? Just as if Basilides, Valentinus, and Origen,
had lived in the sixth century ! That Swedenborg should have possess-
ed any acquaintance with the writings of Gregory the Great, of Alcuin,
of Richard, of St. Victor, or with the description of the three senses
given by Thomas Aquinas and others, it would be too rauch to require
of him ; nor should we have even noticed the contradictions, into which
he has fallen with well-known historical facts, had he not vaunted him
self as an extraordinary divine envoy, and represented his book as one
written under God's especial guidance.
Swedenborg shows great pettiness, and even childishness, in making
a sort of fire-work out of Holy Writ. In the spiritual world, says he,
where the Bible is preserved in holy chests, in the sanctuary of the
Temple, it is regarded with respect by the angels; and it is as radiant
as a great star, and, at times, like the sun, and its glimmering splendour
forms the most magnificent rainbow ! If any one, with his hands or
clothes, touch the Bible, he is iraraediately environed with a brilliant
fire, and he appears as if standing in the raidst of a star, bathed in light !
This, adds Swedenborg, he has offen seen and admired ! But if any

* Vol. i. p. 378. " The spiritual sense doth not appear m the literal sense, being
within it, aa the soul is in the body ; or as the thought of the understandmg is in tlie
eye, or as the affection of love is in the countenance."

628 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
one, entangled in errors, look info the sacred coffer, then his eyes
are overclouded with deep darkness ; and if he venture to touch the
AVord itself, an explosion immediately ensues, which flings him " into a
corner of the room."* Had these descriptions been mere allegorical
representations, to point out to sensual men the effulgence of divine
light, wherewith a soul is filled, that with feelings hallowed fo God draws
from Holy Writ life and nurture ; and, on the other hand, the profound
darkness and appalling night that encompass those, who pervert Scrip
ture to the confirmation of the fancies of their own brain ; we should
then have commended the aptness of such illustrations. But such is
not Swedenborg's meaning ; he here designs to state positive facts.
For our part, we here discern an idolatry manifested to the dead word
of Scripture, which exceeds aU that the slavishness to the mere letter
has ever exhibited, and has perhaps no parallel in history, except in the
controversy among Mohammedans, whether the Koran be created or
uncreated. Yet even the rational Moslem will reply, thaf the ideas,
indeed, of the sacred book are eternal, but by no means the form, where
in they are set forth. 4 LXXXV.— Swedenborg's place in History.
To form a more comprehensive knowledge of Swedenborgianisra, it
is necessary to point out more fully the idea, which its author enter
tained of his own historical importance. He divides the history of the
world into so many great periods, which he denominates Churches ; to
wit, the AntedUuvian ; the Asiatico- African, which attained its term by
the introduction of idolatry ; the Mosaic ; and, lastly, the Christian
Church. In the latter, he again distinguishes four Churches, the Ante-
Nicene, the Greek, the Roman CathoUc, and the Protestant. The
last-naraed, also, like the preceding Churches, has already reached its
end : hence, with the New Community, the times revert to the origin
of the Church — to primitive Christianity, whose principles can hence
forth never more be forsaken. So far Swedenborg, who as is clear from
this, formed no slight estimate of his own historical iraportance. Let
us first take into consideration the view of universal history, prior to
Christ, as set forth by hira. He says, the four great periods of the
world follow each other, according to the type of the four seasons of the
year, and the four tiraes of the day ; and the sarae regularity, which,
on a smaU scale, is observed in this succession of times, exists there on

Loc. cit. p. 396.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 529
a larger scale. On the impropriety of making Christianity faU in with
tihe winter and the night, we will not lay any particular stress, although
Christianity expressly declares itself to be the never-setting noon-day of
ages. But, what Christian can tolerate the subordinate position which
is assigned to Christ ? Instead of representing him, as the great centre-
point of the world's history, he is made to begin a period merely co-
' ordinate with the other epochs of the world ! This would have been, at
least, no error of the understanding, had Swedenborg regarded Christ
as a mere man ; but, it becomes the greatest of errors, since Christ he
CQnsiders to be the incarnate God. If the Deity manifests Himself in
the flesh, so thereby, it is hoped, an epoch is introduced, to which no
thing can be adjoined, but all things should be r^jade subordinate. From
.this point of view alone, Swedenborg might have discerned the essen
tial defects in this system.
The cause of this perverse construction of human history, must be
looked for in the fact, that Swedpnborg would not acknowledge a
general fall of the human race, anrt in reaUty, was at a loss how to ex
plain the very evident fact of a radical sinfulness in man. Had Swe-
denborg deeply considered the scriptural opposition between the
first and the second Adam, instead of occupying himself with allegories
in respect to the first ; had be, in the faU of Adam, deplored with a
pious simpUcity, at least, the fall of all mankind, though he had heen
incapable of comprehending the speculative reasons of this fact, then
the whole period, from Adam to Christ, would have appeared to him as
the period of the development of the sinful principle, and of an apos
tacy from God ; hxit> on the other hand, he would have regarded Christ
as the great turning-point in history, with whom commenced the un-
folding of the principle of sanctification, and of a return to the Deity.
This one great period he might then have again, in some manner, sub-
dirided ; but should never have placed the period from Adam to Noah,
that from Noah to Moses (or what he calls the Asiatico- African
Church,) and the period from Moses to Christ, on the same level with
the Christian epoch. Such a parallel was only possible through a total
misapprehension of the Christian view of the moral world. The text
in Romans (c. v. 14-21 ; xi. 32,) and in Galatians (c. in. 22,) might
alone have sufficed to teach him the right and the true view, had he not,
on that very account, struck out St. Paul's Epistles from the catalogue
of canonical Scriptures, precisely because they offer so clear a contra
diction to his whole conception of religious History.
His main point of view being thus distorted, Swedenborg can give
no satisfactory explanation of any great phenoraenon in religious his
tory ; on the contrary, in his system all is dismembered, unintelligible,
34

530 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
and incoherent. The idolatry of Nature he deduces from the acciden
tal circumstance, that the correspondences between the material and
the spiritual world had been forgotten. The revelation, which, as Swe
denborg possitively asserts, was made to Enoch, and transraitted to the
following generations (namely, that all objects in the lower world had
their correlatives in the higher,) and the true knowledge of these rautual
relations in special, defined cases, were, in the course of ages, accord
ing to our prophet, effaced frora the memory of nations ; earthly things
were regarded without connexion with the things corresponding to
them above ; and the veneration, which was due to the latter, was paid
to the former. This view of Swedenborg's has much resemblance
with the more commob> but equaUy superficial, notion, that out of the
confusion of the syrabol with the object represented by it, idolatry
arose. But, the question must ever recur, how could those relations
adverted to be forgotten, and where raust we look for the cause of this
oblivion 1 Wherefore, also, raust the faith in the one true God have
been at fhe same time abandoned "i The consciousness of God was
certainly not essentially connected wuh the knowledge of such corres
pondences between heavenly and earthly things, since Enoch was the
first to be instructed in thera; and yet before hira, certainly, men had
also known fhe frue God. Had Swedenborg acknowledged a general
darkening of the human mind through sin, a corruption transraitted
frora Adam, and with ever-increasing intensity, contaminating aU
generations, he would not have sought to account for the idolatry of
Nature, from such mere external causes. He would have understood,
that the soul severed from God by sin, necessarily fell under the do
minion of Nature, and chose those Powers for the object of its worship,
with whora it felt an especial affinity, and by whom it was invincibly
attracted. The loss of the essential, internal, and universal correspon
dences between God and man, led to the ignorance of those external
and particular correspondences, between the inferior and the higher
order of the world. The separation of the soul from God, and its con-
centration within itself, first produced this conception of nature, as dis
connected from all higher relations.
Let us, once raore, call to mind one of the proofs attempted by Swe
denborg, in support of the necessity of the Incarnation of the Deity, in
order to bring back men to Himself; for it is only here that proof can
be perfectiy appreciated. He says, the faith of man, considered in it
self, may be compared to a look cast up vaguely towards the sky, but,
through the Incarnation, is the sarae circumscribed, and directed to a
definite object. If, hereby, tbe necessity of an Incarnation of the
Divinity be rendered perfectly conceivable, yet this argument ofiers no

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 531
reason, wherefore the Divine Word should have become flesh precisely
at the coramencement of the fourth period of fhe world. Swedenborg
might, just as well, have introduced this Theophany iraraediately after
the creation of the first man. Nay, he was forced io do this, unless all
the aberrations of the ages prior to Christianity — unless all Heathenism
itself be regarded as perfectly guiltless. Did the first men, unfavoured as
they were with the descent of the Son of God, cast a less vague look up
to Heaven, than those of later times? For this very reason, Sweden
borg should have placed the advent of Christ at the very origin of His
tory ; and thus the first, and not the fourth, period of the world, should
have begun with Him. Had he, on the other hand, kept strictly in view
the teaching of the Bible, as to end of the mission of the Son of God,
then he would have understood the epoch of his coraing. The whole
drama of History, as set forth by our prophet, appears without a plan ;
the members of the great historical organism appear to hang, as if by
accident, together, and to mingle in blind confusion. Now we can see,
wherefore Swedenborg himself .seemed to have a sense of the unsatis
factoriness of the cause assigned by hira, for the incarnation of the
Deity at the particular period wherein it occurred ; and wherefore he
sought to aid his meagre representation, by a fantastic device as to the
relation between heaven and hell. He saw himself forced to the adop
tion of this device, in order to account, by the relations of the next Ufe,
for the incarnation of the Deity, which had no foundation in this world's
history ; — a device, whereby the error of his whole historical construc
tion, is not in the least degree obviated.
When we now come to the Christian period, what a singular view
of its history, what an astonishing spectacle, presents itself here ! The
Church also, as we have already observed, is divided into a cycle of
four parts ; and yet, says Swedenborg, with the Council of Nice be
gins the great apostacy from Christian truth, which lasts down to his
own tirae ! But the notion of apostacy, irapUes the idea of perversity
and disorder. How then would it be possible to find a regular develop
ment in the four Christian Churches, the three last members whereof
are to be, in the same relation to the first, as sumraer, autumn, and
winter, to the spring ; or even as youth, manhood, and old age, to in
fancy I Where a well-ordered developraent is observed, where a
regular transition, from one state to another, is manifest, a rejection of
the original vital principle is not conceivable. Where, on the other
hand, this is rejected, as Swedenborg accuses the whole Church subse
quent to the Council of Nice, of casting off such a principle, there a
regular development is not possible. Even our finisher of the Church
had a sense of the incoherence of his historical constructions. On this

532 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
account he endeavours to excuse, in eome manner, the apostacy, and
speaks to fhe beneficial variety of religious J^differences, that mutuaUy
enlighten one another, and even lets the remark escape him, that he
had been informed, that those Churches, which are in different goods and
truths, if only their goods have relation to the love of the Lord, and their
truths to faith in hira, are like so many precious jewels in a king's
crown."* If hereby, a kind of necessity in the marked out succession
of Churches is acknowledged, so no one, who holds the maxim, that
above aU things, a writer should never contradict himself, would expect
Swedenborg to designate all the Christian ages, that have elapsed since
the CouncU of Nice, " as the very night ;" " as the abomination of deso-
lation ;" " as that Church, wherein nothing spiritual is left remaining ;"'j"
" which in name only is Christian ;":j: or (as the AngUcan writer of fhe
preface fo the book, from which we have made our^extracts, expresses
himself,) " as fhe revelation of the mystery of iniquity ;" " asthe man
of sin;" or whatever other predicates may please him. A marvellous
expansion, fruly, of childhood fo youth, to manhood, and to age I
After such a confused succession of times andof Churches, Sweden
borg fitly follows as the extremest link. In a true developraent, the
continuation and the end are so connected with the beginning, that not
only doth the latter foUow the preceding in gentle transitions, but it
grows out of it, and is in the same relation to it, as the bud, the blossom,
and fhe fruit, are to fhe seed. Yet Swedenborgianism doth not grow
out of the sequence of historical phenomena, but breaks suddenly in
upon them. We have already had occasion to observe, that, accord.
ing to Swedenborg, the corruption of the Church began at once, at a
single stroke, as if by some magical interruption, f o the train of thought
of all her raembers. Equally abrupt and unexpected is theorise of his
own religious systera. He charges the Church existing before him,
with having, by the abuse of free-will, abandoned, and never again re
turned, to the fundamental principles of Christianity ; and asserts, at
the same time, that it is impossible to attain to thera again, without an
intercourse with the spiritual world, — without the knowledge of certain
truths, which no raan, before him, possessed, because none had been
favoured with the like revelations. But, as the revelations were the

* Loc. cit. p. 515.
+ Loc. cit. p. 512. " That the last time of the Christian Church is the very night,
in which the former Churches have sat, is plain from the Lord's prediction," &c.
Vol. i. p. 253 : " Nothing spiritual is left reraaining in it " (the whole Church.)
} Vol. ii. p. 373 : " The former Church being Christian in name only, but not ia
essence and reality."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 533
-result of an extraordinary grace of Gbd, and as, in the Church'itself,
all elements for a true regeneration had been, since the Nicene Council,
utterly lost, how could the Swedenborgian Church follow the preced
ing Churches, in a regular order of development ? All sects, that
Seceded from the Catholic Church, could, in a certain degree, give a
plausible justification to their charges against her, inasmuch, as they
appealed to Scripture, whereby her regeneration were possible. The
censure of the Reformers, indeed, must always be termed incomprehen
sible, since it presupposed the free-will of those, against whom it was
directed ; and this faculty the Reformers denied to men, representing
the Deity as the exclusive agent in all spiritual concerns, on whora it
entirely depended fo set aside, as by a magical stroke, all errors, and
who, in consequence, was alone obnoxious fo any charge, if in His
household any thing were amiss. These reproaches, nevertheless,
might, to men, who are not wont to reason with consistency, appear
well-founded. But Swedenborg boasts that the true spiritual sense of
Holy Writ was revealed to him in Heaven only, and, in consequence,
quite independently of the ordinary channels, furnished through the
original institution of the Church ; and he therefore denies to the three
preceding periods of Christianity, the utter possibility of possessing,
through fhe then existing media, any sound doctrine whatsoever. And
yet he describes the community he founded, as the crown of tha
Churches following each other " according to order !" Was then the
apostacy of the Nicene Council something conformable to order ? Was
the darkness of fhe Greek, the Roman Catholic, and the Protestant
Churches, founded in the very ordinance of God ? In the same way,
too, as, according to the theory of our sage, Christ raight have appeared
in the tirae of jVdam, Noah, and Moses ; so he hiraself, from the desti
nation assigned to hira, might have commenced his career in the fourth,
fifth, or sixth century of our era. And yet, the succession of the
Churches was defined and systematic I Not the slightest reference to
final causes can be discovered, in this contradictory view of History, and
its result appears totally unworthy of the Deity.
But here, we must draw the attention of the reader to a special cir
cumstance. Wherefore had Christ not power enough to stem, by his
manifestation, the progress of sin, and to ensure the truth, he had
brought to mankind, against the possibUity of extinction ? Wherefore
did the Word, which was uttered from his lips, which was preserved
and explained by his spirit, lose, so shortly after his ascension, its world-
Subduing energy ? And wherefore doth it work with might and with
victory, and become for ever permanent, only when proclairaed by
Swedenborg ? We should yet be disposed to think, that when God

634 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
himself speaks, the Word is at least as lasting, as when a mortal bab
bles, though tb him all mysteries in heaven should have been disclosed !
The work of Christ lasted about three hundred years— a short spring
tide— tUI, at last, Swedenborg converts all into eternal spring! Is not
this the most evident blasphemy 1 Swedenborg is really exalted to be
the centre-point of all History, and to hold the place of the true Re
deemer ; with him, and not with Christ, the golden age returns I

§ LXXXVI. — Concluding Reraarks.
The translations of Swedenborg's writings find, as we hear, a very
great sale in and out of Germany, and the number of his followers daily
increases. This we can perfectly understand. The unadorned Gos
pel, the siraplicity of fhe Church's doctrine, are no longer capable of
exciting an age so spiritually enervated, like our own. Truth must be
set forth in glaring colours, and represented in gigantic proportions, if
we hope to stimulate and stir the souls of this generation. The infinite
void and obtuseness of religious feeling in our tirae, when it cannot
grasp spirits by the hand, and see them pass daily before us, is inca
pable of beUeving in a higher spiritual world ; and the fancy must be
startled, by the raost terrific iraages, if the hope of prolonging existence,
•in a future world, is not entirely to be extinguished. Long enough
was the absurd, as well as deplorable endeavour made to banish mira
cles from the Gospel History ; to undermine, with insolent mockery,
the belief in the great manifestation of the Son of God ; to call in
question all Uving intercourse, between the Creator and the creature ;
and to inundate nations with the most shallow systems of morality ; for
these followed in the wake of such anti-Christian efforts. But, the
yearning soul of man is not to be satisfied with such idle talk ; and
when you take from it true miracles, it will then invent false ones.
Our age is doomed to witness the desolate spectacle of a most joyless
languor, and impotence of the spiritual life, by the side of the most
exaggerated and sickly excitement of the same ; and if we do not,
with a living and spiritual feeUng, return to the doctrine of the Church,
we shall soon see the most wretched fanaticisra obtain the sarae as
cendancy, as we saw the most frivolous unbelief estabUshed on the
throne. But by such phenomena will no one be conducted fo the faith
acceptable unto God ; and the answer, which in the Gospel (Luc, xvi.
19) that luxurious, hard-hearted, rich man received from Abraham,
when he begged him fo send Lazarus to his brethren, to the end that
they might be converted, may perfectly apply to Swedenborg's fol-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 535
lowers, when they hold that the world needs a visionary, in order to
bring it back to the truth,* and will be found to contain a valid testi
mony against their prophet. We have Moses and fhe Prophets, and
now also we have Christ and the Apostles, and the Church ; and when
we hear not these, we shaU give no ear to him, who pretends to bring
us tidings from the other world. With these words alone, hath Christ
annihilated all expectations, which might attach to Swedenborg's
visions. '

» See the letter from Thoraas Hartley, rector of Wenwick, in Northamptonshire,
in the preface to the True Christian Religion, p. vii.

CHAPTER V.
THE SOCIPTIANS.

§ Lxxxvii. — Relation of the Socinians to the Reformers. — Historical Reraarks.
In the Catholic system of doctrine, two elements — the Divine and the
human, the natural and the supernatural, the mystical and the rational,
or however else we may please to denominate them — move in uniform
and harmonious corabination ; so that the rights of either appear ad
justed in a manner, that must certainly extort esteem and admiration,
from every reflecting mind. And whoever unites a pious. Christian,
and ecclesiastical spirit to a cultivated intellect, must feel himself im-
peUed to acknowledge, that God's protection hath guarded His Church
in an erainent degree. But of the contrarieties, which in the Church
are so beautifully harmonized, the one or the other can easily, in the
individual beUever, obtain the preponderance. Yet this preponderance
will remain innocuous, if the one-sided principle will not proceed to a
total misapprehension of its opposite, unduly appreciated as it is ; and
if the bonds of love, which unite the individual to the body of the
Church, be maintained inviolate ; for it is these, which oppose a bene
ficial check to the excess of one or other of fhe aforesaid elements, that
both form the life of Christianity. Such one-sided tendencies, existing
more or less at all times, were found in the period immediately prior to
the Reforraation ; and the classical studies, which had fhen once raore
corae into vogue, gave to fhe rational principle, in many, a melancholy
preponderance ; as this may be perceived even in the celebrated, and,
in many respects, meritorious, Erasraus. Yet the opposite tendency
was, by far, raore prevalent, as the rapid diffusion of fhe Reformation
itself will prove, wherein the mystical element had predominated, to the
utter exclusion of fhe contrary one. But after this element, exceeding
all bounds, had dissevered the bonds of the Church, fhe one-sided
rational principle, in its turn, detached itself from the Church, pursued
its own course, and after many unsuccessful attempts, of a Lewis
Hetzer of Bischofzeth in Thurgovia,* of a John Campanus,t of a
* Executed at Constance, in 1529.
t Bom in the territory of Juhers, flourished ftom the year 1520 till 1580, when he
was thrown into prison in his own country.

EXPOSI'nON OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c. 637
Michael Servetus,* and of a Valentine GentUis,f formed a community,
which received its name from two Italians of Sienna, LseUus Socinui,
who in the year 1562 died at Zurich, and his nephew, Faustus Socinus,
who died in 1604, at Luclawicze in Poland. J
Socinianism and the old orthodox Protestantisra are, accordingly, tWto
extremes, whereof the one laid hold of the huraan, the other of the
divine eleraent in Christianity, which is itself one, and so diverged into
opposite paths, that Catholicism alone can unite. If, in the Protestant
system, the Divinity of Christ be rightly and truly upheld, yet the
Humanity of the Redeemer is, by the doctrine of ubiquity, absorbed in
His Divinity ; but among the Socinians, Christ appears as a mere man.
If Luther asserted, that the object of the manifestation of the Son of
God, was solely and exclusively the reconciliation of men, with the
Deity in the Redeemer's blood ; and all the rest, which Jesus taught
and wrought, was purely accidental ; the Socinians, on the other hand,
hold, that Christ has offered up no sacrifice, for the sins of the world,
but wished only to deliver unto men a new doctrine, and be to them a
model of virtue. Luther and Calvin could set no bounds to the malig
nant consequences of Adam's sin, that from him had infected his
whole posterity ; but the two Socini know absolutely nothing of any
moral evil, that our great progenitor had brought upon his chUdren.
According to the former, God alone worketh the deUverance of man
frdm the empire of Satan, and bringeth him into comraunion with
Christ, and man is, in this process, purely passive ; according to the
latter, man is alone active, and God, after communicating to him His
doctrine and His promises, respecting a future life, leaves hira almost
entirely to himself. If the old Protestants speak only of grace, we
.  .  — J. -
* A Spaniard, who at Calvin's instigation was bumed at Geneva, in 1553.
t A Neapolitan, beheaded at Bern, in 1566.
X On the tirst authors of Socianism, the Protestant historian, Turretinus, (m
Compendium Hist. Eccles. p. 373,) has the following notice: " Antitrinitarii hao
ffitate multi occurrunt ; quorura pars raaxiraa Photinianisraum et Sabellianisraum ;
nonnuUi etiam Arianismura renovabant. Tales fuere Itali quidara, numero quadra-
genariura excedente, qui circa annura 1546 in Veneta-ditione propre Vicentiara cot-
ventieda et colloquia inter se habebant. In his memorantur Leonardus Abbas Bu-
salis, LiElius Socinus, Senensis Patricius, Bemadinus Ochinus, Nicolaus Paruta,
Valentinus Gentilis, Julius Trevieanus, Franciscus de Ruego, Paulus Alciatus,
aiuque. Sed cum detecti essent, imo et duo, J. Trevisanus et Franciscus de Ruego
comprehensi et supplicio affecti, Cieteri sibi consulturi in varias eras disperai sunt.'
Of all these, Valentme Gentilis had the most melancholy fate. After havmg with
difficdty escaped the fiery death, destined by Calvin for hira, as well as Servetus, he
was conderaned, by the Zwmglians of Bern, as an anti-Trmitarian, and beheaded.—
Trans.

538 EXPOSmON OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
hear, on the other hand, from the lips of the Socinians, but the word,
laws, and precepts. If it be the custom of the Wittenberg theologians,
constantly to despise reason, and if, at the origin of the Reforraation,
they were scarcely able to endure its name, it is a maxim with the
above-mentioned ItaUans to consult it in every thing, to adrait no
thing which was impervious to that degree of culture, that it had
attained to in their own persons, just as they had stood at the very
summit of all attainable knowledge. If we listen to the Reformers,
man has only to fake the Bible in hand, and its contents, in a magical
way, wUl be conveyed, through the Spirit of God, to his mind ; but, if
we turn to Laelius and Faustus, fhey will tell us that, we must under
stand all the languages in the world, and all the rules and arts of bib-
lical criticisra and interpretation, in order to penetrate info the obscurity
of Holy Writ. But, if these two species of religious reforraers, in the
aforesaid, and other like points, pursued courses so totally different,
they again frequently concur in other matters. Not only did both
promise to restore primitive Christianity, and look upon the Bible, as
the only standard and source, from which it was to be drawn, and by
which all religious tenets must be tested, but fhe peculiar starting point
of both was also the same. They united in asserting Christianity to
have a purely practical tendency, adapted folife ; this practical tendency
being taken in the narrow, and one-sided signification, as opposed to
all speculation and high scientific inquiries. In this matter, however,
the other differences between the Reformers and the Socini, exerted,
doubtless, a decisive influence ; the practical tendency of the former
being, in its fundamental tone, exclusively religious ; that of the latter,
exclusively moral.
Protestantisra and Socinianisra have this, too, in comraon ; that as
the forraer checked its own development, and left to later sects, that
sprang out of its bosom, the task of carrying out its own principles ; so
Socinianism bequeathed to a later period the work of ifs own consura
mation, — namely, the entire abandonment of those elements of super
naturalism, which, in its origin, it had not wholly rejected.*
Having now pointed out the historical connexion, between the Pro
testant and the Socinian systems of doctrine, we shall proceed to state
a few historical details. Poland, as hinted above, was the first seat of
the Socinians. Here, neariy contemporaneously with the Reformation of
Luther and of Calvin, the religious system, which denied the dogma of
the Trinity, had penetrated. However much the opponents of the latter

• Moehler here makes an allusion to the Rationalists, who completed tho work of
destruction, begun by the Socinians  Trans.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 539
doctrine, were in hostility with the partisans of the Reformation, they
tolerated each other, lived in mutual concord, and formed together one
Protestant community ; a fact, which it is by no means difficult to
account for, since the enemies to the fundamental doctrines of Chris
tianity, rendered timid from their small numbers, were for a long time
cautious in avowing their sentiraents. So soon, however, as their
numbers were sufficiently increased, and they had assured themselves
of the protection of some powerful patrons, they were no longer able to
maintain silence, or to confine their sentiraents to a raere whisper. At
the synods of Pinczow and Petricow, fhe two parties separated from
each other, in fhe years 1563 and 1565 ; and, everywhere held in ab
horrence, alike by Catholics and Protestants, the Socinians, under the
name of Unitarians, formed a separate sect, for the moraent, undis
turbed frora without, yet inwardly divided by the most various opinions.
Under these circumstances, Faustus Socinus repaired to them, and
succeeded, by degrees, in uniting their discordant views respecting
Christ, and in setting aside the anabaptism advocated by the Unita
rians. Henceforward the Unitarians exchanged their name for that of
Socinians. In fhe year 1638, however, their tranquillity was disturbed in Poland
also. They saw themselves, partly owing to their own fault, deprived
of their school, their church, and their printing-press, in Racovia, where
their chief settiement existed ; tUl at last, chiefly at fhe instigation of
the Jesuits, they were forced to emigrate. The political confederacies
of the 'Unitarians with the Swedes, who had penetrated into Poland,
very much contributed to excite general indignation against them. Uii-
der the guidance of their leaders, Schlichting, Wissowatius, Przypkovi-
us, and Lubienisky, they endeavoured now to establish settlements in
Transylvania, (where already, in the sixteenth century, by means of the
Italian physician, Blandrata, Unitarian principles had taken root,) and
also in Silesia, Prussia, Brandenburg, the Palatinate, and the Nether
lands. It was only in Prussia and fhe March of Brandenburg, that
they succeeded in founding some unimportant congregations ; for, the
general abhorrence for their principles, and for aU attempts to propa
gate them (even, as in Manheira, where they thought themselves se
cure,) opposed great obstacles to their progress. In fhe Netheriands,
though individual Unitarians were tolerated, they were not allowed to
form congregations at least. The greater part went over, by degrees,
to the other Christian communities, among which they lived dispersed.
Tt was in Transylvania only, that the sect maintained itself.
The chief sources of information for the history of Socinianism, are
the numerous writings of Faustus Socinus, who made use of the papers

540 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
bequeathed to hira by his uncle ; the writings of John Crell, Jonah
Schlichting, John Lewis WoUzogen (the works of aU these writers are
found in the Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum,) and of several others.
Among the Socinian catechisms, the larger one of Racovia, edited
by Moscorovius and Schmalz, in fhe year 1605, and that by Ostorod,
a Socinian preacher at Buscow, near Dantzic, are particularly distin
guished. (Bak. 1604.) A regular symbolical writing the Socinians
do not recognize ; although the Racovian Catechism may pass for
such.

§ LXXXVIII. — Principles of the Socinians, as to the relation between Reason and Rev
elation, and the functions of the forraer in the interpretation of Holy Writ.
It is our first duty to state the views of the Socinians, as to the
sources of all religious and raoral knowledge. They assert, that, through
his own powers, raan arriveth at the knowledge and distinction of good
and evU ;* and, on the other hand, they think that the idea of God, and
of divine things, is conveyed to man only from without, to wit, by in
struction. "j" In accordance with this theory, they represent the Divine
image in man, as consisting in the dominion of the latter over animals.
This is avowedly the meanest view, which it is possible to entertain of
the affinity fo God in man ; a view, which renders it utterly inconceiv
able, how, when God announces Hiraself, or lets Himself be announced,
frora without, man would be even capable of receiving the doctrine on
the Deity. Clearer, and yet withal raore frivolous and powerless, the
one-sided moralizing tendency of Socinianism could not well appear,
than in these conceptions, which evidently have in view to represent
the ethical principle, as fhe priraary and raost deeply-seated idea in
man ; and the religious principle, on the other hand, as something sub
ordinate, only extraneously annexed to the mind, only tohe grasped by the
finite understanding, Uke fhe geography of Peru, for instance, and
therefore, in a raanner, accidental. Thus, while Luther assigns to mo
rality a mere temporal, perishable, earthly value, Socinianism, in the
most direct opposition, aUots the highest place to if. In the sequel,
we shall also see, that the religious is made to minister entirely to the
ethical principle. Not less do we, here, recognize the instinctive force,
which urged Socinianism to carry out that opposition, that it forraed
against the elder Protestantisra ; the latter, in its extreme sects, repre-

» Faust, Socm, Pradect. theol. c. 2 ; Bibliotheca Fr. Pol. tom. i. fol. 537 ; Volkel.
tie vera ReUg. lib. iv. c. 4.
t Faust. Socin. de auct. Sta. Script. Bibl. Fr. Pol. tom. i. p. 273.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 541
seating the divine idea in man (as, for instance, the inward light, the
iftward Christ of the Quakers), to be so all-powerful as to need no ex
traneous aid, for its rise and development in human consciousness ;
whUe, on the other hand, the Socinians will deduce this divine idea
solely from an external source. The truth is on neither side. Ration
al nature, the reUgious, intellectual, and moral capability, is innate in
man ; but, in both respects, it needs the outward excitation, proceeding
from a being of a like spiritual essence, in order to unfold its own ener
gy, and consummate ifs own history.
One would be incUned to suppose, that, in virtue of these principles,
Socinians would have adhered UteraUy to fhe sense of any record of re
velation, and have embraced it, with unhesitating faith ; since they de
nied to man the capacity, as it were, for any ulterior criticisra of such,
or the divine sirailitude, in the true sense of the word. But, in such
an expectation we should be totally deceived. There are not, indeed,
wanting nuraerous passa.ges, that inculcate an unconditional submission
to Holy Writ ;* but the very reverse is practised, and the maxim is
not only enforced, but clearly avowed ; that any thing contrary to rea
son, that is to say, to the understanding of the Socinians, raust not be
considered as a doctrine of our records of revelation. Hence the mem
orable declaration of some Socinians, that in cases, where a Scripture
text does not harmonize with what they denominate reason, they should
rather invent a sense, than adopt the simple aud literal signification of
the words."!" Hence we find, among them, the first outlines of the sub
sequent accommodation-theory, — a theory which is, indeed, closely con
nected with the conception they had formed of Christ ; for, with the
nature of a mere man, an adaptation to errors is perfectly consistent.
Yet, this point the Socinians did not fully develop. They did not
even uphold the theory of inspiration, in all its rigour ; and admitted

» Faust. Socm. Ep. iii. ad Mat. Redec. Bib. Fratrum Pol. tora. i. fol. 386.
" Equidem contra id sentio : Nihil in iis Scriptis legi, quod non verissimura sit 
Prffistat, mi frater, mihi crede, cum in aliquem Scripturse locum incidimus, qui nobis
falsam sententiam continere videatur, una cum Augustine hac in parte ignorantiam
nostram fateri, quam eum, si alioquin iiidubitatus plane sit, in dubium revocare."
Faustus, after having observed, that 'f we wish to charge on Holy Writ any un
truth, we can do this only through re "n, or other grounds, says, " Ratione vix ullo
modo fieri id potest, cum Christiana loligio non humana; rationi dio pacto innitatur."
t Bengel (in Suskind's Magazine, No. xv. p. 128) has excellently proved, that the
Socinians, in the interpretation of Holy Writ, adopted as a rule, a negative use of
reason. The passages relative hereto, extracted from the writings of Faustus Soci
nus and Schraalz, may be seen m p. 133 of the above-cited work. See also Mar.
heineke Instit. Symbol, p. 172.

542 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
k-'^ If.
that errors, though only in unimportant raatters, might have crept into
the Bible.* From the analogy of the whole Socinian system, especial
ly from the representation it gives of the Holy Spirit, the higher guid
ance, under which the sacred Scriptures were composed, was, accord
ing to these sectaries, merely confined to a Providential ordinance,
which perraitted only virtuous, honourable, and weU-informed men to
write the same. That the followers of Socinus should reject tradition,
and fhe authority of the Church, was naturally fo be expected.

§ LXXXIX. — Doctrine of the Socinians respecting God, and the person of Christ.
Even in fhe doctrine of the Divine attributes, the opposition, which
the Socinians form to the elder Protestants, is very manifest. If the
Reformed (and herein fhe Lutherans had set them the example) sacrifi
ced the free-will of raan to the Divine oraniscience, the Socinians, on the
other hand, in order to uphold the capacity of self-determination in man,
set liraits to God's fore-knowledge. The one party annihilates man,
the other disfigures the idea of God. The forraer represents man as
so deterrained that he can no longer be regarded as an independent be
ing ; the latter teaches, that God is deterrained by man, and subjects
the immutable to extraneous influences.
By all the sects, which we have hitherto described, the doctrine re
specting the person of the Redeemer, as handed down by the CathoUc
Church, namely, that he is at once God and man, was ever retained.
The Socinians, on the other hand, in this article of belief, departed frora
the ancient truth in such a way, that the errors they adopted in ifs
roora, deterraine alraost all their other deviations. The Father only of
Jesus Christ they hold to be God.f They are not, indeed, of opinion,
that salvation depends on the denial of the docfrine of fhe Trinity. On
the contrary, distinguishing between truths, the knowledge whereof is
absolutely necessary to the gaining of eternal life, and such, the adop
tion of which is only very useful, they asserted, that the dogma of the
unity of God belongs to the first class ; the dograa of the unity of per
sons to the second ;J yet it is singular, that, at the same time, the So-

* Faust. Socin. de auct. S. Script. Bibl. Fr. Pol. fol. 267.
t Catechism. Racov. qu. 73. " Quffinam est haic Persona divina ? Resp. Est
iUo Deus unus Domini nostri Jesu Christi Pater."
} Loc. cit. Qu. 53. " Quaenara sunt, quee ad essentiam pertinent, ad salutem
prosus necessaria ? Resp. Sunt ea, quod Deus sit, quod sit tantum unus," etc. " Qu-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 543
cinians wished to prove, that the unity of person is inseparable from the
unity of essence, and, accordingly, from the unity of God.* For, here
by, they certainly thought to prove, that the Trinity of persons destroys
fhe unity of nature, and, consequentiy, that the belief in the unity of
person is indispensably necessary to salvation.
The Son of God they hold to be a mere man, who was conceived of
the Holy Ghost, and therefore called the Son of God. He also enjoy
ed the distinction (as the Socinians further teach,) to have been, prior
to entering on his office, adraitted into heaven, where he received his
commission relative to mankind. This article of belief the Socinians
evidentiy put forward, not only in order to set aside the difficulties,
which several Scripture texts presented, — difficulties which, on the re
jection of Christ's divinity, must have proved very weighty,f — but also
because, from the views they entertained as to the origin of religious
ideas, they were unable otherwise to explain, how Christ, even accord
ing to the meagre conception they had formed of his doctrines, could
have attained to his peculiar religious systera. On account of his obe
dience, they proceed to say, he was, after the consummation of his
work of redemption, exalted to divine dignity and honour, and all things
were given unto him ; so that Christians may turn with confidence un
to him, as a God, and one invested with Divine power, and may adore
him, nay, are bound to do so.ij: Faustus Socinus was so zealous for the
worship of Christ, that Blandrata called him to Transylvania, in order
to overcome the repugnance of the consistent Unitarians in that coun
try, who, with reason, were unwilling to offer fo any creature an act of
adoration. Faustus even fell under suspicion of having contributed.

71. Expone, quas ad eara rem vehementer utilia censeas? Resp. Id quidera est, ut
cognoscamus, in essentia Dei unam tantum personam esse." Christ. Rehg. Instit.
Bibl. Fr. Pd. tom. i. fd. 652. Col. ii.
* Catech. Rac. Qu. 74. " Demonstra hoc ipsum. Resp. Hoc. sane vel hinc
patere potest : quod essentia Dei sit una numero, quapropter plures numero personte
in et esse nullo pacto possunt," etc.
t Catechism. Rac. qu. 194 and 195.
t Socin. de Justif. Bibl. Fr. Pol tom. i. fol. 601, Col. i. " Ipsi Jesu tantam in
ctelo et in terra., tanquam obedientiae scilicet usque ad mortem crusis insigne prte-
mium, potestatem dedit, ut," etc. Catech. Racov. " Qu. 236. Quid praeterea Do
minus Jesus huic praecepto addidit ? Resp. Id quod etiam Dominum Jesura pro
Deo agnoscere tenemur, id est, pro eo, qui in nos potestatem habet divinam, et cui
nos divinum exhibere honorem obstricti sumus. Qu. 237. In quo is honor divinus
Christo debitus consistit ? Resp. In eo, quod quemadraodura adoratione divini eum
prosequi tenemur, ita in omnibus necessitatibuB nostris ejus opera iraplorare possumus.
Adoramus vero eum propter ipsius sublimem et divinam ejus potestatem." Christ.
Relig. Instit. fol. 656. Ostorod Instruction, cap. xix. p. 134.

544 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
with all his power, towards the imprisonment of Simon David, who was
particularly zealous in upholding the consistency of his own reUgious
systera. Even in the Racovian Catechism, those are declared unwor
thy of the Christian narae, who testify not, in the aforesaid manner, their
homage to Christ.* Once accustoraed to adrait self-contradictory pro
positions into their religious system, the Unitarians, who adored Christ,
now introduced a distinction in their worship, allotting suprerae adora
tion to God,' and an inferior one to Christ.f In this way, they who
had resolved to maintain so rigidly the unity of the Godhead, admitted,
by the side of the one, true, and supreme Deity, a second, unreal, and
inferior God, whom, compelled by the clearest texts of Scripture, they
resolved to adore ; so that they immediately revoked their resolution,
as well as enfeebled the docfrine of one God, by the setting up of a se
cond. Had they been acute thinkers, they must have discerned, that
if the Gospel represents the Son as a person, and at the same tirae as
God (and this the Socinians do not pretend fo deny,)f no other relation
between Hira and the Father is conceivable, but that which the Catho
lic Church hath from the beginning believed. But what strange theol
ogy is this, which can teach, that in the course of ages, God permits
a change in the governraent of the world ; so that having, down to the
time of Christ, conducted that governraent in his own person, he now
resigned it, just as if he had been weary of it, and appointed a vicege
rent, to whom he probably coraraunicated omnipotence, certainly, at
least, omniscience, and such like attributes ; just as if things of this
kind could, without any difficulty, be transferred, and, as it were, ap
pended to any individual !
It is reraarkable, that raan, when he has once forraed a mean con
ception of his calling, can rarely rise in speculation, as in will, above
the point of elevation, which that conception had fixed. Whoever

* Catech. Racov. " Qu. 246. Quid vero sentis de iis homimbus, qui Christum
non invocant, nee adorandum censent ? Resp. Prorsus non esse Christianos sentio,
cum Christura non habeant. Et licet verbis id negare non audeant, reipsSl negant
taraen." t Loc. cit. " Qu. 245. Ergo is honor et cultus ad eura modum tribuitur, ut
nullam sit inter Christum et Deum hoc in genere discrimen ? Resp. Imo permag-
num est. Nam adoramus et cohmus Deum, tanquam causam priraara salutis nos
tra ; Christura tanquam causara secundam ; aut, ut cum Paulo loquamur, Deum
tanquam eum, ex quo omnia, Christum ut eum, per quem omnia." Corapare the
letters to Nieraojovius (Bibl. Frat. Pol. tora. ii, fol. 466,) where we see, that to Christ
a species of mvocation is addressed, bearing sorae resemblance to the Cathohc invo
cation of saints.
t Christ. Relig. Instit. loc. cit. fol. 655. " The words of St. John's Gospel, i. 1 to
20, 21, are here cited.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 515
imagines, that he is absolutely incapable of satisfying certain moral
clairas, wiU certainly never act up to thera in life ; and whoever obsti
nately persists in the prejudice, that his powers are unequal to any
speculative problem, will assuredly never solve it. Would it not appear,
that such so-called fancies, at times, at least, determine instinctively
the measure of inteUectual power in those, who possess them? It was
so with Socinus. The Divine simUitude, the highest faculty in raan,
that wherein the real raan alone consists, he places in the caUing to
hold dorainion over animals. Frora all thespeciraens we have given of
his religious system, we see a man before us, who judges of Divine
things, like a shepherd, a goat-herd, or a cow-herd ; but we see no
theologian. The following way of dealing with Scriptural texts by
Socinus, is certainly not calculated to overturn the judgment we have
pronounced upon his very narrow-minded views. In order to get rid
of the proof, which may be so strictly drawn in favour of the pre-
existence of Christ, from those words of John (i. 1,) '• In the beginning
was the Word," the two Socini thus interpreted this passage : " In the
beginning of John's preaching, Christ already was the envoy of God."
On that text, " Before Abraham was, I am," (John vi. 5S), they foisted
the following sense : " Before Abram becometh Abraham, I am the
light of the world !" As the change of narae of the aforesaid patriarch
was connected with the proraise, that he should be the father of many
nations; but as, before Christ, he was the father only of one nation,
and it was only through the latter many nations entered into the relation
of sonship to hira, so the Saviour wished to say, before Abram, in fact,
merits the name of Abraham, I will be the light of the worid ; for, I
am destined by God to bs the mediator of the transformation of the
one name into the olher I That Christ is termed by John the Creator
of the world, they denied ; because the text, " Through Hira all things
were made," &o., was to be referred to the new creation occasioned
by Him.* Yet it is not here our business to bring forward the exegeti
cal arguments, which ths Socinians advance, in support of their doc
trines ; we shall therefore return to the exposition of their peculiar
tenets. The Holy Ghost, they represent as a power and efiicacy of the

* Catech Rac Qu 107, 123. Oeder, a Protestant Dean, whose edition of the
Racovan Catechism, in the year 1739, I make use of, says, at p. 146, at the ques
tion 107, as follows : " Perversio clarissim, loci (John vi. 58) ita f<Eda et s,md raani-
festa est, ut fieri non potdsse credam. ut homines san^ alioquin raent.s, m eas cog -
tationes inciderent, nisi qni ob abjectam amorem veritat^ ra reprobum ^— j^^^''"
sunt." He is right. Compare Chnst. Rdig. Instil. Bibl. Frat. Pd. tora. ,. fd. 656.

546 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Deity ; but fhe raore exact description they give of this power, will
claim our attention later.* The question has often been proposed, with
what ancient heresy doth the Socinian conception of Christ agree ? It
would be easy to discover many points of resemblance with ancient
sects ; but the Socinians are unable to show a perfect concur
rence with any one. With fhe Arians they, doubtless, agreed in the
veneration and worship of one, who became a God' — who was a mere
creature. But the heretics of the fourth century taught, that the Son
of God existed before the world, and that through him fhe universe
was created, and frora fhe beginning governed ; a doctrine which their
friends, in the sixteenth century, called in question, since they repre
sented the existence of the Saviour as, in every respect, coramencing
with his earthly nativity ; and therefore could not teach a creation of
the world by him, and even dated from his ascension, only his govern
ment of the world, which, even now, according to them, is of a liraited
nature. With the Artemonifes the Socinians wiUingly associated themselves ;
and about the period of their first rise, others (a.s, for instance, fhe
author of the Augsburg Confe.ssion,) compared the Unitarians with the
disciples of Paul of Saraosata. The affinity is, doubtless, not to be
denied, since all these families of heretics held Christ to be a mere
man, who was conceived of the Divine Spirit, and was sent to men,
with a Divine coraraission. But if the Socinians denied, that before
his birth frora Mary, Chrisf had already existed, and was a secondary
Lord of the universe (and by this denial they take a position below the
Arians,) the Artemonitcs, on the other hand, together with the disciples
of Paul of Saraosata, rejected even the docfrine, that Christ, after his
ascension, was exalted to Divine digmty, and to the government of the
world ; and hereby fell as far below the Socinians, as these fall below
the Arians. Some disciples of Arteraon, as well as of Theodotus,
rejected, as a later interpolation, the beginning of fhe Gospel of St,
John, and were therefore called Alogi ; while Artemon hiraself asserted,
that, before Pope Zephyrinus, Christ was not held to be God. Paul of
Saraosata suppressed the hymns, wherein Christ was addressed as God,
and thereby endeavoured to prevent the worship of Christ. The So
cinians, accordingly, occupy the raiddle place between the Arians and
* Catech. Racov. "Qu. 271. Spiritum Sanctum non esse in Dcitate personam, et
hinc discere potes," etc. Christ. Rdig. Instit. ii. fol. 652, Col. ii. " Quid, qusero, dc
Spiritil sancto nunc mihi dicis ? Resp. Nempe, ilium non esse personam aliquam, a
Deo, cujus est Spiritus, distinctara, sed tantummodo ipsius, Dei vim et efiieaeiam
quandam," etc. 'What an absurd answer, in more than one respect ! In general, the
whole catechetical exposition is very unsuccessful.

SETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 54T
^he disciples of Artemon ; and have something in common with the
errors of all these sectaries, without, however, entirely coinciding with
them. Tbey are also wont to be placed in the same category with the
Photinians. But as these taught, that in Christ there was an union of
the Logos, whom fhey conceived to be impersonal, with the man Jesus,
they herein differed from the doctrine of the Socinians. They preached
lip, moreover, tbat fhe kingdora of the Redeemer would have an end ;
that the union of the Logos with fhe man Jesus would again be dis
solved, and thereby the dominion of Christ cease ; whereas the reverse
of this was inculcated by the Socinians.

^ xc.---On the PaU and the Regeneration of Maft.
With reason the Socinians assert, thaf, by the creation, Adam was
endowed with free-v/ill, which, in consequence of the FaU, he forfeited
neither for himself nor for his posterity ; for it is essentiaUy inherent in
human nature. Adam, moreover, fhey say, was created mortal in hira
self; yet so, that if he 'had persevered in his obedience to God, he was
not under the necessity of dying. Immortality would have been vouch
safed to him, as a gratuitous gift. Original sin, fhey contend, there is
none ; and the consequences of Adam's fall extend not beyond his
person, with fhe exception of a certain defectiveness, which occasions
death to extend to all his posterity. This was a concession, which the
undeniable phenomena of ordinary life wrung from the Socinians ; but
in their religious system, this concession is so isolated, as to be utterly
untenable.* Corresponding to their notion of the moral malady of mankind, was
that of t'.i3 remedies, which they represented Christ to have proffered
ns against it. These the Socinians make to consist, in the granting of
a purer and more perfect legislation, as well as in the opening the
prospect of a future life, confirmed, as it is, by Christ's resurrection,
^nd which, according to them, was not covenanted in the Old Testa
ment, but now only is promised to penitent sinners, and to the observers
of the moral precepts.f The Socinians saw themselves eompelled to
circumscribe, as much as was practicable, the ethical and religious

• Catech. Racov. Qu. 422, 42, 45.
t Catech. Racov. "Qu. 197. Quid vero hoc novum foedus comprehendit ? Resp,
Duplex rerum genus, quorum unum Deum, alterura nos respicit. Qu. 198. Sunt
perfecta mandata «t perfecta Dei promssa," etc. Socin. de Justif. Bibl. Frat. Pol.
^om. i. fd. 601, Col. i. Resp, sA object. Cuteni. Bibl. Frat. Pol. torn. ii. fol. 454, n. q.

548 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFEREi'JCES
knowledge, and hopes of the ancient world ; for, otherwise, there woufJ
scarcely have remained any thing, for which, as Christians, we were
bounden in gratitude to God and to Christ. How, otherwise, was Christ to
be distinguished from the prophets ? Hence, they allege even the Lord's
Prayer, among the especial revelations, which, through Christ, the Deity
hath vouchsafed to men. And had they known that the Saviour found
this form of prayer already existing, and only strongly recomraended it,
then their account of the peculiar services of the envoy of God, would
have occupied a totally iraperceptible space.* The most remarkable
indirect act of Christ must, according to the Socinian system, when
we closely investigate the matter, be evidently the abolition of the ritual
and legal ordinances of the Mosaic dispensation ; an abolition, to which,
they refer the establishraent of a raore spiritual worship of the Deity.
But this is a merit of Christ, which, after all that the prophets of the
old law had taught upon the subject, is certainly, in respect to the
novelty, at least, of its fundamental idea, not to be so highly estimated*
Thus, admitting no vicarious satisfaction on the part of Christ — no
imputation of his merits, which they reject as pernicious fo morality —
the Socinians know only of a certain meagre communication of Divine
power supporting human exertion, and co-operating with it ; a power,
whereof we must, beforehand, forra only a very modest idea.f The
Holy Ghost, whose personality they deny, as was above stated, is, ac
cording to thera, even in its workings, very far from corresponding to
the idea which Scripture, and the perpetual failh of the Church, give of
it. They divide his gifts into two classes, into temporal and extra
ordinary, under which they include the apostolic power of miracles,^
and into permanent, which they term the Gospel, and the sure hope of
eternal life.§ The former they designate as the outward, the latter as
the internal gift of the Holy Ghost. In order that no one might deem
the Holy Spirit necessary for the formation of Christian faitb, and, con
sequently, for the beginning of all true virtue in man, the Racovian
Catechism devotes a special question and answer to the denial of this
opinion. II Nay, whether the internal operation of the Divine Spirit he
necessary, for implanting in the soul a firra hope of eternal life, is a

* Loc. cit. " Qu. 217. Quid vero ad ha;c addidit Dominus Jesus ?" (Namely, fo
the coramandrocnt in the Old Testament, to worship God alone.) " Resp. Primum
hoc, quod nobis certara orandi rationera prsescripsit, " etc.
t Socin. de Justif loc. cit. fol. 6U1 ; Relig- Christ. Instit. loc. cit. fd. 665 ; Ca
tech. Racov. Qu. 374.
t Catech. Racov. Qu. 361. § j^c. cit. Qu. 365, seq. 430.
II Loc. cit. Qu. 370.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 549
saatter of doubt to the authors of this Catechism ; for they make use
of the expression, it seemeth that the outward proraise afforded us, by
the preaching of the Gospel, needs an inward sealing in our hearts.
As regards the fulfilment of the moral law, the above-mentioned
inward gift of the Holy Ghost is limited, solely, to cases of pecuUarly
grievous temptation.* In iUustration of this doctrine of the Catechism,
the following propositions, taken from a series of answers, made by
Faustus Socinus to the objections, which a eertain Cutenus had pro
posed to hira, deserve to be cited. " Every man," says this Reformer,
" in case he be not corrupted by his associates, can live without sin,
when the most attractive and stimulating recompense be promised to
hira, as the reward of his virtues. But, such a recompense is promised
in the Gospel ; therefore, he can perfectly conform his life to the pre
cepts of Jesus." To this the stUl stronger proposition is subjoined;
" Man, not, indeed, by his natural strength, but by the powers afforded
to him by God, through the hope of eternal life, can act up to the Divine
wiU."f Hence we see, that the opposition between natural and super
natural powers, in the Socinian system, has, in part, quite another
signification, than it has ever received in the Church, and still retains
among Protestants, as well as Catholics. This phenomenon, moreover,
is grounded in the fact, that, according to Socinus, man has no innate
sense of religion — not even the slightest sense of the immortality of his
own soul: for the doctrine of iramortality is represented as one in
every respect extrinsically communicated — supernaturally revealed ; and
therefore he denominates even belief in it a supernatural power. Fur
ther below, Socinus recurs to the sa.me subject, improving, as it were,
on himself. The Christian, according to hira, by calUng to mind eternal
life, ean rise again, by his own strength, even from a grievous faU ;
yet nothing is safer and more praiseworthy,J says he, than to turn to
God, for, one ought not to trust too confidently in one's own powers..
But a vicious life, he continues to say, raan, without a special favour
and grace of God, is not able to reform. The question, however, arises,
whether to this grace we are to attach the orthodox notion ; or whether,
on the contrary, we are not to understand, by this special favour, fhe
judgraents of God ?§ How extreraely similar the sentiments of the
.Socinians are to those of the Pelagians, must be evident to all minds.

*Loc.cit. Qu. 368.
t No. 6. " Homo in hic vita, non quidera viribus naturalibus, sed viribus sibi a
Deo per spem vitsE Eetemae tantum submmistratis, potest ejusdera voluntatem perfi
cere." t " Laudibilius et securius." § Bibl. Fr. Pd. tora. ii. foL 454.

550 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
Christ also, according to the Socinians, stUl exerts, after his ascen
sion, a perpetual influence over our destiny. But the influence whicfcy
he exercises, they represent as only external. He protects us, thej
say, by the fulness of his power : and, in a certain degree, turns away
frora us the wrath of God, which is wont to be poured out against sin
ners : and this it is, we understand, by his intercession. He sets before
us, in his own person, the blessed effects of virtue ; but this is to be re
ferred, solely, to the reading of the Gospel history, that has been be
queathed to us, and by means whereof he constantly worketh. Lastly,
he purifies from sin by punishments and aids. The notion of the latter,
b}' being associated with punishments, is necessarily confined to the
granting of earthlj- prosperity, as an eneourageraent to virtue.* Hence
the Socinians assert, that Christ discharges his priestly functions solely
in heaven, and his sufferings and ministry on earth have only procured
for him, this, his celestial influence.
From all we have now stated, the notion which the Socinians con
nect with justification, may easily be inferred. That they would avoid
the errors of the Lutherans and the Calvinists, on this matter, may
naturally be expected ; but it is equally certain, that they rush into the
opposite excess. Justification they conceive to bc a judicial act of God,
whereby He graciously absolves from sin and its guilt, all raen, who,
with faith in Christ fulfil the moral precepts.f This definition would
be vcrj- just, if the Christian obedience required by them were not, from
its very nature, even in the best case, purely finite ; for, it usually is
begun only by the natural powers ; and to Christ scarcely any other
share is allotted therein, save that of a credible and trustworthy guide.
In other respects, what the Socinians advance touching justifying faith,
that it possesses in itself, as an essential forra, a power effic cious in
works, and can be separated frora the sarae only in thought, is very
good, and has been borrowed from tbe Catholic schools (fides formata,)
It is only to be lamented, that the, in itself, very laudable earnestness,
which applied its energy to moral conduct, should have been devoid of

• Cathech. Rac. Qu 479.
t Socin. de Justif. loc. cit. 602, Col. ii. " Justificatio nostra coraraDeo, ut uno ver.
bo dicara, nihil est aliud, quam a Deo pro justis haberi . . . Ratio igitur, qua nobis ilia
contingit, ad nos respicit. Quod ad Deum attinet, nihil Deum movet ad nos pro justis
habendos, nihilne, ut tantum bonum consequaraur in Deo esse necesse est, prteter gra
tuitam voluntatem... Quod vero ad nos pertinet, non aliter reipsi justi coram Deo
habemur, et ddictorum nostrorum veniara ab ipso consequiraur, quara si in Jesum
Christum credamus.. ..Credere autem in Jesura Christum, nihil aliud est, quam Jesu
Christo confidere, et idekco ex ejus praescripto vitam instituere." Catech. Racov.
Qu. 452, an ill-composed article.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 551
the Divine blessing and unction ; and wo are at a loss to discover how
it can attain its ends.*
Directed by the truest instinct, the Socinians further assert, that
works, or obedience to the Divine precepts, do not, of themselves, merit
heaven ; for, as in the performance of these, they refer the larger share
to human exertion, and therefore adrait no truly Divine works, it does
honour to their understanding to have allowed no inward relation to
eternal bliss, in works founded in such a principle. But if they per
ceived this, it is then the more inconceivable, how they could deem
man capable of future rewards, since with these, according to their sys
tem, his earthly feelings and actions possess no true affinity and uni
formity. Even from this point of view, they might have discerned the
unsatifactoriness of their own systera, and have been brought round to
the doctrine of the Church.f
In respect to the concurrence of the Socinian view of justification,
with the Catholic and the Protestant belief, as well as its divergence
from the doctrine of either Church, we shaU here raake a few brief ob
servations. The Socinians agree with Luther and Calvin, in holding
Justification to be a mere judicial act of God. To justify, according to
thera, signifies only to acquit — to declare raen just. But, both parties
stand in direct hostility one to the other, inasrauch as the forraer raake
this Divine declaration to follow upon sanctification ; the latter, on the
contrary, deduce sanctification only from the belief in this declaration.
Catholics reconcile these contrarieties, by teaching, that sanctification
and forgiveness of sins concur in the one act of justification. While
the Protestants hold, that for the sake of Christ's merits, heaven is
thrown open to the believer, in despite of his sins ; that not raoral
worth, but only grace, decides our salvation, in order that praise may
be rendered unto God alone ; while the Socinians, on the other hand,
maintain, that merit of Christ there is none, but only merits on the part
of man, and therefore no real grace in Christ, because otherwise raoral
exertions would be paralyzed ; the Catholic Church lays hold on the
truth in both parties, and, at the same time, rejects the errors of either;
* Socin. loc. cit. fol. 610, Col. ii. " Fides obedientiam praeceptorum Dei, non
quidem ut effectum suum, sed ut suam substantiam et formara continet atque com
plectitur. Merainisse enim debemus ejus, quod supra recte conohisum est, fidera,
hanc scilicet, quae justificamur, Dei obedientiam esse." Corapare de Christo Serva-
tore, Bibl. Frat. Pol. tom. ii. P. i. c. iv. fol. 129 ; P. iv. c. xi. fd. 234. These pas
sages, as containing the refutation of the Protestant doctrine on faith and works, have
an especial importance ; and many remarks are, contrary to all expectation, acute
and ingenious.
t Socin. frasrraent. de Justific, loc. cit. fol. 620.

552 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
as she inculcates, that by grace man can and must let himself bc
raoved, exalted, and thoroughly purified in morals ; and only iiiasiiiucli
as he doth this, hath he a Uving conception of the institution of grace,
and doth he place himself in due relation to it. That, however. Pro
testantism is far more fitted than the systera of the two Socini (ujuch
as the latter raay perpetually exalt morality,) to call forth moral exer
tion, and to found a pure raorality, although Protestantisra misappre
hends its nature, and doth not truly understand its due relation to
religion, is a truth, which cannot be caUed in question. Socinianism
is utterly wanting in huraUity, and in aU deeper insight into the great
necessities of human nature, since in man, even in his present condi
tion, it finds nothing essentially amiss; and accordingly, it is deficient
in the vivifying and morally inspiring principle. A mere lawgiver, as
Christ mainly appears fo the Socinians, cannot exert a deep and power
ful influence on man. They protest, indeed, against the notion, that
they regard Chrisf exclusively in this Ught, since they consider the de
liverance of the human race, as the true object of his mission, and they
look upon his legislation, as only a means fo that higher end* Doubt
less, it is precisely so ; but it is this very one-sided view of the means
selected by God, which forms the great gulf between Socinian Chris
tianity, and the old genuine Christianity. The Socinians want the
Emanuel ; and, therefore, aU which for eighteen hundred years hath
wrought the great raoral renovation of the world. How weak, how
impotent, is their legislative Jesus, compared with the Son of God, re
conciling, by his self-immolation, the world with his Father I The Son
of God it is, who hath overthrown heathenism, and tamed barbarism.
And what means the vague expression, " deUver V Frora what was
he to deliver 1 From a moral corruption, that was unavoidable, since
no one before Christ, Jew or GentUe, was, according to the Socinians,
instructed in the relations of the present to a future life ? At most, by
the word "deliverance," can here be understood onlythe liberation
from inculpable ignorance, and therefore from guiltless immorality
also. § zci. — On the Sacraraents.
The sacraments of baptism and of fhe altar, the Socinians hold to be
mere cereraonies ; as, indeed, from their rejection, or, at least, misap
prehension of the inward operations of grace, such a view necessarily
* Faust. Socui. Respons. ad object. Cut. loc. cit. " Nee sane ob id praecipue in
mundura venit, ut legem ferret, nosterve legislator esset, sed ut nos servaret, in quem
etiam finem suara legem dedit."

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 553
foUows. Baptism is regarded only as a rife of initiation, of the carnal
Jews and Heathens into the Christian Church ; for, these needed an
outward symbol of the forgiveness of sins, and of inward purification.
As regards its retention in the Christian Church, this is considered by
the Socinians to have arisen out of a misunderstanding of the mere
temporary ordinance of Christ. To children, moreover, baptism is in
applicable, for these certainly coraprehend not the nature of the act.
These sectaries deem it a great concession, on their parts, when they
refrain from damning those, who administer baptism to infants ; and
this, with them, is certainly not surprising, since they deny original
sin, and naturally look on the sprinkling with mere water as a ceremony
in itself void.*
Of the Lord's supper they believe, at least, so much, that it hath been
instituted for all ages ; but, indeed, only to announce the death of the
Lord.f Lastly, the Socini taught an annihilation of the damned, and accord
ingly rejected the eternity of hell-torments.

» Catech. Rac Qu. 346-351.
t Loc. cit. Qu. 333. It appears perfectly superfluous to allege any testimonies, on
this matter, from the writings of Socinus and others.

CHAPTER VI.
THE ARMINIANS, OK EEMONSTBANTS.

§ XCII. — Some historical preliminary reraarks.
This sect, as Iras been already observed in the Introduction, owes its
name and origin to an inhabitant of South HoUand, who, in the year
1560, was born in Oudewater. The very solid and extensive learning,
which he had acquired at several learned academies at homo and
abroad, — especiaUy his philosophic studies at Paris and at Padua, —
certainly made hira acquainted with the dograa of free-will, and the
doctrines connected therewith ; so thaf, he must have entertained
doubts, as to the truth of his own confession, and fhe divine origin it
laid claim to. Yet, he would scarcely have resolved to take up an at
titude of formal opposition, against the doctrine of his Church, had not,
even contrary to his hesitating wUl, a concurrence of circumstances
determined him thereto. The parties of the Supralapsarians and fhe
Infralapsarians, already stood opposed to each other, in battle array.
The former asserted, that, prior to the faU, the predestination to eternal
felicity and damnation was already decreed ; the latter, that it was so
only subsequently to that event. The Supralapsarians alone, as is evi
dent, raaintained Calvin's doctrine in all its rigour. Under these cir
curastances, it happened, unfortunately, that whUe Arrainius was pastor
of a congregation, he received the commission fo refute sorae Calvinistic
adversaries of the rigid doctrine of predestination; and the investigation
which he then undertook, led him to a still more decided rejection of
what he had been called upon fo defend. As professor of theology at
Leyden, he found in his opponents, particularly Gomar, adverse spies,
who took offence at anything, which in any, even the slightest, degree
betrayed an opposition to the harsh Calvinistic theory of election, and
sumraoned him, in consequence, to an account. Thus was Arrainius
led to express his opinions, ever more clearly and distinctly ; and, in
proportion as this occurred, the partisans of his views increased, and,
consequently, the fermentation among the Calvinists of the United States
augmented. The civU authorities soon saw themselves forced to take

EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c. 555
cognizance of the prevaUing controversies ; but, the attempts at concU-
iation, which they deemed the most suited to their position, proved
abortive. Arminius died in the year 1609 ; but his principles survived hira, and
found in Uytenbogart and Simon Episcopius, defenders not less able
than courageous. Accused of a departure from the formularies of the
national Faith, and of disturbing the peace of fhe country, they delivered
to the States, in fhe year 1610, a remonstrance, which, in five articles,
embodied their principles. From this declaration, they derived the
name of Remonstrants. At last, after repeated, but ever ineffectual,
attempts on the part of the civU authorities, to bring about a pacific ad
justment of these disputes, the adversaries of the Remonstrants, especi
ally after Maurice, Prince of Orange, had declared in their favour,
succeeded, in the year 1618, in convoking the Synod of Dort. Con
demned by that Synod as heretics, all Arrainians were, in consequence,
deprived of their places, and even banished the country ; till at length,
after the death of Prince Maurice, they carae by degrees to be tolerated
again, and even, as a separate ecclesiastical community, were insured
a legal existence.
We shall describe their doctrinal peculiarities after the Confession,
which Simon Episcopius published in the year 162-2, under the title
Confessio sive Declaratio senieniice Pastorum, qui infoederato Belgio Re-
monsirantes vocantur, etc. Its author soon saw himself induced to put
forth a defence of his declaration ; for sorae rigid Calvinistic preachers
had published a censure on it. The apology, terraed Examen Censurce,
etc., is distinguished by the most dexterous logic, and would well serve to
illustrate the confession of the Remonstrants, had this stood in need of
illustration. For, the latter is written with the utmost clearness and vi
gour, and only in respect to certain points, is deficient in that explicit
ness, which should characterise a public formulary. In these rare cases,
the Apology, or Examen Censurce, will be very serviceable, for in it, the
Arminians were forced to make fhe most unreserved declarations.

§ XCIII. — Doctrine of the Arminians.
The subject of the controversy, between the Arminians and the Go-
marists, turned, doubtless, more immediately on Calvin's doctrine of pre
destination. But, as may easily be conceived, a series of other dog
mas were soon involved in this dispute ; for, the aforesaid error doth
not stand isolated, but, in part, presupposes, and is grounded on other
notions, or rather mistakes ; and, in part, has thera in its train. But,
as the controversy arose on the question of absolute election, we shall

550 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
commence, with the exposition of the Arminian doctrine, on that sub
ject, and then set forth the other points, on which it exerted an influ
ence. Against the rigid Calvinistic theory of predestination, the Arminians
not only alleged, that, thereby, God was raade the author of moral evil,
but, they very acutely observed, thaf, by this theory, Christ's death of
atonement would be deprived of all power and eflicacy, nay, become ut
terly inexpUcable. For, they said, if, from all eternity, the salvation
of the elect hath been unconditionally and immutably decreed, it would
ensue in virtue of that decree, and not for the sake of Christ's raerits :
and as to the reprobate, Christ, undoubtedly, could not have appeared
in their behalf; since God did not, and could not, seriously wish for
their salvation, as this would be in utter contradiction with their eter
nal destination to misery.*
The doctrines of Calvin, in respect to the elect and fhe reprCbafe, as
corabated by the Arminians, stood by no raeans isolated. They chang
ed the idea of a government of the world, and a providential guidance
of all things, into the conception of a destiny, whereby all the move
ments of creatures are absolutely fettered. For, there could be no con
ceivable interest, in withdrawing any thing from the circle of necessity,
when the felicity and misery of spirits had once been absolutely de
creed ; and any conception of final causes, as to what might yet be re
served to Free- Will, became utterly irapossible. For, to deny to man
moral liberty, and leave hira a so-caUed political freedora, as the Lu
theran Forraularies do, is to betray the raost singular levity ; as, when
once the kernel has been taken away, no interest can attach fo fhe
wretched husk ; and in the world of man, every thing hath a raoral re
lation. Accordingly, fhe Remonstrants, in their Confession, devoted a
particular section to the article on Providence, attaching thereto the no
tion of a wise, holy, and just guidance (not predetermination) of aU
things ; and, in this way, fhey conceived they steered the true raiddle
course between the Epicurean system of casualty, and the Stoical and
Manichean destiny, or Fatum ; for, with the latter, they associated the
errors of predestinarianism. f
To man, therefore, they ascribe free-will, which is so inherent in his
nature, that it can never be obliterated.f The fall of the first man is

* Confessio sive Declaratio, etc. Herdewici, 1622-4, p. 31. See the defence m
the Examen Censuras, p. 1 04, b.
t Loc. cit. c vi. pp 19-23.
X Loc. cit. p. 22. " Naturalem tamen rerum contingentiam atque innatam arbi-
trii huraani libertatera, ohm semel in creatione datam, nunquam per ipsam (provi-

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AKft) PROTESTANTS. 65'?
ifl hecessary connexion with this, represented not as a mere spontane-»
ous, but as a perfectly free act.* As an immediate consequence of the
Fall, we see stated the loss of true righteousness, and of the felicity it in*
sured. Adam was doomed fo the eternal misery, and the manifold tem
poral misfortunes, wherewith he had been menaced ; and his posterity,
in consequence of their ties of relationship, with their common progeni--
tor, incurred the same fate. As the Confessiim adds, that actual sins
increase guUt in fhe sight of God, obscure at first fhe understanding in
spiritual things, then render it, by degrees, totally blind, and at last,
through J:he habit of sin, entirely corrupt the will ; it follows, that the
Arminians did not conceive original sin, in itself, had bereaved man
of aZZ his faculties for good.f By such an opinion, in fact, their oppo
sition to the doctrine of absolute predestination, would have become ut
terly untenable.
Redemption in Christ Jesus is, according to the Arminian system,
universal. To every man, who heareth the Gospel, sufficient grace is
proffered, to enable him to rise from his fall ; and where the announce
ment of the doctrines of salvation, is not attended with these effecls,
man only is to blame. If, on the other hand, grace prevails (gracia ef
ficax), then the reason of this is to be sought for, not in its intrinsic na
ture, but in the reception, which it has found in the soul of man. An
irresistibly working grace is therefore, according to the Arminian sys.<
tem, totally inadmissible. With reason they assert, that its notion is at
utter variance with the rewards promised to obedience when rendered,
and with the penalties threatened against the refusal of obedience, for
God would in that case extort obedience, and would work exclusively
and alone. It were absurd, and contrary to all reason, they add, to pre
mise any one a recompense, as if be had freely obeyed, and yet wring
obedience from him, as from a slave. On the other hand, they finally
observe, it were cruel to inflict an eternal punishment on the disobedi
ent, who yet cannot obey ; for they want the irresistible Grace, under
the condition whereof, alone, obedience can be rendered. J
dentiam) tollit fDeus,) sed rerum naturas ordinario salvas relinquit : atque ita cum
hominis voluntate in agendo concurrit, nt ipsam quoque pro suo gemo agere, et libere
suas partes obire sinat : nee promde preecisam bene, nedura male, agendi necessita>-
tem eidem Unquam impoMit."
* Loc. cit. c. viii. ^ 2, p. 24. " Transgressus est, inquam, non spontanea., tantum,
sed prorsus libera voluntate."
t Loc. cit. J 5, p 25.
X Loc. eit. c. xvii. pp. 55-58, !j 7. " Gratiam taraen divinara aspemari et respuj
ere, ejusque operationi resistere homo potest, ila ut seipsum, cum divinitus ad fidem
et obedientiam vocatur, inidoneura reddere queat ad credendum, et divine voluntati
obediendam," etc.

558 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
But if the Remonstrants reject these Calvinistic views of grace, they
yet wUlingly retain those doctrines respecting it, without which the
character of Christianity cannot be preserved. The grace of God, ac*
cording to them, determines the beginning, the progress, and the con-
suraraation of all good. Their articles of belief on these points are
nearly identical with the Catholic ; and therefore, like fhe Council of
Trent, they speak of a resuscitating grace, which only awakens the dor--
mant powers yet existing in fallen man,* in opposition to the Lutheran
theory, according to which the higher faculties must first be created
anew in hira.
"With the clearest consciousness of their object, and with a genuine
scientific insight into, and prosecution of their task, the Remonstrants
defined the notion of faith also. As the usual Protestant conception of
the same excludes the idea of free-will, and is based on the assuraption
of the impracticability of the law, the Arrainians, having once embraced
the true doctrine of free-will, were necessarU}^ compelled to assail the
favourite opinion of the Reformers, as to the saving nature of Faith
without works. He, who believeth in a way acceptable fo God, is, in
their opinion, one, who, converted to the precepts of the Gospel, is filled
with contrition for the sins he hath committed, nnd is inwardly renew
ed. They observe, as Paul teacheth, that faith is imputed to raan for
righteousness ; and James, that " by works a man is justified, and not
by faith only ;" as the Epistle to Timothy promises fo godly behaviour,
rewards in this and in the next life ; and as the author of the Epistle to
the Hebrews moreover declares, that without being sanctified, no one
shall see God ; it follows that the saving faith, req'iired by the Gospel,
is cortainly no other, than that which, frora its very essence, includes
in itself obedience ; is fhe fruitful parent of all good works, and the
source and the root of all Christian piety and sanctification. Hence
they sum up their belief in these words, — fhe true saving or salutary
faith, is that " which worketh by charity."!

* Loc. cit. c. xvii. § 16, p. 37. " Gratiam itaque Dei statuimus esse prineipium et
complementum omnis boni : adeo ut ne ipse quidera regenitns absque prEccedente
ista, sive prffiveniente, excitante, prosequente, et co-operante gratia, bonum ullum
salutare cogitare, velle aut peragere possit : nedum ullis ad raalura trahentibus tenta
tionibus resistere. Ita ut fides, conversio, et bona opera omnia, omnesquc aetionea
pise et salutares, quas quis cogitando assequi potest, gratiae Dei in Christo, tanquam
causa; suse principali et prunariaj, in solidum sint adscribendrc." When the expres
sion " ra solidum " is here used, so the reader should remeraber the t.tpression which
Dr. Eck employed in the disputation at Leipzic, who very well observed, that the
ioium of regeneration is to be ascribed to God, but only not totaliter.
t Loc. cit. ex. xi. pp. 33-38. " Fides salvifica." Thj expression " fides juElifi-
cans " (according to the Examen Censur. p. 170, b,) they do not make use of.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 66S
The following five acts of God, according to the Remonstrants, de
note the history of the sinner, who hath already obeyed the Divine call,
been converted to faith, and, under the assistance of grace, fulfilleth
the Divine precepts. The first is election, whereby the true believers
are separated from the profane multitude of those who perish, and are
marked off as the property of God. Election is followed by adoption^
whereby the regenerated are received into the faraily of God, and fuUy
admitted to the rights of the celestial heritage, which in its due tirae
wUl be awarded. Justification is then described, as the gracious abso
lution from aU sin, by means of a faith, " working by charity" in Jesus
Christ, and in his merits ; and Sanctification is distinguished from Jus
tification as the fourth act of God. Sanctification the Remonstrants
conceive to be a perfect, inward separation of the sons of God from the
chUdren of this world. Lastly, the Sealing through the Holy Spirit, as
the fifth Act of God, they represent as the firmer and more solid confir
mation in true confidence, in the hope of heavenly glory, and in the as
surance of Divine grace.* Of the last periods in the internal history of
the regenerated man, the Arminians formed so high a conception, that
they say of him, he can no longer sin ; for the words in the first Epis
tle of John, iii. 4, and V. 18, they apply to him. Nevertheless, they
protest against the notion, that the believer, who is exalted to this high
degree of perfection, is no longer guilty of any, even the slightest,
fault, that raay be bottomed in error, frailty, and infirmity, especially
under grievous temptations, f
It was natural to suppose, that the Gomarists would charge this doc'
trine of conversion, with declaring war against the whole Protestant
Church, and with being Catholic, or even Socinian ; but it can scarcely
be conceived, that the Remonstrants would deny the charge.f For so
soon as we overlook unessential points, and a diversity of exprassion,
the unprejudiced observer must perceive the most striking concurrence
with the Catholic doctrine. Against their agreement with Catholics,
the Remonstrants appeal principally to the circumstance of their de
claring justification to be a judicial act, whereby God releases the sinner
from the merited punishments ; whereas Catholics regard it, as an
inward newness of life, wrought by the Deity. But under one act,
which they call Justification, Catholics comprehend the Divine forgive
ness of sins ; whereas the Remonstrants divide this one act iuto a
series of acts, which cannot be defended on scriptural grounds. But
their opposition to the Calvinists and Lutherans consists herein, that
* Loc. cit. c. xviii. p. 59- + Loc. cit. c. ii. p. 37.
X Examen Censurae, loc. cit. p. 107, et seq,

Sao EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES
they assert a true and inward deliverance from sin, through regenera'
tion, and do not recognize any imputation of Christ's righteousness,
through faith onlyt in opposition to Christian works and to Christian
charity. Next, they place their divergence from Catholics in the dif
ference of ideas, which both attach to faith : for they asserted of thora-
selves, they regarded good works as only the fruits of faith, and this
the Catholics were not wont to do. Were then the Arminians ignorant,
that Catholics deduce charity frora faith, and frora both, good works,
as their common fruits? In many particular definitions of the Ar
minians, moreover, the influence of Socinian principles is very mani'
fest ; and, on this account, they incurred the charge of Socinianism,
which, however, was very unfounded. It was Hugo Grotius, a Re
monstrant, who, against the assaults of the Socinians, had defended
the doctrine of the vicarious satisfaction I

5 XCIV. — Doctrine of the Arminians on the Sacraments.
The Remonstrants adrait only two sacraments, and consider them as
signs of covenant, by means whereof God symbolizes His promised
blessings, and communicates and seals them i« a certain way ; and the
faithful, on their part, publicly declare they will erabrace them with a
true, firra, and obedient faith, and bear the same in lasting and grateful
remembrance.* As the expression, " communicate in a certain way,"
is evidently very obscure and indefinite, the Goraarists solicited a fuller
explanation, which, after a long and dilatory parley, turned out to be
this : that, touching the mode of efficacy in the sacraments, nothing
Was really known, and no internal coraraunication of grace, connected
with their reception, could be adraitted. That, moreover, from Holy
Writ the notion of a sealing of the Divine proraises, through the sacra
ments, can be deduced, was even called in question. f
These definitions could not fail to incur strong censure ; and they
Were even charged, as regarded baptisra. With bearing perfect resem
blance to the raaxiras of the Anabaptists. In fact, there was, according
to these principles, no longer a rational ground for baptizing infants ;
* Confess. Remonstr. c. xxxiii. p. 70. " Sacramenta cum dicimus, externao ec
clesias ceremonias, seu ritus illos sacros et solennes intelligimus, quibus fosderalibus
signis ac sigillis visibilibus Deus gratiosa beneficia sua in foedere praeserlim evangeh-
co promissa, non modo nobis representat et adumbrat, sed et certo modo exhibit et
obsignat : nosque vicissim palam publiceque declaramus ac testamur, nos promis
siones omnes divinas vera, firma atque obsequiosa fide arapjecti et beneficia ipsius
jugi et grata semper memoria celebrarc velle.''
t Exam. Cens. p. 245, et seq.

BETWEEN CATHOLICS AND PROTESTANTS. 561
nay, baptism administered to thera raust needs be regarded as super.
stitious. Even Episcopius, in his Examination of the Censure, could
give no other reply, than that infant baptism was not discontinued in
his sect, as it was of high antiquity, and its abolition would certainly
be attended with great scandal.* Yet a rite, which, in itself, was held
to be senseless and meaningless, and was retained raerely out of respect
for custora, could not long endure. And, in fact, we find, that the Re
monstrants, a portion of them at least, gradually adopted the practice
of the Mennonites ; as, in general, we discover an interchange of
opinions and rites, between these two religious coraraunities.
Buf, in respect to the Lord's Supper, Episcopius, in his Examination
of the Censure, was forced plainly to admit, that the Remonstrants
adhered to the views of Zwinglius, who, in the article of the Sacraments,
was to be revered as the best teacher. f
Frora this point, a shallow conception of the whole systera of Chris
tianity, penetrated raore and more into fhe sect; and, soon, even the
dogma of fhe Saviour's divinity was disputed. Although, in the Con
fession of the Remonstrants, this dograa, as well as, in general, the
orthodox doctrine on the Trinity, is expressed with the utraost clearness
and correctness ;f yet Limborch, one of the most eminent Arminian
writers, early asserted a relation of subordination in the Trinity. Sorae
of his expressions, nevertheless, raay very well coincide with the
Catholic exposition of that doctrine ; and in so far they place the
Father above the Son, merely because the latter is rooted in the former,
and subordinate the Holy Ghost to the tvvo, because, in the two. He
hath the source of His God-head, the expressions are perfectly identical.
But Limborch teaches, besides, that, in the strict sense, the Father
iraparts commands to the Son, and both to the Holy Ghost ; a doctrine
which is utterly absurd, and subversive of the Trinity. By degrees
Socinianism found its way into the Arminian sect — a way, which, it
cannot be denied, had been long before prepared ; so that, when the
Goraarists, during the first controversies, constantly repeated the
charge, that Socinian poison had crept in among the Ramonstraots, we
must not consider this accusation as the mere effect of party-hatred.

• Exam. Cens. p. 249. "Eadem ratio est de Paedobaplisma: Rem^nstriotes
ritum baptizandi infantes, ut perantiquum et in ecclesiis Christi, proBsertim in Africa,
permultis steculis frequentatum, hand illubenter etiam in coatibus suis admittunt,
adeoque vix sine ofFensione et scandalo magno intermitti posse statuuut, lanlura
abest, ut eum seu illicitum aut nefastum improbent ac damnent."
t Loc. cit. p. 252. " Et hac in re assentientes sibi habent non paucos Rcformatos,
inter quos Zwinglius optiraus hujus ceremonias doctor, princeps est," etc.
{ Confessio sive Declar. c. iii. p. 14.
36

562 EXPOSITION OF DOCTRINAL DIFFERENCES, &c,
Doubtless, this reproach was frequently unfounded ; nay, as regards
the earUer history of the Arrainians, the charge, with the exception of
some subordinate definitions, in the article of justification, can nowhere,
perhaps, be fully established. But, nevertheless, many among them
must even fhen have manifested a leaning to the hated system of So
cinus ; for, otherwise, the suspicion of the rigid Calvinists could not be
at all accounted for, and the sequel has well justified that suspicion.
Even frora the very copious treatment which the doctrine of the Trimty
has undergone, in the Confession of the Remonstrants, we might feel
disposed to look for a confirmation of this suspicion ; for, if no special
grounds had existed, such detailed exposition would have been quite
superfluous. Yet, on the other hand, it may be observed, that as the
authors of the formulary, seem to have proposed for their object, to
give an outline of all the more important doctrines of Christian faith
and morality ; an important place, without any peculiar or secondary
views, was, of necessity, assigned to the dogma of the Trinity. The
well-known exegetical writer, Daniel Brenius, who was an iraraediate
disciple of Episcopius, even at that early period, openly professed So
cinian views in respect to the person of Christ, as Sand, in his book,
enumerates him among the Antitrinitarians ;"¦ and in the subsequent
time, such doctrines obtained, araong the Remonstrants, very general
diffusion. » Sand Biblioth. Antitrin. p. 135.

APPENDIX.

Note A, referred to at page 307.
Salig ux his Complete History of tht Augsburg Confession (book n. c. 8, § ?, p.
¦397,) gives an accotrat of a scene which occurred in the general committee appoint^
ed at Augsburg to bring about a reunion of the Churches > from which it will ap,
pear that Luther originally, so far from rejecting ecclesiastical punishments, re.
preached his adversaries with their remissness in imposing them. Salig says : " I
cannot, meanwhile, pass over in silence what Cochlaeus has related respecting the
transactions of the first and second day, touching the matter of satisfaction in
penance. On the first evening, when the difference on this point could not be re
conciled, it was agreed that Cochlaeus on one side, aud Melancthon on the other,
should the next morning discover something to bring about an understanding.
Cochlteus accordingly adduced a passage, where Luther wrote as follows : 'Our
mother, the Christian Church, when from kindness of heart she will obviate the
chastening hand of God, punishes her ch-'ldrcn with sorae penance of satisfaction,
lest they fall under the Divine rod. Thus the Ninevites, by their self-imposed
works, anticipated the judgment of God. This voluntary punishment is not every
thing, as the adversaries will have if, yet it is still necessary. For either we, or men,
or God, punish sins : but this tho adversaries by their inddgences totally set asidei,
If they were pious pastors, Ihey wodd rather impose punishments, and, according
to the example of the Churches, go before the judgraent of God, as did Moses,
when, on account of the golden calf, he slew some Israelites [this example is not
very relevant.] But the very best thing of all were, if we would chastise ourselves.' "
This was an earnest, energetic language on the part of Luther, widely removed
from those efieminate maxims subsequently introduced by his doctrine on Faitb,
which exacts of man nothing disagreeable — I might almost say, nothing incommo.
dious. Salig continues : " This passage of Luther's which Cochlaeus had communi.
cated, Dr. Eck read frora a schedule before the coramittee. Cochlaeus relates that
the seven Lutheran deputies looked each other in the face, and for a while observ
ed a dead silence. Melancthon, who sat thereby, reddened, and said, ' I am
aware, indeed, that Luther wrote this.' And as he codd say nothing more, the
elector, John Frederick, asked, ' At what time did Luther write this ?' ' Perhaps,
about ten years ago.' The CathoUcs then replied, that it was immaterial when
Luther wrote this passage, but it was enough that such was his opinion on this
doctrine. Hereupon Brentius and Schnepfius became indignant, and said : ' They
were there not to defend Luther's writings, but to assert their Confession.' Melanc.
then then delivered his opinion in writing, to the foUowing effect : • We may kold
penance to consist of three parts, — ^contrition, confession, yet so that in this we look
in thefirst place to absolution and believe in the same ; and next satisfaction, to
wit, that worthy fruits of penance foUow.' In one pouit aU were agreed, that on

564 APPENDIX.
account of satisfaction sin was not forgiven as to its guilt. But whether in fespe«4
to the penalty, satisfaction were necessary to the forgiveness of sin, stiU remained
matter of dispute. So Jar Cochlieus. Now I will not entirely caU in question his
account," &c. The account cannot be at aU called in question. This passage of
Luther's is still to be found in the Assertio, 41 Art. contra indulgent. Arl. 5, as
Salig himself after Cochlteus has cited them in his work, de aclis et scriptis
Lutheri, p. 200. That the deputies of the Protestant States should have fallen into
some embarrassment, was inthe nature of things; for in Luther's Church his
variations were never contemplated with pleasure. Melancthon's expressions,
however, perfectly coincide with larger passages in the Apology, wherein he hke
wise enuraerates three component parts in penance. " Art. v. Si quis volet addere
tertium, videlicet dignos fructus pcenitentitB, hoc est mutationem totius vitae ac
morum in melius, non refragabimur."
It is, indeed, surprising that he will only not be op-posed to what harmonizes v.ery
well with his doctrine on faith, wbich will not establish a necessary inward con
nexion between faith, and the mutatio totius vita. From all this it is clear that
Melancthon annexed to his satisfaction a very difTerent notion frora Catholics, as
in the negociations which took place at that period between the two religious
parties, there occurred frora laudable raotives, though not without reluctance, a fort
of mutual self-delusion. In the Catholic Church the purpose of amendment of life
is included in contrition, and is the first, not the last, aet of the sinner in the sacra
ment of penance. But as, among the Lutherans, contrition has a very difft rent
signification frora that which it bears among Catholics, consisting merely in fear, —
and as frora this fear raan is liberated through absolution, and then only ensues
newness of life, the latter, according fo Melancthon, forras the third part of penance,
and consequently is not the Catholic satisfaction. This third part the later
Lutherans entirely threw aside, because, if amendment of life were made an integral
portion of penance, the whole Lutheran doctrine on faith would fall to the ground.
Here, as on other points, Melancthon became entangled in contradictions, for he
always sought to patch up the defects in the doctrines of his Church, wilhout re
nouncing her fundamental principles. So in this narrative of Cochlieus, after ad
mitting that in penance there were three parts, he turns round and says, that " we
should look in the first place to absolution;" as if all did not exist, and claim our
attention, in a like degree.

Note ^, referred to at page 319.

To bring oar explanation of the Christian sacrifice more vividly before the rainds of
our readers, it raay be useful to give a few extracts from the liturgies of lhe eastern
and western Churches, and to cite sorae of the principal forms, [n regard to the onen-
tal liturgies, they usually bear the name of the founders of the Churchrs wherein they
were used. So, forinstance, tho liturgy of the Cfiurch of Jerusalera is called the
liturgy of St. Jaraes ; that of the Alexandrine Church, the liturgy of St. Mark : —
or they are entitled after some celebrated bishop, who made use of them, as St.
Chrysostom, St. Basil, St. Cyril, and the rest. As to their age, this is a matter
which cannot be so accurately determined. Certain it is, that hi the fourth oen-

APPENDIX. 565
tary they were already in existence, since the Menophysites of Syria and Egypt,
who in part separated from the Catholic Church in the latter half of the fifth age,
make use of these Uturgies, as well as the orthodox Greeks. Moreover, St. Cyril
of Jerusalera, in hia catechetical discourses, appeals to many passages in the liturgy
of St. James ; and St. Chrysostom, who in his homilies often explains and employs
portions of the liturgy, presupposes them to be things of long standing. The latter
father lived towards lhe close, the former about the middle, of the fourth century.
In general there is such a striking conformity between the oriental and the western
liturgies, whereof great numbers, through a gracious Providence, have been rendered
accessible to us ; and this coincidence is so manifest even in the forms, that theh:
formal groundwork indisputably belongs to a period, where dd Christians were yet
confined within a small space. Already, in the second century, St. Irenseus raakes
mention of the eVixAijiris ; and lhe preface with the Sursum corda, 'a>u -rov »ot/»,
or T«5 xapS'ini, which recurs in every liturgy, St. Cyprian speaks of in the raiddle
of the third century. (Compare Bona rer. liturg. tora. ii. c. 10, where several pas
sages of a Uke kind are brought together.) Respecting the antiquity of the liturgies
in general, see the excellent dissertation by Renaudot, Dissertatio de Liturg. orient.
orig. et auctor. forming an introduction to his Collectio Liturg. orient, tom. ii.
Paris, 1716. A brief summary of all the investigations, pertaining to this subject,
the reader raay see in Lienhart de antiquis liturgiis. Argentorati.'1826.*
In the liturgy of St. Chrysostom (in Gear's Euchologium sive Rituale Graco.
rum. Paris, 1647, p. 70) the first prayer of the faithful (in the Missa fidelium
runs thus :
''Eu^a^ic-TaZf.e^ o-'i, Ki/fi£ a B-i'ii rat SuvuiA.ias, rZi xxTx^iaa-xv-i-i >iiA.ai
Txpiiii-rvvcci xx) tuv Tal ayioi o-ov ^virixirii^iifi, xui -jr^on-Trsa-iiv tois oixrtff.o'ii
"-av uTTip tSv ij^eTtf 4i» ccfcx^riificiTav xai rou a-ov >,aou ayvotiptaruv. Xlpof-
eil»i 0 3'£05 r^t Sifi'Tit ifcaiv, !ro('i)5"oy i)/«.«5 ct^tovi yivea-.'^ai srforipEf £/»
c-oi Siit'reii xcu Ixio-iai, xcci S-vtrleci avccifiuxrov^ usTEf -TTccvroi rou A«ou o"«u,
x«i Ixdvairtv vifixi, o3r 'cS-av £/'? T?y Staxoviclv a-ov rauriiv, h r>t duvtcpiei rou
meu,u,eiTas- a-ov zoo aylov axitTccyvuTTUi x<ti uTr^otrxoTrraf iv x«-^«fi2 H-"?-
Tvpiicu r^g a-vvsiS^trea^ tjf,t,a,v iTTtxct.Xs'ia-B-tx.i c-£ ey -jtavti xaipat xai ro-TTOi, ivcc
tla-axouav Jj'/M.ay, /Pisoij sjft'''' ^'"15 ^'' ''"5" ""AijS-Ei t^s c-iij ayet^ortiToi.
While the seraphic hymn of the sanctus is being uttered, the priest, among
other things, recites the following prayer (p. 72) : —
" Si< yag ei o -7r^oT<pi^av xxi -ir^oa-ipe^if.i.evoi xai -n-^oo-Sexofciva xai Sia-
hil>iA,ivoi, Xpiar) o 3-eor if^Sv, xa) a-ol Tjjy I'o^av ha-^rifiTropt.iv, irZv ru
avdg^io a-ov -TC-arp), xa.) rai -jravayio). xai kya^u, xa) ^ao^oiio aov irviui^.arc
son xa) ai), r.ai eii Totis a,iav«e rSv aiavaiii- apiria.'"
Further on (p. 75) : —

* The translator begs to refer tlie reader to Dr. Rock's learned and interesting work, the Hierurgia,
wliere he will find copious information respecting the purport, arraninment, and antiquity of the va-
flaoug liturgies. — TVoair.

556 APPENDIX-
The Priest. XrSpiiv xaXai, arSpi.ii fttra (pifiov, -n-^ia^^afpiev t,« iyficf
ava^opav eiq £tp-i,vs) (?) -npoatpepetv.
The Choir. "EX'.ov il^^vta, 3-vai'av aUcaiai;.
The Priest. 'H X°^?'^ '^"^ K-v^iov ipcav 'ItiatZ Xpiarov, xa'i »j «y«7n»
Tou9-iou,Ka] jrargSii, xai t] xoivwvia rou ayiov -Kveupiarai, im niTa navra*
^pt.Sv. The Choir. K«i pura rou nvsufiaroi aov.
The Priest. "Ava a^apiiv T«5 xaph'xf;.
The Choir. "E^^opcsv tt/joj Toy Ku^iot.
The Priest. Zuxa^iar^jaapiiv t5 K.vpta).
The Choir. "A^tov -xxt ^ixativ ian -irpoaxuvi'it -srariga, tiiiy, xai ayiov
vv£upca, rpiaS'a OM.oouaiov x.at ax^^iarov.
The Priest. ''A^tov xa) S'ix.aiov al upiviii, ai luXoyeiv, at aUnv, ao\
e u Yxp t ar t'lv , ae ir^oatcvvnv lv -KavTi tottoj 7115 ^sa-iroreiai aov, au ya^ ti .^£05
aveK(PpecaToi, aTTEPivoijroi, aoparo^, axaraXviJrroi, ccei aiv, ataaurui uv x.r, >,.
In the Liturgy of St. Basil (in Gear's Euchologium, p. 162) the first prayer of
the faithful runs thus :
" Su Kuj/£ xariSs^Oi ipCtv to pi.iya rouro riii aartipiai pt-varti^iov, au xarii-
^iaaai iifiaf rour, ra-rrt 110)1 ^ xa) ava^iov^ SouXoVi aev^ yiyvea^xi Xeirou^yovi
rou ayiov aov S-vaiaarvipiov. 2[/ ixxvoiaov ^pLXi r-^ ovvapcEi rou ayiov
rrveifiaroi cU ^>)y Staxovlav rair-itv. iva axarax^irof aravrcf tva-mov Tijs
aytxg ^0^3)5 aov, Tpoaayoipcsv aoi bvaiav alvtaeai;. Xu yap it 0 tvepyaiv
ra TTavra tv Traat, Ao^ xvpte xai u-Trip rav vipLErtpuv apLaprvjpLarav, xxt
rSv rou Xxau ayvotiuaruv, Sixrtiv ylyvcF^ai Tijy Bvaiav ^piaVj xa) cuTrpoi-
oexrov svaTTiov aov.
The Prayer at the Offertory, p. 164 : —
" Ku^iE 0 3-£0{ D'ftffl-y 0 xriaai iptag, xai ayayav lU TJjy ^aii!» TauTijy, 0
u-jreSti'-ai >ipc7v 01J0U5 tii aarijpixv, 0 ;ii«^io-«|tt£»o5 j)/M.7y oupavt-av pLVarriptai
a7roxa>,v-\piv, a]) e't 0 .'i-epi.ivoi i!p<,xi iii r^v Siaxoviav raur%v iv r-it Svvapici
rou TTvsufAxroi aov roij ayiov. Eu^oxtiaov avi xupis rou yeviaBai J^ptxi oia-
xovovi rrti xaivyji aov ata^vix-yji, Xeirovpyoui rav aytav frov pcvartjptaV
TT^oads^at -^ptxi -jr^oaiyyic^ovrai toi ayioi aov Bvaiaarvi^tu, xara ro -TrXviBoi
rou iXiovi aou- 'tva yevaipceBoi a^ioi rou Trpoiipe^eiv aoi rtiv Xoyixviv rauryjv,
xxt avatf.i.axrov Bvaiav uTrtp rav ^iLsrtpuv api.aprvipi.ar oiv xai raiv rou Xaou
ayvoyifLarcav ijv Trpoade^aptevoi eti ro ayiov xa) voe^ov aov Bvaiaartj^tov.
eti oTptrtv euadixi, avrixaraTrspL-^/ov vjpLiv Tsjy ;tj*^(y rou aytov aov Trveupce^
roi' iTTi^M-^ov i(p vpt.ai 0 Beoi xai eTTioe Itti rvjv Xarpetav i:pcSv rauritv^
XXI TT^'oaSe^ai attrviv, ui TrpoaiSi^a. 'A/3eA ra SS^a, Nffls Toj; Bvaiai,
A^paapt, rai oXoxxoTrcoTsti, MM-recJi xxi ^ A^oiv rai te^uauvxi, Xapaiv-itX rai
e'l^nviKag- o>i ^^oatSi^o ix rav aytav aov a-proaroXav mv aXiiB-ivijV raurtiv
Axr^iiav o'ura xx) ix rav xii^Sv -^pcav rav apt-a^raxSv -r^oaSi^at ra Sa^a
raura iv tj) j^^Tiaroriirt aov xu^ie- 'tva xara^iaBlirii Xeirov^yeiv antptTrrai
raj xytaj aov Bvria-^rjjoiai ^ eu^aptsBa rov pttaBov rav -Trtarav, xai ^povipievt
o'lxovofiav, iv TJilftEf « Tji (po^t^a tjjj avra-xoSoaeui aov r^i Sixatai."

APPENDIX. 567
In the Alexandrine Uturgy of St Mark, (Renaudot, Liturg. Orient. Coll. t. i.
page 145), the priest thus prays at the canon : —
"II«yT« as tTTOitiaXi Sta ria a^i ao<Pi'ai, roZ ^aroq rou aX-iiBivou roZ
fuvoyitoui aov vioZ^ toJ xv^iov xa) BioZ xxi a-arij^Oi Jipi,av liiaov Xpiarou-
dt ou aoi aui aura x.ai ayicu Tcvsufixri euf^^a^iarouvrsij -Trpoatpi^opt-iv rtit
Xoyixiti xai avaip<Mxrov Xarpeiav raurvv, jjy -Tr^oa-ipt^it aot JHu^id iravra ri,
tBvri., a-KO avaroXav TjXiov xxt pi.e^t^^t dvapcav arro a^xrov xai pLsaiipi^^tai-
on ft,iya ro ovopia aov h 9raa) roii 'sBvsai, Kai ev Travri r'o-jrtfBvpUapu*
^poa^e^erai ra ovopi,ari aytiu aov. xai Bvaia, xai 3"joo"^of«."
In the Uturgy of St. James, used by the Jacobites or the Syrian Menophysites,
in common with the Church of Jerusalem, the Priest says as foUows (Renaudot,
t ii. p. 30) :
" Deus pater, qui, propter amorem tuum erga homines magnum et ineffabilera,
misisti fiUum tuum in mundum, ut ovem errantem reduceret, ne avertas faciem tu
am a nobis, dum sacrificium hoc spirituale et iucruentum celebramus : non enira
justitiaB nostrsB confidimus, sed raisericordiae tuae. Deprecamur ergo et obsecraraus
clementiam tuara, ne in judiciura sit populo tuo mysterium hoc, quod institutum no
bis est ad salutera ; sed ad veniara peccatorura, remissionem insipientiarum, et ad
gratias tibi referendas, per gratiam, misericordiam et araorera erga homines unigeniti
Filii tui, per quem et cum quo te decet gloria."
Further below (p. 32) the priest continues : —
" Memoriam igitur agimus, Domine, mortis, et resurrectionis tuee e sepulchre post
triduum, et ascensionis tuae in coelura, et sessionis tuae ad dexteram Dei patris : rur-
Bumque adventus tui secundi, terribilis et gloriosi, quo judicaturus es orbem in jus
titia, cura unumquemque rerauneraturus es secundum opera sua. Offerimus tibi
hoc sacrificium terribile et incruentum, ut non secundum peccata nostra agas nobis
cum, Domine, neque secundura iniquitates nostras retribuas nobis; sed, secundum
mansuetudinera tuam et araorera tuum erga homines magnum et ineffabUera, dele
peccata nostra, servorum nempe tuorum tibi supplicantium. Populus enira tuus et
haereditas tua deprecatur te et per te et tecum patrera tuum, dicens," etc.
In the Gothic Missal (in MabiUon de Liturg. GalUc. Paris, 1729) we read, among
other things, at p. 210 : —
" Saerificlis praesentibus Domine quaesumus intende placatus ; quibus non jam
aurum thus et myrrha profertur, sed quod iisdem muneribus declaratur, offertur,
immolatur, sumiture (scil. Christus.")
In the Missal of the Franks, lib. cit. p. 38—
" Sacrificiura, Domine, quod desideranter offerimus, etc. — P. 319. Hanc igitur
oblationem servitutis nostra;, sedet cunctae farailias tuie, quam tibi offerimus," etc.
In the old GalUcan Missal, (Ub. cit. p. 334,) we read the following prayers :—
" Sacrificium tibi Domine celebrandura placatus intende ; quod et nos a Vitus
nostriE conditionis emundet, et tuo noralni reddat acceptos : et communicatio prue-
sentis oscuU perpetuo proficiat charitatl— P. 385. Descendat, precamur, oranipo-

568 APPENDIX.
tens Deus, super hsec quse tibi offeriraus, verbura tuum sanctum ; descendat inaes-
timabilis glorias tuae Spiritus; descendat antiqute indulgentite tuie donum; ut fiat
oblatio ho3C Hostia spiritualis in odorcm suavitatis accepta : etiam nos famulos tuos
per sanguinem Christi tua raanus invicta custodial. Libera nos ab omni malo, om
nipotens, aeteme Deus : et quia tibi soli est prosstandi potestas, tiibue, ut hoc so-
lemne sacrificiura sanctificet corda nostra, dura creditur; dcleat peccata, dum su
mitur." .
Decorum requires us now to cite sorae forms of prayer from the Roman Liturgy ; —
" Suscipe, sance Pater, omnipotens leterne Deus, hanc iramaculatarahostium, quara
ego, indignus faraulus tuus, offero tibi Deo meo vivo et vero, pro innumerabilibus
peccatis ct offensionibus et negligentus raeis, et pro omnibus circumstantibus, sed et
pro omnibus fidelibus Christianis, vivis atque defunctis ; ut mihi et illis proficiat at
saluttm in vitam aetemam.
" Offerimus tibi Domine calicem salutis, tuara deprecantes clementiam ; ut in
conspectu diviniB majestatis tuae pro nostra ct tatius raundi salute cura odore suavi
tatis aseendat.
*' In spiritu huraiUtatis et in animo contrite suscipiamur a te Doraine : et sic fiat
sacrificiura nostrum in conspectu tuo hodie ut placeat tibi Domine Deos.
" Suscipe, sancta Trinitas, hanc oblationem, quam tibi offerimus ob mcraoriam
passionis, resurrectionis et ascensionis Jesu Christi Domini nostri, etc. Suscipiat
Dominus hoc sacrificiura de manibus tuis ad laudera et gloriam norainis sui, ad
utiUtatera quoque nostram, totiusque ccclesiaB suae sanctae.
" Te igitur, clementissime Pater, per Jesum Christum filium tuum Dominum
nostrum, supplices rogaraus ac petiraus uti accepta habeas et benedioas htec dona,
haec munera, haec sancta sacrifitna illibata, imprimis quae tibi offerimus jiro ecclesia
lua sancta cathohca, quam pacificare, custodire, adunare, et regere digneris toto or
be terrarum, etc. [This prayer occurs in all the Liturgies.] Memento, Doraine,
faraulorura faraularuraque tuarura el oraniura circumstamtium, quorum tibi fides cog
nita est et nota devotio, pro quibus tibi offerimus, vel qui tibi offerunt, hoc sacrifi
cium laudis pro se suisque omnibus, pro redcmptione aniraarum suarum, pro spe sa
lutis et incolumitatis suae ; tibique reddunt vota sua tnterno Deo, vivo et vero."
More or less detailed representations of the principal actions in the hfe of Christ,
prayers for the living and the dead, and the raention of saints, occur in every Litur
gy friira the earliest ages of the Church. But want of space prevents us frora cit
ing, in proof of this, any longer passages.

Translation of the Extracts from the Greek Liturgies.
In the liturgy of St. Chrysostom (in Gear's Euchologium sive Rituale Graeco-
rum, p. 70. Par. 1647,) lhe first prayer of the faithful in the Missa fidelium runs
thus: " We give thee thanks, O Lord God of Hosts, who hast judged us worthy both
to assist now at thy holy altar, and to supplicate thy mercy on account of our own
sins, and of the errors of thy people. Receive, O God, our prayer, make us worthy
to offer unto thee prayers and supplications and unbloody sacrifices in behalf of aU

APPENDIX. 569
thy people, and raake us, whom thou hast ordained for this thy holy ministry, wor
thy to invoke thee, in aU places, and at aU times, by the power of thy Holy Spirit,
without blame and without offence, and according to the pure testimony of our
conscience, that thou mayest hear us, and be propitious unto us, aocordiug to the
multitude of thy mercies."
While the seraphic hymn of the sanctus is being uttered, the priest, among other
things, says as foUows (p. 72) : " Thou art, O Christ our God, the offerer and the
offered, the receiver and the distributed, and we render glory to thee together with
thy etemal Father, and with thy raost holy and righteous and Ufe-giving Spirit,
now and for ever, and for ages of ages. Araen."
Further on, p. 75.
The Priest saith : " Let us stamd up in holiness ; let us stand up with awe ; let
us endeavour to offer up in peace the hdy oblation."
The Choir. " The victim of peace, the sacrifice of praise."
The Priest. " May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the charity of God
the Father, and the comraunion of the Hdy Ghost, be with you all."
Choir. " And with thy spirit."
Priest. " Let us raise up our hearts."
Choir. " We have raised thera up to the Lord."
Priest. " Let us give thanks to the Lord."
Choir. " It is raost meet and just to worship the Father, the Son, and the Holy
Ghost, one consubstantial and undivided Trinity."
Priest. " It is meet and just to celebrate thee, to bless thee, to praise thee, to
give thee thanks, to worship thee in every place of thy dominion ; for thou art a
God ineffable, imperceptible, invisible, incomprehensible, everlasting, and always the
same," etc.
In the liturgy of St. Basil, in Gear's Euchologium, (p. 1 62,) the first prayer of
the faithful runs thus : " Thou, O Lord, hast revpaled to us this great mystery of
salvation; thou hasl vouchsafed to make us, hurable and unworthy servants as we
are, ministers of thy holy altar. Make us, by the power of thy Hdy Spirit, worthy
of this ministry, that, standing without condemnation in the presence of thy divine
glory, we may offer unto thee the sacrifice of praise. Thou art who in all thmgs
workest all. Grant, O Lord, that, on account both of our sins, and of the errors
of thy people, our sacrifice may be received, and become weU-pleasing in thy sight."
The prayer at the Offertory, p. 164.
" O Lord, our God, who hast created us, and hast brought us into this Ufe, who
hast shown us the path to salvation, who hast vouchsafed to us the revelation of
celestial mysteries ; it is thou who, by the power of the Holy Spirit, hast ordained
us for this ministry. Be pleased, O Lord, that we raay become ministers of thy
New Testament, and dispensers of thy holy raysteries. Receive ue, O Lord, ap
proaching to thy holy altar, according to the radtitude of thy raercies, that we be
corae worthy to offer unto thee this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice in behalf of
our own sins, and the errors of thy people. Receive this sacrifice upon thy holy
and reasonable altar, for a sweet-smelUng fragrance, and send us down in return the
grace of thy Hdy Spirit. Look down upon us, O Lord, and regard this our wor
ship, and accept it, as thou didst accept the gifts of Abel, the sacrifices of Noah, the

570 APPENDIX.
holocausts of Abraham, the sacred oblations of Moses and Aaron, and the peace-
offerings of Samuel. As thou didst receive from thy holy apostles this true sacri
fice, so also in thy benignity accept, Lord, frora our sinfd hands these gifts ; in or
der that, being found vvorthy to minister without offence at thy holy altar, we may
meet with the reward of faithful and prudent stewards in the tremendous day of thy
just retribution."
In the Alexandrine liturgy of St. Mark (Renaudot Liturg. orient, coll. t. i. p.
145), the priest saith in the offertory: " Thou hast created aU things by thy wis
dom, the true Ught, thy only-begotten Son, our Lord and God and Saviour Jesus
Christ ; through whora rendering thanks unto Thee, together with hira and the
Holy Ghost, we offer up this reasonable and unbloody sacrifice, which aU the na
tions off'er up to thee, O Lord, frora the rising of the sun unto the going down there
of, frora the North and frora the South ; for thy name is great among all tho na
tions, and in every plaoe incense and sacrifice and oblation are put up to thy holy
name."

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

Psge
Introductory Notices by the Translator . . . - . v.
Author's Prefaces - -...--. ix.
Memoir of Dr. Moehler . ----- xxiii.
INTRODUCTION.
Nature, extent, and sources of SymboUsm . - - - - 93
BTMBOLICAL WHITINGS OF CATHOUCS AND PROTESTANTS.
The CathoUc formularies  103
The Lutheran forradaries . . - . - 106
The Cdvinistic and ZwingUan formdaries ..... 108
BOOK I.
PART I.
DIFFERENCES IN BOCTEINE RESPECTINQ THE PRIMITIVE STATE OF MAN
AND THE ORIGIN OF EVIL.
Sect. i. Primitive state of man, according to the Catholic doctrine - 113
II. The Lutheran doctrine on man's original state - - 119
III. The Calvinistic doctrine on the primitive state of man - 123
IV. On the cause of moral evil . - - - - - 126
CHAPTER II.
ON ORIGINAL SIN AND ITS CONSEQUENCES.
V. The CathoUc doctrine of original sin . . - - 134
VI. Doctrine of the Lutherans respecting original sin - - - 142
VII. Considerations on Heathenism, in reference to the doctrines contro
verted between the two Churches - - - 154
VIII. Doctrine of the Calvinists on original sin - - - 159
IX. Zwingle's view of original sin . . - - . - 165
CHAPTER III.
OPPOSITE VIEWS ON THE DOCTRINE OF JUSTIFICATION.
A. General statement of the mode in which, according to the different
confessions, man becoraes justified ----- 163
XI. Of the relation of the operation of God to that of raan, in the work
of regeneration, according to the Catholic and the Lutheran sys
teras --.-----.- 172

572 TiBLE OF CONTENTS.
Sect. Page
XII. Doctrine of the Calvinists on the relation of grace to freedom, and
human co-operation. — Predestination - - - 181
XIII. Of the Catholic notion of justification . . 186
xrv. Doctrine of the Protestants on justification and sanctification - 194
ON JUSTIFYING FAITH.
XV. Catholic view of this subject . . - : - 201
XVI. Lutheran and Calvinistic view of faith - - 207
APPRECIATION OF THE THEORETIC AND PRACTICAL GROUNDS, WHICH THE PROTESTANTS
ALLEGE FOR THEIR VIEW OF FAITH.
XVII. Appreciation of the theoretic grounds - 214
XVIII. Appreciation of the practical grounds ... 220
XI.X. Survey of the differences in the doctrine of faith - 230
XX. On the assurance of justification and eternal felicity - 233
OF GOOD WORKS.
XXI. Doctrine of Catholics respecting good works - . . 238
XXII. Doctrine of the Protestants respecting good works - - - 242
XXIII. The doctrine of purgatory in its connexion with the Catholic doc
trine of justificalion -..-.-- 249
xxrv. Opposition between the comraunions in their general conception of
Christianity - . ... - 254
xxv. The culminating point of inquiry. — Luther maintains an inward
and essential opposition between religion and morality, and assigns
to the forraer an eternal, to the latter a raere temporal, value - 262
XXVI. Analysis of the elements of truth and of error in the Protestant doc
trine of faith, as hitherto stated - - 269
XXVII. Affinity of' Protestantis-fli with Gnosticism, and some Pantheistic
systems of the Middle Age. More accurate deterraination of the
difference between Zwmgle's and Luther's principles 272
CHAPTER IV.
DIFFERENCES IN THE DOCTRINE OF THE SACRAMENTS.
XXVIII. Doctrine of CathoUcs on the sacraments in general - - 279
XXIX. Lutheran doctrine of the sacraments in general. Consequences of
this doctrine . .--..- 282
xxx. Further consequences of the original Lutheran view of the essence
of a sacraraent --.....- 290
XXXI. Zwinglius and Calvin on the sacraments . - - 292
XXXII. Baptism and penance ----- 295
XXXIII. Continuation of the doctrine of penance - . - 299
xxxrv. Doctrine of the Catholics on the most holy sacrament of the Altar,
and on the Mass ... - - 310
xxxv. Doctrine of lhe Lutherans, Zwinglians, and Calvinists, on the Eu-
charist ---...-.. 323

T.'VBLE OF CONTENTS. 573
CHAPTER V.
DIFFERENCES IN RESPECT TO THE DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH.
Sect. Page
XXXVI. Notion of the Church. Combination of Divuie and human ele
ments in her. Infallibility of the Church - - . 330
XXXVII. More detailed exposition of the Catholic view of the Church - . 334
xxxvm. The Church as teacher and instructress. Tradition. The Church
as judge in matters of faith -.--.. 349
XXXIX. The Church as interpreter of Holy Writ, and the doctrine on tra
dition continued .-....- 354
XL. Formal distinction between scriptural and ecclesiastical doctrine 360
XLI. Tradition in a more limited sense. The canon of the Scriptures - 364
XLII. On the relation of lhe ecclesiastical interpretation of Holy Writ to
the learned and scientific exegesis. Patristic authority and free
investigation ¦-...... 366
XLIII. The Hierarchy ........ 375
LUTHERAN DOCTRINE ON THE CHURCH.
XLIV. The Bible the only source and arbitress in matters of faith - - 380
XLV. Cpntinuation. Internal ordination. Every Christian a priest and
teacher, and consequently independent of all ecclesiastical com
munion. Notion of ecclesiastical freedom - . 387
XLVI. Continuation. Invisible Church ...... 392
XLVII. Continuation. Rise of the visible Church according to Luther.
Ultimate reasons for the truth of an article of faith - . 395
XLVIII. Continuation. Divergences in the doctrine on the Church, shortly
expressed -• ...... 398
XLIX. The truth and the falsehood in Luther's doctrine on the Church - 402
L. Negative doctrines of the Lutherans in regard to the Church . 405
LL Doctrine of the Calvinists on the Church - . . - 407
CHAPTER VL
THE CHURCH IN THE NEXT WORLD, AND ITS CONNEXION WITH THE CHURCH
MILITANT.
LII. Doctrine of Catholics on this matter . . - . . 417
LIII. Doctrine of Protestants on this subject . , * . 421

PART n.
THE SMALLER PROTESTANT SECTS.
LIV. Introduction -.-•--... 425
CHAPTER I.
THE ANABAPTISTS OR MENNONITES.
FIRST PERIOD OF THE ANABAPTISTS.
tv. Fundamental principle of the Anabaptists - . . . 429
LVI. Initiation into the sect. Signs and confirmation of covenant . 433

?74 Table op contents.
Sect; Ps^,
LVII. These sectaries assaU the Protestant doctrine of justification 435
LVIII. Continuation. Concurrence of the most various errors in the sect 437
LIX. Continuation. Relation of Scripture to the inward spirit. The
Church - . - ...... 440
LX. Hatred against all outward institutions for promoting edification.
Ecclesiastical disciphne. Manners and customs . . 443
LXI. The Anabaptists in the form of Mennonites j their second period - 444
Lxii. Peculiar doctrines of the Mennonites. Their Church-discipUne . 446
LXIII. Conclusion. Special controversies - .... 449
CHAPTER II.
THE QUAKERS.
'jXiv. Some historical preUminary remarks ..... 453
LXV. ReUgious system of the Quakers. The inward Ught . . 455
LXVI. Continuation of the sarae subject. Effects of the inward light . 458
LXVII. Continuation of the sarae subject. Of justification and sanctifica
tion- Perfect fulfilment of the law - - 460
LXVIII. Contmuation of the same subject. Doctrine on the sacraments . 464
LXIX. Continuation of the same subject. Rejection of a distinct order of
ministry. Preaching. Pubhc worship - . 465
LXX. PecuUar raanners and customs of the Quakers - . 469
LXXI. Remarks on the doctrinal pecuUarities of the Quakers . . - 471
CHAPTER III.
THE HERRNHUTTERS, OR THE COMMUNITY OF BROTHERS, AND THE METHODISTS.
LXXII. Historical remarks. The Moravian brethren . . - 486
Lxxiii. Continuation of the same subject. Spener and the Pietists 488
LXXIV. Combination of the doctrinal pecdiarities of the Moravians and the
Pietists . - - - - . 493
Lxxv. The Methodists. Religious state of England at the beginning of
the eighteenth century. Profound degradation of pubUc raorals.
The Methodists wish to bring about a reform. Comparison be
tween the reforming efforts of Cathohcs and Protestants, at
similar epochs ... .... 496
LXXVI. PecuUar doctrines of the Methodists. Marks of distinction between
them and the Hermhutters. Division of the sect into Wesleyans
and Whitfieldites . ¦ . . . . ,. -499
CHAPTER IV.
THE DOCTKIME OF SWEDENBORG.
LXXVII. Some preUminary historical remarks . - . 506
LXXVIII. Practical tendency of Swedenborg. His judgment on the Reform
ers, and his account of their destiny in the next hfe 508
LXXIX. Swedenborg's dpctrine on the Trinity. His motive for assaiUng that
of tlxB Ghatclj ' .... I ... 511

Contradictions in his

TABLE OF CONTENTS. 575
Sic*. Pase-
Lxxx. Swedenborg denie? the fall of man in Adam.
theory on this matter - . -
LXXXI. Incarnation of the Divmity. Objects of the incarnation. Relation
between grace and free-will . • . -
Swedenborg's doctruie relative to the sacraments -
Swedenborg's revelations from the other world
BibUcal canon of Swedenborg. AUegorico-mystical exegesis
Swedenborg's place in history . . . - .

LXXXII.
LXXX,^IL liXxxrv. LXXXV.

LXXXVI. iConcluding remarkB

514 516521 523
525 528534

CHAPTER V.

THE SOCINIANS.

' IXXXVII. Relation of the Socmians to^the Reformers. Historical remarks - 536
Lxxxvin. Prmciples of the Socinians, as to the relation between reason and
revelation, and the functions of the former in the interpretation of
Holy Writ -  540
LXXXIX. Doctrine of the Sochlians respecting God, and the person of Christ 542
xc. On the faU and the regeneration of man ... - 547
XCI. On the sacraments - - . . ^ . 552

CHAPTER VI.
THE AKMINIANS, OR REMONSTKAMTB.
iciL Some historical preliminary remarl^
XCUL Doctrme of the Arminians ...
xcrv. Doctrine of the Arminians on the sacraments •

- 554 555
- 560

Note A, referred to at page 307
Note Bj referred to at page 312

APPENDIX.

563564

YALE

7452

'¦ YA L E

' ^!^^

V,

.¦Mxf