^Tnw^ /> r\r> &LQ BX 9183 .M67 1900a Morris, Edward D., 1825- 1915. Theology of the Westminster w pq < u w IX! w w W Theology OF The JVestminster Symbols. A COMMENTARY HISTORICAL, DOCTRINAL, PRACTICAL, ON THE CONFESSION OF FAITH AND CATECHISMS AND THE RELATED FORMULARIES OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCHES. BY EDWARD D. MORRIS, D, D„ LL. D Emeritus Professor of Systematic Theology In Lane Theological Seminary. COLUMBUS, OHIO, igoo © ^ b dation# and progress, and that such development can never be regarded as finished. All theology, regarded simply- as the human statement or expression in more or less scientific form of what God has first revealed in his inspired Word, is constantly varying and widening in both con- tent and structure, as the human mind gains larger views of the CREEDS — THEIR INCOMPLETENESS. 13 truth, or sees that truth in wider and juster relations. Even when the constructive principles of theology have been appre- hended, and after the main elements in the system have been drawn from the Scriptures, new definitions of doctrine and new combinations of doctrine are still possible. What is seen prepares the way for a clearer discernment of what at first can not be seen ; what has been grouped together at one time may by its own imper- fection suggest some better method of grouping ; what seems at one stage to be perfect, comes to be viewed as imperfect under the light of further study and experience. Christian theology thus exists under a law of growth, and can never be said to be com- plete. The affirmation of Macaulay that theology, revealed as well as natural, is not of the nature of a progressive science, is clearly unwarranted. For while the cardinal teachings of Scrip- ture can not be altered or improved by human ingenuity, the volume of teaching in the Bible is found to be steadily expanding, as the human intelligence increases in capacity ; and both the forms and the cogency of revealed doctrine are constantly developing through progressive inquiry and widening knowledge of the Word itself. Christian theology is thus not a stationary and finished, but a steadily advancing science ; ever setting the truth of God in fresh lights and relations, discovering new harmonies in that truth, and thus building up, century by century, a temple of sacred doctrine, whose full completion it may not be given to mortal man to behold. The manifest fact is that no century can frame a scheme of doctrine which should justly limit the belief and teach- ing of succeeding centuries. Each period, each generation, each body of believers may and in some sense must make a theology for itself. To suppose otherwise is to confuse the rudimentary distinction between theology and revelation : it is to fancy each and every council, each and every theologian, infallible. Creeds are developed under a similar law of growth, and partake of similar incompleteness. A confession adopted as sufficient at any one period may be too brief and rudimentary to describe the more comprehensive or more philosophic faith of a later period. A symbol formed in an era distinctly theological, when the mind of the church is largely occupied with speculative question or debate, may have much in it which an era of greater practical activity, or of comparative indifference to the more recondite aspects of divine truth, will either reject or regard as of little practical moment. A creed shaped during some period of intense controversy, and drafted for the special purpose of contradicting or of crushing out some rising heresy, will inevitably carry with 14 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION, it traces of the conflict in which it arose, and may consequently fail to command the intelligent and cordial assent of the church after the period of excitement is over, and the controversy has come to a decisive close. In like manner, a creed which may be regarded as the best possible expression of the belief of the church in any given land or age, will indicate at many points its particular place and date, and may consequently become inadequate to repre- sent the living convictions of other churches in other lands and times. And beyond all this, what is illustrated in all theology as a growth largely personal and provincial, and always limited by human narrowness, must appear no less really or vividly in all creeds. In the broadest sense, to affirm that such creeds are imperfect, is simply to assert that they are human. The Placuit Spiritui Sancto et Nobis, of the primitive Council at Jerusalem, though appropriated by the Vatican, can not rightly be employed to describe the decisions of any subsequent council, whether in the early church or in more modern times. It is a just inference from this view of the imperfectness of all human compilations of belief, that no church, in planting itself on any given formula, agrees by that act to hold the said formula unchanged and unrevised through all time. There is indeed, as we have seen, a certain sacredness attaching to old symbols like those of the ancient church — symbols that have come to be ac- cepted widely, and are held in common by many different branches of the one church of Christ — which seems to forbid attempts to alter or expand or improve them by whatever process. A creed which has become the heritage in some sense of the common Christianity, ought not to be torn to pieces, or changed by the introduction of improvements according to the judgment of this or that particular denomination, until its historical quality is destroyed, and the aroma of antiquity in it is altogether exhaled. The same principle would apply in the case of a confession held extensively even by any main division of the church, such as the Lutheran or the Reformed, or in the case of such doctrinal sym- bols as those of Westminster, as now received and held by many Presbyterian bodies. It would be more in harmony with the fit- ness of things for any such communion to make a new creed or declaration for itself, presenting in its own chosen words the accepted scheme of doctrine, than to alter at essential points such historic symbols so as to suit its own specialties in belief. Yet the general right of emendation is one which can not be denied. This right may be exercised, as in some historic instan- ces, by the adoption of additional definitions or declarations, CREEDS — THEIR AUTHORITATIVENESS. 1 5 designed to meet objection or to remove obscurity. In any such case, the original creed is to be received in the light of such explan- atory additions, and is obligator}' only so far as these extend. This right is certainly admissible, even if carried much farther than this. The Westminster Assembly itself at first undertook such revision and emendation of an existing symbol, and only abandoned the effort after discovering that the framing of a new confession would be an easier and more acceptable task, than so radical an alteration of that symbol as was judged to be needful in order to make it a fit exponent of what was then regarded as the national belief. It is obvious, however, that the justifying reasons for such emendation must be clear, urgent, decisive. Some degree of permanence is essential to the usefulness or influence of any creed. Slight or frequent changes are to be avoided as prac- tically destructive. The frequent agitation of the question of amendment is certain to unsettle popular confidence in the creed itself. Errors or defects which are minor may therefore be borne with ; even serious imperfections in statement or in construction may be endured, when the alternative is likely to be ecclesiastical agitation or conflict, or the wide disturbance of popular faith. It has been urged that, as in the case of some state constitutions, the matter of creed amendment should be brought up at stated inter- vals, in order to test the confidence of the church in its accepted standards, or to furnish an orderly and peaceful mode of improving them. But the general instinct of the Protestant communions is adverse to any such provision, and their obvious choice is to hold their standards in their primitive form as nearly as possible, and to modify that form only when some serious emergency may demand it. Whenever such an emergency arises, some churches, like our own, have provided in their constitution a legitimate method for making alterations in creed, as in matters of polity or worship. The degree of authoritativeness attaching to all church symbols must be measured by the facts as to their origin, contents and nature. The doctrine of church infallibil- , 5i „ «,,,', , * , 7. Their authoritative- ly as held by the papacy, whether such n£SS. degrees in weight infallibility lies in the councils of the an(j ciaim: loyalty de- church, or in the pope as spiritual head fined, over the church, leads inevitably to the conclusion that all canons, decrees, doctrines once enunciated by the church in either way, are beyond all challenge or question. Additions may be made to such decrees, as the developing con- sciousness of the church may make new discoveries of truth : 16 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. further proclamations of doctrine may be needful, to complete the system already held, or to meet errors arising in opposition to the truth. But a creed once proclaimed, resting on the Scriptures, inspired by the Holy Ghost, endorsed by the voice of the church, must according to Rome be viewed as forever infallible, and should be received by all with implicit, unquestioning faith. Protestant- ism finds infallibility nowhere but in the inspired Word. It main- tains in the language of the Confession of Westminster not only that all synods and councils since the days of the Apostles may err, but that many of them have erred ; and therefore that, while such synods or councils may be helpful in the elucidation of divine truth, their affirmations however entitled to respect are never to be made the implicit rule of faith or of practice. No other posi- tion than this is consistent with the Protestant doctrine as to the supreme authority, the perfect truthfulness and the absolute suf- ficiency of the Holy Scriptures. The perils involved in that position, such as false interpretation or indifference to church authority or the extreme individualism of reason, are far less seri- ous than the perils involved in the papal view, or in the absolute acceptance of any earthly standard, personal or impersonal, as infallible. The degree of authoritativeness in any particular creed may be determined by a variety of tests. Among extrinsic sources of such authoritativeness may be named the number and ability and posi- tion of the persons who framed the symbol, the circumstances and conditions regulating its formation, the extent to which it has been received and acknowledged, the degree of its present prominence and influence as an accepted representative of the faith of the ch'urch. The intrinsic authority of a creed lies in what it is as a statement of truth, when studied in the light of the Scriptures, and tested by the best results of exegetical and theological inquiry The authoritativeness of some creeds obviously wanes with time, even among those who have vowed allegiance to them ; and not infrequently they are held up rather as historical insignia of a past faith, or as representatives of old controversy, than as expressions of living thought and present experience. Such symbols may still be insisted upon as strict tests of loyalty to the church, or as standards of individual teaching in the church ; they may be in- vested with an extraneous authority derived from the concentrated will of the body that avows them ; and yet their claim to accept- ance may be a waning claim, and they may have little real authoritativeness over the individual mind or conscience. To be authoritative in the best sense, a creed must be the cherished LOYALTY TO CREEDS. 17 expression of living belief — the utterance and confession of the church as it actually is. It must also be so thoroughly biblical, so saturated throughout with both the teaching and the temper of Scripture, that those who study it shall be drawn spontaneously into acceptance of it by the continuous and positive consciousness that its declarations are substantially the voice and message of the Holy Ghost. The general question of loyalty to church creeds is indicated sufficiently in what has already been said. Viewed simply in their abstract form as statements of Christian doctrine, made and avowed by some section of the church of Christ, they are entitled to the respect of all who receive that doctrine, and have a right to be accepted and honored as deliberate expressions of the judgment of the household of faith. Acceptance of them in this sense is simply a personal endorsement and acceptation of the truths they contain. But when viewed as doctrinal bases or foundations of an organized church, creeds assume a different character, and are entitled to allegiance of another sort. Here they become a coales- cing factor in the organization, a permanent representative of the distinguishing principles on which the organization is based, a test of individual teaching and especially of official qualifications, and a standard around which all who are connected with the organiza- tion may properly be expected to gather. Apart from any abstract question as to the use of creeds in such connections and ways, there can be no doubt as to the obligation of all who acquiesce in that use, and who connect themselves with any church under these conditions. The acceptance of the creed here assumes in part the character of a covenant ; the confession is made by the individual to and before the church ; and loyalty to that church therefore involves true and honest loyalty to the symbol on which the church is based. There are two practical errors to be avoided here. The first calls for an acceptance of every section and clause of the endorsed creed — an avowal of personal allegiance to every word or phrase, and of obligation to maintain and defend the symbol in each par- ticular. This may be carried so far as to include a tacit agreement not to believe anything that lies outside of the creed or is in conflict with it ; it may be regarded as involving an obligation tc resist all proposed revisions or emendations ; it may even assume a more or less conscious veneration of the creed as if it were per- fect, and possibly in some degree inspired. There is a blind allegiance which goes to such extremes as these, and which would require similar blindness in all who should seek admission to the 18 HISTORICAL, INTRODUCTION. church, or undertake to represent the church officially. But no argument is necessary to show that such a theory is not only contrary to the spirit and teaching of Protestantism, but is alto- gether at variance with supreme loyalty to the Word and Truth of God. The attempt to enforce any such theory within the Presbyterian church has always failed, and must always fail, for the simple reason that it is at variance with the fundamental position of our Symbols respecting the supremacy of Scripture, the fallibility of human councils, and the superior obligation of fidelity to personal conscience in all matters of belief. The opposite error is a latitudinarian indifference to the specific teaching of the creed avowed, or to the covenant implied in a true subscription. While such subscription can obligate no one to be indifferent to the errors or defects of a creed, or to accept that creed in any other way than as an expression or exponent of the doctrine supremely taught in Holy Scripture, as discerned and held by the church, that subscription honestly made will not permit indifference to the recognized rights of such creed, or disregard of its plain and decisive teaching on any essential point of doctrine. If the authoritativeness of such symbols be earthly and human, it is still real and is entitled to respect even from those who conscien- tiously differ in belief. Certainly such authoritativeness ought to be binding on all, and especially on all in official station, who have once voluntarily accepted any symbol as their own, and have entered into formal covenant to support and proclaim it. No right mind can be in sympathy with that loose, reckless, revolutionary temper, which disregards such obligations, or which uses a position within any given church to subvert the foundations on which that church is conscientiously standing. Honest, open, manly loyalty to these as to all other recognized obligations is a cardinal constituent in every worthy character. With these definitions and under such limitations, it would seem that no just objection could be raised to the formation or adoption of church creeds. There is indeed a class 8. Objections to creeds: r , , , theseobjections answered. of Persons whose °PPosltl°* to such doc' trinal symbols is only one phase of a broader opposition to all definite and positive statements of biblical truth. In some instances the real feeling in the case is doubtless one of hostility to the truth itself — not merely to the formulated expression of the truth ; it is the doctrine of the inspired Word that is opposed, whatever form that doctrine may assume. In others the objection springs rather from a general impression that the Bible itself is sufficient as a creed, or from a kindred impression OBJECTIONS TO CREEDS. 19 that there is danger lest these merely human statements shall crowd out or impair the supreme force of the Divine Original. It is al- leged that creeds thus tend both to weaken the dominant claim of Scripture, and to bring the church under subordination to some human system, to the injury rather than to the nurture of faith. An adequate answer to such objection may be found in the obvious fact that the Bible itself is so variously interpreted, and that so many forms of error are claiming scriptural warrant. In the pres- ence of such error, the just interpretation of Scripture can be recognized and attained only by careful analysis and condensation of the truth as revealed, in the exact language of philosophy — in scientific form and proportions. Viewed simply in this light, church creeds as .systematic statements of the biblical teaching, are often of immeasurable value : in some periods or conditions of the church they may be absolutely indispensable, both as a protec- tion against the incursions of unbelief, and as a source of strength and nutriment to those who believe. Objection is sometimes based specifically on the recognized im- perfection in all such symbols. It is to be admitted that as human constructions all creeds are imperfect, — that many of them are deficient either in their constructive principle, or in their definitions or their phraseology, — that some are too cumbrous to be available as practical tests of belief, others too abstract and speculative, and others too narrow and meager, to meet the ends sought in their formulation or their use. But some of these criticisms apply with equal force to all human expositions of the truth of God : some are illustrations of deficiency such as lies in the nature of all human products : some give occasion merely for correction and improvement, and therefore are arguments, not for rejection but for emendation. Moreover, however defective such symbols are, they are still useful ; though they fail to express the totality of truth, they yet express much which is not only truthful but full of spiritual significance. And while it may be easy to reject them because of their imperfection, it will be found far more difficult than is imagined either to do without them or to provide any worthier substitutes. Objection is also urged on the further ground that such creeds are not merely human and in themselves imperfect, but also, even in their best forms and especially when largely specialized and mi- nute in contents, are fetters upon liberty of thought, and therefore hindrances to the free and full development of the truth, as con- tained in the Bible. It is alleged that men are unduly hampered by such confessional declarations, — that they are sometimes held 20 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. back from legitimate investigation, and in others are led to conceal their real beliefs, or are tempted into an advocacy which is not entirely sincere. So far as creeds do in fact produce such results, they may become injurious, rather than beneficial to the church. But these are by no means necessary consequences, nor are the creeds always at fault when they do occur. A true, clear, just creed is far more likely to be a stimulant than a hindrance to lib- erty of thought ; it is more likely to quicken investigation than to repress it. Is it not an obvious fact in the history of Protest- antism, that the churches which possess the broadest and strongest creeds, have been the churches in which the largest freedom of thought has been not only granted but exercised ? Still further objection is based upon the wrong use of creeds, and especially upon the help they may afford to an assuming dogmatism and to ecclesiastical tyranny. It is admitted that church symbols have in some instances been so used, — that they have been put forward and exalted by bigots as if perfect, — that church authorities have wielded them as scourges to repress free conviction or punish personal error, — that they have at times played no small part in that experience of religious tyranny through which our Christianity has passed, and in some measure is still passing. But these issues are hardly more attributable to creeds than to the Bible itself, or to the church of Christ viewed as a living organism. Like all other divine instrumentalities put into human hands, such as the holy sacraments, or the ministerial office, or the keys of the kingdom of heaven, creeds may be thus misused — may be perverted into instruments of injustice. But it is against the perversion of creeds that such objections lie. This possible issue neither destroys their true design nor justifies their rejection : in their proper place and office, they may still prove an inestimable help and blessing to the church. Miller (Creeds and Confessions) argues in defence of creeds as contributing to church unity, as illustrating the position of the church as a depository and witness to saving truth, as candid testimonials of belief addressed to other churches, and as promoting the study of Chris- tian doctrine and the increase of religious knowledge. He argues also from the experience of the church as to the helpfulness of creeds, and from the latitudinarian character and tendency of those who oppose them, and answers effectively various specific objec- tions urged by such opponents. Historic Creeds : From this general view of the nature and uses of creeds, and of the conditions under which they are framed CREED ELEMENT IN SCRIPTURE. 21 and are to be received, we may now turn to glance summarily at the historical succession of such symbols, enumerating them as they were evolved in chronologic order from the study and ex- perience of the church, and considering them in some of their more obvious connections and bearings. Such a brief glance at the material of what has already been defined as Comparative Symbolism, will prepare the way for a more specific and intelligent examination of the Symbols of Westminster in their historic position and relations. The creed element in Scripture itself may serve as a proper introduction to such survey. It has already been suggested that the Bible is not a book of doctrinal form- , . .. , i 9. Creed element in ulas, but presents itself rather as a record Scripture . Biblical decla. of faith already in exercise, — of beliefs rations of faith, already cherished in experience, and in that form regulating human lives. In the spiritual sphere it is not in the nature of the human mind first to formulate and then to believe. Divine truth enters into men first as a living power, subduing the soul into obedience and devotion, and assuming the shape of objective doctrine only when the soul has contemplated its own experience reflectively, and has discerned the truth as it shines forth in personal consciousness. And the Scriptures in general follow this law, approaching man chiefly on the side of his spiritual nature, and making their teachings manifest in religious effects rather than in didactic formulas. The doctrinal element is indeed everywhere present, but diffusively rather than in concrete shape — as life rather than proposition. Yet even in the Old Testament we may discern the antetypes and germs of much Christian symbolism. Individual confessions, for example, such as are apparent in the Davidic psalms, in the dedicatory prayer of Solomon, in the profound petition of Daniel, may be found half formulated in many of the sacred books. More general declarations, such as the confession of the people at Sinai or in conjunction with the great miracle of Elijah, occur both in the historical sections and in the prophetical writings. The entire Mosaic ceremonial, as observed by the nation, was a continuous confession of its faith in Him by whom that ceremonial was insti- tuted, and toward whom it was ever pointing the soul of the worshiper. Advanced Judaism, as it calls itself, has in nothing more fully betrayed its lack of loyalty to the holy Word than in its refusal to be bound by that clear and solemn system of doctrine, which is thus embedded actually though in unelaborated statement in the Old Testament. — But in the New Testament this creed 22 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. element, as might be anticipated, exists in forms more distinct and more precious, as all sacred doctrine centralizes and glorifies itself in the personal Christ. The Christian church indeed pre- sents itself to our view at first as existing without creeds. The reasons for this are easily seen. The basis of fact on which the primitive Christianity rested, was so clearly understood alike by the church and its enemies, — the simple verities of the Gospel were so distinctly known and avowed by all believers, that there was no real necessity for the statement of these in confessional form, whether for apology or for confirmation. Even during the latest decades of the apostolic century, though antichrists were already appearing, this necessity could hardly be said to have had an existence. The church reposed in its traditional faith, as de- fined in the apostolic writings, until the rising heresies and the philosophic oppositions of the centuries succeeding constrained it to the formal expression of its cherished belief. The creed element in the New Testament consists therefore chiefly of individual declarations of faith, called out by something in personal experience, or of ascriptions of trust uttered by the church, resembling hymns rather than formal creeds. Of the first class we have illustrations in the avowal of Nathaniel, John i : 49 ; in the emphatic utterance of Peter, Matthew xvi : 16 ; in the trust- ful declarations of the apostles generally, Matthew xiv : 33 ; John vi : 68-69 ; in the confession made by the eunuch to Philip, Acts viii : 37 ; in the declaration of Paul to the jailor, Acts xvi : 31. Of the second class instances may be seen in several summaries of apostolic teaching bearing the confessional form, as in Romans x : 9 ; I. Corinthians xv : 3-8 ; I. John iv : 2. The most elaborate of these is found in I. Timothy iii : 16 : in which the mystery of godliness, or the true faith, receives its fullest exposition in a recital of the main facts respecting the incarnation, life, death and res- urrection of our Lord. Further allusion to such principia or foundations of belief may be found in Hebrews vi:l-2 ; and Rev- elation ii:13 ; and possibly in the form of sound words referred to by Paul, II. Timothy, i : 13. Jude also speaks of the faith once delivered to the saints ; Peter alludes to the present truth, as in holy contrast with all human errors ; and Paul regards himself as a steward of certain divine mysteries, I. Corinthians iv : 1 ; Ephesians iii : 9 ; and as having a dispensation or deposit of truth committed unto him, I. Corinthians ix:17. The baptismal form- ula also may be regarded as a confession of faith in the funda- mental mystery of the Trinity, on the part of those who submitted to that ordinance ; and the kindred formula to be used at the FIRST CREED PERIOD. 23 eucharistic supper according to the instruction of Christ, is in some sense a like confession of that cardinal truth of grace, which the bread broken and the wine poured forth so vividly symbolize. The apostolic benedictions certainly embody the fundamental doctrine of the Trinity. But these examples are not to be pressed too far. While such illustrations indicate clearly the presence in Scripture of what may properly be called a creed element, it still is true that the Bible furnishes no complete formula of religious belief ; and that the church existed during the apostolic era and for nearly a century afterward, without any such organized confession of its faith. The tradition that the apostles agreed in preparing the creed which bears their name, is without historic warrant and is to be set aside as a tradition merely : Fisher, Hist. Doct. So long as living men were found who could testify to what the Lord had spoken, — so long as there were actual witnesses to the great facts as well as the fundamental teachings of the common Christianity, more formal creeds than those just mentioned were needless, and the church, so far as we know, made no effort to supply them. The suggestion that the apostolic church had no creed because it could not agree upon any common and acceptable statement of doc- trine— a suggestion based on the alleged disparities between the Pauline and Petrine and Johannine conceptions of the Gospel— is clearly without historic warrant. The first creed period may be regarded as including the third, fourth and fifth centuries. During the second century and probably shortly after the decease of John, various J , . , . A , ' . . 10. First Creed Period: forms of antichrist appeared, breaking The three ancient creeds, in openly upon the doctrinal unity of the church, and imperiling the common faith. Some allusions by John, and also by Paul and Peter, ( I. John ii : 18-22; iv : 3; II. Thess. ii : 3-7; II. Peter ii : 1; see Epistle of Jude) seem to suggest either the actual rising of such heresies, or at least the subtle development of tendencies toward heresy even in the first century. It is matter of history that, shortly after the departure of the apostolic college, external opposition became more formidable in its aspects, and much more decisive in its assaults. It was natural that the first center of conflict should be found in the person of the Immanuel, and in the associated doctrine of the Trinity. If Christ could be shown to be something less than he had declared himself to be as a divine Mediator, — if the churchly conception of his person could be shaken or overthrown, — if the supernatural element in the doctrine of the Holy Ghost could be rejected, and 24 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. the divine Fatherhood in nature and in grace could be proved unworthv of acceptation, then the entire scheme of Christianity, resting on these foundations, would crumble into dust. Error within the church or opposition from without, succeeding at points so cardinal as these, would subvert and destroy the whole system, and the church and the Christian religion would inevitably perish together. The oldest of the three ancient creeds, bearing the name of the apostles, but not originating with them membratim articulatimque , was the first formal attempt by the church to protect herself from such perils by the definite formulation and proclamation of her essential belief at these vital points. It can be traced in its earliest forms to the latter half of the second century. Springing appar- ently from the baptismal formula, following the order of the holy trinity, confining itself to the main facts of the Gospel, — simple in structure, suffused with devotional feeling and fitted alike to be a standard of belief and a song of adoration, — it still remains, as Augustine described it, a regula of faith both brief and grand, brief in the number of its words, grand in the weight of its declarations. Accepted by both the Eastern church and the Western, and by Romanist and Protestant, incorporated in the Lutheran confessions, and more widely used than any other symbol for both testimony and worship, it will probably stand through all time as alike the primary representative of sacred doctrine, the germ of succeeding creeds, and the uniting and distinguishing confession of all in every age who truly believe in Christ. Associated with this primitive symbol are the Nicene and the Athanasian creeds ; not including as fully as the preceding the general field of divine doctrine, but relating especially to Trini- tarianism and Christology. The first represented eastern more than western thought ; was prepared at Nicaea, A. D. 325 ; perfected at Constantinople, A. D. 881; and modified for the western church at the council of Toledo A. D. 589, by the addition of the term, Filioqae. The second, also oriental in origin, some- times called from its opening words, Symbolum Ouicunque, of uncertain authorship although ascribed to Athanasius, was ac- cepted by no action of the ancient church, yet was widely received, especially for its elaborate exposition of the deity in Christ and of the doctrinal decisions of the first four ecumenical councils gen- erally, and is now ranked, aside from its damnatory clauses, with the other two primitive symbols as expressing still the faith of extensive sections of the Christian church, both Catholic and Protestant. To these may be added the explanatory clauses THE THREE ANCIENT CREEDS. 25 appended to the Nicene creed by the council of Chaleedon, A. D. 451 ; which were designed to exclude still more carefully certain remaining forms of error, and to define still more exactly the orthodox belief respecting the union of two natures in one person in Christ. Studying these three ancient creeds comparatively, we may note the following particulars. First: they are alike in resting imme- diately on the words of Scripture, and more specifically on the baptismal form- 1 1 ' These Creeds studied i j *u x— • m. ■ u j-.l- comparatively: Their con- ula and the tnnitanan benedictions. tents and liraitations. Recognizing as we have done a certain confessional element specially in the New Testament, both as indicated in individual utterances of belief and as expressed in the forms of sacred devotion, we may readily appreciate this early upspringing of that seed or germ in these more formal affirmations of the accepted faith. Had there been no outward exigencies im- pelling to such affirmations, we still might presume that the inward needs of the household of faith, such as the training of the young and their entrance into public covenant, and the investiture of per- sons appointed to office, would have led in time to such symbolic statements of the truth, especially as these were so immediately suggested though not formally given in the divine Word. Second : these creeds were peculiar in adhering mainly to the historic facts on which the Gospel reposes. In the two latter, we have indeed the results of the prolonged controversies touch- ing such abstruse and speculative questions as the trinity in the divine constitution, and the union of divine and human elements in the composite personality of Christ. Yet even in these state- ments we see a close adherence to the historic method followed so rigidly in the earliest symbol ; the divine facts however mysterious are ever kept in the foreground. In reality we find but little in them after all beyond the simple teaching of Scripture concerning the Father and the work of creation, concerning the Son in his incarnation and mission for our redemption, and concerning the Spirit in his official relations to the church and to the prime blessings of the Christian life. Third : compared with the later symbols, these original creeds are brief, terse, pointed ; stating simply what is most central and omitting much which subsequent confessions have sought to state or to expand. This peculiarity is explained by the fact that the great anthropological and soteriological controversies, and espec- ially the latter, had not yet arisen, — that the grave errors in these departments of theology which figured so largely in subsequent 26 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. thought and discussion were as yet undeveloped. The great conflict between Augustinianism and Pelagianism in their several varieties, near as it was in point of time, is hardly recognizable in these creeds. Of the momentous issues which subsequently arose respecting the nature and scope of the work of Christ, and which have so decisively affected all later symbolism, we discover nothing. So far as these later issues are concerned, these ancient creeds are altogether inadequate : they do not define where dis- crimination is now indispensable : they open or leave open avenues along which the most dangerous error might now enter. Fourth : they obviously represent simply an existing stage of doctrinal development ; they only mark the precise point at which the church had then arrived in its comprehension and exposition of divine truth. They contain no provision for their own enlargement and embody no law of growth, such as would make them by simple expansion the sufficient confessions of the church for succeeding times. Therefore while they can never be superseded in their exposition of the truths they affirm, they may and must make room for other creeds of broader scope and greater complete- ness, whenever the oppositions of unbelief or the expanding convictions of the people of God may require. They are styled ecumenical or catholic because they are either formally or tacitly accepted by nearly every division of nominal Christendom. Greek and Roman Christianity agree in accepting them with the exception of the single word, Filioque ; and both are united with the various Protestant communions in acknowledging them as in all else authoritative. But while in some sense they thus form a bond of union between all nominally Christian churches, they betray their imperfection in the fact that they provide no adequate lines of distinction for later ages between what is evangelical and much that is now seen to be formal or even fatally corrupt. Passing beyond the fifth century, we come upon a vast creedless period, extending to the sixteenth century, and terminated only 12. Creedless Period, A. D, hY the decisive developments of the 500: A. D. 1500. No Prog- Reformation. In general, periods of ress of Doctrine : Scholasti- theological activity and conflict are nat- sm' urally followed by eras of comparative quiescence, — the faith of the church reposing in the truths decided, and religious thought concerning itself rather with the contem- plation or the application of doctrine than with the problem of further expansion. The history of the dark ages illustrates the additional truth that this process may degenerate even into reaction or retrogression, — that such quiescence may change into CREEDEESS PERIOD — SCHOLASTICISM. 27 indifference, torpor, decadence, worse even than the presence of heresy or open unbelief. The fact is that from the sixth or sev- enth to the twelfth century, or even later, the church for various causes hardly retained spiritual vitality enough to use or under- stand the creeds it possessed, — had far too little to undertake any expansion or improvement of these primitive formularies. It is especially to be noted that from the age of Leo and the first Gregory, the thoughts of both teachers and people were turned mainly toward that composite process of ecclesiastical rather than doctrinal development, of which the papacy was the immense and splendid, yet disastrous result. For obvious reasons the influence of the papacy tended steadily to the repression of vigorous and especially progressive thought : it held the mind of the church fixed and moveless in the position in which the ancient creeds had placed it : it allowed no opportunity for the rise of any semblance of heresy. The first centuries of this period were also an era of great external enterprises and outward growth for the church. The standard of the Cross was carried throughout Europe ; Africa became the seat of a flourishing, though too formal and conse- quently evanescent Christianity ; the nations of the East heard of Christ, and received the Gospel at the hand of his messengers. The rising conflict between the papacy and the patriarchate, between Rome and Constantinople, also attracted thought and drew off interest from theological issues : and when the great schism came, both the Eastern church and the Western felt themselves under new obligation to adhere tenaciously to the old creeds, and to shut out whatever might seem like an incipient departure from that ancient faith to which each clung as its supreme heritage. Scholasticism, though a vast advance on the sluggishness and blindness which for five or six centuries had preceded it, yet did not furnish in itself the basis for any new expression of churchly belief or experience in confessional form. For scholasticism was in part simply a revival or restoration of what was best in the thought and experience of the ancient church. It was an attempt to state afresh what had long been believed, and what had been em- bodied already in the old creeds and the old theologies. It was also in part an effort to analyze this ancient belief, — to define its phrases, state and justify its propositions, and bring out its harmony with current philosophy. It was rather, in a word, the defender of the old than an expositor of any new convictions on the part of the church. It is true that a school of freer thought arose among the scholastics as a natural, perhaps inevitable, antithesis to the main tendencies of theological opinion ; and that this freer 28 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. movement became an essential antecedent to that great subsequent awakening, theological and spiritual, of which the confessions of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were the outgrowth. It is also true that in the development of the doctrine of redemption under Anselm we have the central germ of that new Soteriology , that larger and better comprehension of Christ and his work, of which the doctrine of justification by faith as enunciated by Luther was the final expansion. Yet Scholasticism had hardly vigor enough in itself to produce a creed : at best it could only prepare the way for that result in a later and more fruitful age. These facts illustrate the general truth that the production of creeds by the church is a process peculiar in itself, and dependent on a long series of conditions. There must first be meditation, inquiry, spiritual as well as mental development ; the narrownesses or imperfections of old formulas must be discovered through an expanding experience, or possibly through collision with rising and presumptuous heresies. More extensive study of the sacred Oracles must lead on to new views of doctrine, new combinations or adjustments of truth, and in some just sense to new faith. But such changes can record themselves in creeds only after they have first indicated their presence and power in such preparatory ways, or perhaps have justified their right to be accepted through bitter conflict or through the pangs of glorified martyrdom. Other agencies such as state influence may sometimes seem to force out creeds ; but these agencies at best are only secondary and occa- sional. The real creative forces are found only in the expanding thought, the broadening experience, the more matured faith and life of the church. It has been queried why the great anthropological controversy of the fifth century was not followed, as had occured after the christological conflict of the preceeding century, by some formu- lated expression of the triumphing Augustinian doctrine. There are some obvious explanations of this fact. Among these may be named the dominating interest of the Eastern church in the trinitarian question in its various aspects, the natural sympathy of the Greek mind with the psychological and ethical theories of Pelagius, the developing antagonism between oriental and occi- dental Christianity, the increasing inability to bring together any truly ecumenical council, and the declining piety and growing formalism of the period. Had the doctrine of Augustine, triumph- ant for the hour, been thus crystalized in a strong, clear creed before it began to subside into the modified and weakened forms which it assumed a century or two later, there can be little doubt that such SECOND CREED PERIOD. 29 a creed would have proved a great blessing during the long and blank period which followed. It would have checked the Pelagian currents which in fact ran everywhere like poison through the veins of Christendom : it would have quickened into life the vapid theology of the dark ages ; it would have given Scholasticism a different sphere and tone, and have saved the church of Rome from many of those false teachings and tendencies which rendered necessary the Reformation. The second great period of creed formation follows the Refor- mation, and extends from the earlier part of the sixteenth to the middle of the seventeenth century. It 13. Second Creed Period : . , , , , . . . , , , . , . i> a t *u t» * « might be anticipated that such a stu- Creeds of the Reformation : s r . Four General Classes. pendous movement as that m which Protestantism originated, — such an eruption of intellectual and spiritual forces long pent up by papal assumption, — such a rapid and unique development of thought and feeling along the higher planes of religious experience, would not occur without some manifestations in the form of creeds as well as of theologies — in new confessions as wTell as in new modes of worship, or new varieties of church organization. History abundantly confirms the anticipation. The great mental as well as spiritual vigor of the Reformation demonstrated its qualities almost from the outset by the abundance, by the richness, by the permanent character of the church symbols that sprang from it. A brief enumeration of these will justify this statement. Grouping these symbols into classes, the first to be noticed is the series of Lutheran creeds, originating at the beginning of the Reformation in Germany and representing generically the belief of that group of churches bearing the name of the greatest among the earlier reformers. This series, incorporated in the Book of Concord, embraces the Augsburg Confession, with the Apology or explanation of that Confession, A. D. .1530 : the Articles of Smalcald, 1537 ; and the Formula of Concord, 1577, together with the two Catechisms composed by Luther, 1529. With these are associated in the Book of Concord the three ancient creeds already mentioned, — the whole constituting the represent- ative expression of the Lutheran, so far as distinguished from the Reformed belief. The second class includes the earlier Reformed confessions of the continent, Swiss, French, Belgic and German. Omitting the personal declarations of Zwingli, the Swiss symbols are the Con- fession of Basle, A. D. 1534 ; the first Helvetic Confession, 1536; and the Second Helvetic Confession, 1566. To these may be added 30 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. as of secondary importance the Consensus of Zurich, A. D. 1549, and that of Geneva, 1552. Outside of Switzerland, the Gallic Confession, A. D. 1559 ; the Belgic Confession, 1561 ; and the Heidelberg Catechism, 1563, represent the main lines of opinion and belief in the Reformed churches of the continent. The third class embraces the British creeds of the sixteenth century, especially the Scotch Confession of A. D. 1560, with its associated Catechisms ; the Thirty-Nine Articles, A. D. 1563 ; and the Irish Articles which, although prepared at a later date (1615) yet belong by their connections to the symbolism of the century preceding. The Ten Articles of 1536, drafted by Convocation under royal sanction, and the Lambeth Articles, 1595, though without full ecclesiastical authority, maybe added to the list, — being appreciated, in the quaint phrase of Fuller, for no more than they are in weight, yet clearly indicating the received doctrine of England in their day on the several topics discussed. These insu- lar creeds may properly be separated in the present survey from the continental symbols of the same period, both because they represent in addition to the general doctrine some special phases and varieties of British thought, and because they all stand in close historical relations to the subsequent Symbols of Westminster. The fourth class embraces the creeds of the seventeenth century, within the territory of evangelical Protestantism. We may in- clude in this class especially the Arminian Remonstrance, 1610 ; the Canons of Dort, 1619 ; and the Catechisms and Confession of Westminster, A. D. 1647-48. So far as the direct development of the Reformation doctrinally during that century is concerned, these symbols and especially the last represent its most elaborate and matured results. The Formula Consensus Helve tici (compiled at Zurich, 1675, by the distinguished Heidegger) though justly characterized as an able and interesting theological statement, never gained more than local and temporary influence, and therefore can hardly claim a place in this series. Omitting from this enumera- tion various minor symbols which originated in personal opinion or had only provincial circulation or a temporary influence, we may note here the remarkable fecundity, the confessional vigor and propagativeness, displayed in such a series of confessions. Their abundance and variety are not traceable, as has been alleged, to the diversities developed within the common Protestantism : they are rather the indices of its amazing vitality, the proofs of its loyalty to the great principle of private interpretation, the beautiful evidences — when studied comparatively — of the profound and conscious unity in the entire spiritual movement of which they PROTESTANT CREEDS — COMPARATIVE VIEW. 31 were the symbolic expression. A hundred ages of papacy could never have originated so vast and so vigorous a growth of Christian knowledge and doctrine as is registered in these creeds. * Comparing together this remarkable series of Confessions, and considering them in contrast with the creeds of the ancient church, we may note the following points of interest. First: they were confessions rather than creeds. They were not designed primarily to be re- , 14-/">testant Creeds .^j^,. ^ , / . viewed comparatively : Their cited at baptism, or used at the reception confessional qualltyo of members, or repeated as a part of public worship. With the exception of the catechisms, which for the most part were practical summaries of the truth already embodied in the associated confessions, they were intended rather to be authoritative formulas of Christian truth, as received and held by the various churches, — formulas designed to represent the true doctrine and testify to it, in the presence alike of other divisions of the common Protestantism, and of both Romanism and unbelief. Their main office was thus external rather than internal : they sprang immediately from, and were especially designed to meet, exigencies which lay outside of the witnessing church. Secondly : as a natural consequence, these confessions were more elaborate and extended than the earlier creeds. They were con- cerned not merely with those primary facts and those fundamental questions respecting the nature of God as triune and the deity of Christ, which the earlier symbols had embodied. They were designed to express also the results of later thought, and especially of the more earnest and fruitful discussions of the period of the Reformation, respecting the nature of salvation and the mode of justification by grace, together with all the related truths. They were therefore more extensive in content, more philosophic and ex- act in definition, more complex in structure, and more thoroughly doctrinal throughout. In style and construction as well as in substance, they reflected at every point the remarkable theological qualities and conflicts of the period in which they were produced. Thirdly : these confessions were agreed substantially in the acceptance of all that was taught in the earlier creeds. They based their affirmations on the old Apostolic and Nicene foundation ; they maintained their essential harmony and oneness with the ancient faith as therein embodied. This unity was distinctly asserted in *For a full list of these Symbols, major and minoi , see Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I. Also, HasF, L,ibri Symbolic! ; NiEMEYER, Collectio Confessionum ; Winer, Confessions of Christendom ; Hall, Harmony of Protestant Confessions, and other compilations. 32 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. some of the symbols, as in the Confession of Calvin, prepared for the French church, 1559 : On all of the articles which have been decided by ancient councils touching the infinite, spiritual essence of God, and the distinction of the three Persons, and the union of two natures in our Lord Jesus Christ, we receive and agree in all that was therein resolved, as being drawn from the Holy Scrip- tures. The Lutheran Book of Concord also formally incorporated the three ancient creeds with the distinctive symbols of Lutheran- ism, as representing the common belief of that division of Protestantism. On these ancient declarations regarded as a foundation, the whole Protestant scheme of belief was erected as a superstructure. The old creeds were the trunk : these numerous and varied confessions were the branches. It has well been suggested that this is a fact of very great significance, both as an illustration of the continued existence and unchanged faith of the Christian Church through the ages, and also as an evidence of its substantial unity in belief, notwithstanding its many circumstan- tial diversities. Fourthly : while the earlier symbols presented the faith of the Church in its simple unities, these described that faith in its complex varieties. Not only did they differ at many points from the avowed tenets of Romanism ; they differed distinctly at some points and in some important features from each other. While the Lutheran and the Reformed creeds were alike in emphasizing the fundamental doctrines of the common Protestantism, they were considerably unlike in the law of their construction, in the relative prominence given to specific elements, and in the completeness of their execution. The earlier and the later symbols of Lutheranism and, in a still higher degree, of the Reformed churches differed not only in the fullness and elaborateness of their contents and struc- ture, but also to some ext<= nt in their presentation of the doctrines themselves. The Reforme d symbols especially exhibited a marked and suggestive progress from the Helvetic Confessions onward to the Canons of Dort and the Westminster Symbols. In all, the car- dinal truths affirmed w.re the same for substance, though the definitions, forms and adjustments were often widely unlike. In addition to this series of creeds essentially evangelical, the period is remarkable for the production of other symbols varying more or less extensively from the current 15. Heretical and Greek protestant belief. These symbols are on and Reman Creeds of this one gide latitudinarian and rationalistic, PCr ° ' and on the other Greek and Papal. It would be improper to describe the Arminian Remonstrance of 1610 GREEK AND ROMAN CREEDS. 33 by the former term, for while the Arminian theology as incorpo- rated in that document was in open antagonism at four or five important points with the extreme Calvinism current on the con- tinent at the beginning of the seventeenth century, it was at the same time a direct outgrowth from the common Protestant stock, — embodying in itself nearly every principle, whether formal or spiritual, on which the Reformation in general had been based. It is true that in some minds the primitive Arminianism assumed a different phase, and became even rationalistic in its conception and presentation of the biblical truth ; yet at the outset and in the main it was substantially evangelical, and while rejecting Calvinism, was yet in no just sense to be described as Pelagian. In its later developments, especially as accepted by many English minds during the century following, the theology which the Re- monstrance originally represented certainly deserves an acknowl- edged place among the positive types of acceptable Christian doctrine. Among the clearly latitudinarian or heretical symbols of the period may be placed the Anabaptist Confession, 1580; the So- cinian Confession, 1542, expanded in the Racovian Catechism, 1605 ; and also, in a modified degree, the Confession and Cate- chism of Barclay, 1675, representing more fully than any ante- cedent document the belief of the Society of Friends. The first and last of these resemble each other in their leading tenets and tendencies. The Socinian symbols define what was by far the most dangerous departure from orthodox teaching, consequent upon the Reformation. Of other minor confessions belonging to the same class, it is hardly needful to speak, as none of these have become the basis of organized churches under whatever name. The aversion of heresy or of latitudinarianism to embody itself in a written creed receives a striking illustration here. Whether springing from a conscious unwillingness to put its opposition on record in definite form, or from an interior incapacity to formulate its own vague or defective conceptions, this aversion is a fact as universal as it is suggestive. Heresy like sin is often an anomaly to itself. The Greek church accepts as the fundamental statement of its doctrine the decision of the seven ecumenical Councils. Among its later symbols of minor prominence are the Confession of Gen- nadius, 1453 ; of Critopulus, 1625 ; of Cyril Lucar, 1631 ; of Mogilas, 1643 ; and of the Synod of Jerusalem, 1672. The Cate- chism of Philaret, adopted in 1839 by the Holy Synod of the Russian Church, and approved by the eastern Patriarchs, has 34 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. been pronounced the ablest and clearest summary of modern Greek orthodoxy. Winer does not quote it, but relies in his exposition of oriental doctrine on the Confession of Mogilas and the Decrees of the Jerusalem Council. The chief value of these formularies to us lies in their illustration both of the immobility of the Greek communions, and of their wide departure from some of the cardinal doctrines of Scripture as enunciated by evangelical Protestantism. The Papal symbols of the period are mainly the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, 1545-1563, and the Catechism authorized by this Council and published in 1566 ; and as explana- tory of these, the Tridentine Profession, 1564. To the formulation of these important symbols the Roman church, while clinging still to the three ancient creeds, and declaring the immutability of its belief as the sole church of God on earth, was driven by the doctrinal as well as practical exigencies of the Reform- ation. The whole may be regarded as an attempt to state the papal faith in better form at those points where Protestantism had shown that faith to be weak or erroneous. Romanism main- tained the full sufficiency of the old creeds, yet held to the possibili- ty of additions or accretions springing from the developing spiritual consciousness of the organized church. As the confessions of the Protestant churches were successively framed and scattered ev- erywhere through northern Europe, setting forth tersefy the great truths of Protestantism, it became necessary to meet these new and revolutionary beliefs by fresh, authoritative declarations of what was believed at Rome. In this necessity originated the Tridentine Council with its doctrine respecting the Scriptures, and its definition of sin, of the atonement, of justification and sanctification, of the sacraments and ordinances, and of the true church. No creed of the period was more carefully drawn, more skillful in structure or form, more authoritatively endorsed and promulgated. After three centuries it still stands as the final symbol of Roman Catholicism, to which nothing can be added except by the infallible wisdom of the pontificate, and from which nothing can ever be taken away. The Dogmatic Decrees of the Vatican Council of 1870 and the Syllabus Errorum of 1864 superadd little to the canons and decrees of Trent beyond the affirmation of papal infallibilty, ex cathedra. The special Decree respecting the immaculacy of the Virgin Mary, 1854, hardly rises to the dignity of an authoritative doctrine, though widely influential as a church dogma. SECOND CREEDLESS PERIOD. 35 Passing beyond the middle of the seventeenth century, we come upon another creedless period which may, with some small exceptions, be said to extend to the pres- ent time. It was in the nature of things 16- Second Creedless ., , , ,. , . , , ., j Period since the Reforma- that such a process as that just described, .. extending through considerably more than a century, and resulting in the production of more than thirty creeds of distinct importance, as well as many minor declar- ations of faith, should finally come to a close. Every recognizable section of Protestantism had stated its belief in some confessional form. The Roman church had revised its belief, and given it new and permanent expression. Even the more erratic tenden- cies born of the Reformation, and the heresies that had arisen in connection with the more legitimate protests of Christian faith against Rome, had taken formulative shape. Such a process needed no repetition so long as these various beliefs retained their primitive character. There might be expositions, commentaries, theologies, but there could well be no additional confessions. It is also a familiar fact that the seventeenth century, and in some divisions of Protestantism the eighteenth also, were devoted largely to the task of throwing the teaching of the symbols into the forms of systematic theology. It has been said with justice that the Protestant confessions gave birth to as noble a series of dogmatic writers as Christian literature has ever known — men as subtle as the schoolmen whose methods they inherited, but bap- tized richly with the spirit of the new evangelical doctrine. The process of evolution was in several respects analogous to that of the Scholastic era. Many of these theologies were framed, like the Institutes of Calvin, on the basis and order of the ancient creeds: others were expositions, more or less close and complete, of the symbols of the period just past : others were constructed around some central principle or doctrine by methods more exactly philosophic or speculative. Few minds if any wandered far from the territory occupied by these symbols: few were inclined to construct a theological system on any other plans than those here suggested. Such periods are also likely to be followed by eras of practical activity rather than of speculative or dogmatic progress. The mind of the church having been put to rest for the time in regard to what it believes and must teach, the great task of teaching, of proclamation, becomes prominent: the work of making all men acquainted with the truth assumes supreme importance. Ques- tions of organization, of government, of activity and growth 36 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. become conspicuous in the thought and regulate largely the actual life of the church. In the century following the close of the Reformation, great outward revolutions, wonderful discoveries and inventions, developments in science, art, philosophy and in social and civil life, contributed to draw away interest from the further formulation of belief, and to some extent even from the explanation and defence of the existing creeds. It may also be true that, as the heats and excitements of the great conflict of the sixteenth century passed off, something of reaction came over the hearts of men, — a reaction growing in some quarters even into a torpor, a degeneracy, not unlike in type that which we discover during the dark ages. It should be said, however, that this period has not been wholly creedless. As new sects have been formed around specific issues, — as new varieties of polity, method, worship have arisen, explanatory declarations or statements have been made from time to time, often on the basis of some accepted symbol, which in turn represent later variations of thought and experience. The Savoy Declaration, 1658, the Baptist Confession of 1688, the Methodist Articles of Religion, 1784, may be taken as examples of this fact. The first of these differs from preceding Calvinistic symbols chiefly in its definition of the church; the second, in its emphasizing of the dogma of immersion; the third, in its exposi- tion of the differences between the Methodism of Wesley and the Thirty-Nine Articles of the Anglican church. Later illustrations of less prominence, such as the Auburn Declaration, the Articles of Reformed Episcopacy, the Declarations of American Congre- gationalism, or the Old Catholic Creeds, might be noted as indicative of the multiplied divisions which have arisen among Protestants around various issues in teaching, polity or worship. These represent, however, no continuous process of creed-making, but rather make manifest the fact that this process had practically come to an end. They also show that no further creed period can well arise until new and higher conceptions of the Gospel have been attained, or until the heart of the church has passed through some new and more profound experience of grace. This brief survey of the symbols of Christianity with reference to their number, their chronologic succession, and their doctrinal relations, may well lead us to a larger 17. Comparative Sym- conception of the nature and worth of bolism as a Science illus- ,. , ,. , . comparative symbolism, viewed as a branch of theological science. The prop- er interpretation of any single specimen among the major SYMBOLISM — PURPOSE AND SPIRIT. 37 confessions of the Reformation requires not merely careful knowl- edge of the theological terminology of the age, but also minute acquaintance with the theologies of the period, writh the posture of ecclesiastical parties, with political events and tendencies, and with the types of spiritual experience prevailing at the time. Recent history exhibits at many points the evils of failure to recognize this primary requisition. Instead of taking the words and phrases of a confession in their plain historical sense, other meanings have been forced into them, new stress or emphasis has been laid here or there, and the obligation to receive the symbol as thus interpreted has been urged in a spirit and to an extent entirely at variance with the purpose or temper of those who framed it. The results of such perversion or abuse of creeds are seen in some of those conflicts and disruptions which have done so much to distract and dishonor the Protestantism of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. There is surely no wise or safe rule but to interpret each individual creed in the light of its own history, and to accept the meaning of the document precisely as it stands. But if such exposition of the single creed be so delicate and difficult, how much greater the task of analyzing in like manner any group of creeds, or all the creeds of Protestantism or of Christendom, and presenting them to view comparatively, with proper reference to their respective contents, their mutual con- nections and relations, and their general worth. It is one of the felicities of our age that the preparations for this task have essentially been made. Collections of these symbols, practically adequate, have been gathered and made available for the student. Some careful and comprehensive work in this department has already been done. Yet the field is comparatively new, and much remains to be accomplished, if not in exploration, still in philo- sophic scrutiny and analysis, in close comparison, in exhaustive description and summation. To that work the Christian scholar- ship of our time seems by many considerations which need not here be named, to be especially invited. The temper — it may be added — in which such a task should be undertaken must be pure, generous, catholic, devout. The creeds must be studied for higher purposes than the discovery of words and phrases with which to fortify personal opinion, or to flagel- late some errorist or confute some doubting inquirer. The polemic elements displayed in them must be subordinated to what is irenic: the particular must be merged so far as possible in the universal. Toleration of all differences that are not absolutely 38 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. fundamental, careful recognition of all essential oneness amid incidental divergencies, must be cherished and sought. The spirit of partisan narrowness or bigotry, or even of supreme loyalty to sect, must give way to the loftier spirit of devotion to the essen- tial truth, and of love for all of whatever name who receive the truth though in differing form. High regard for the Word of God as supreme, a corresponding view of all creeds as human and therefore imperfect, true interest in the thoughts and the struggles of good men for the truth in other lands and times, a keen sense of the living laws of growth under which all Christian thought and experience are developed, and an earnest and pure desire to use all that may be learned from the past as helps toward still further advance in the future, — these are among the incen- tives which must regulate such study, and inspire the student at every stage. On any other basis, comparative symbolism or even particular symbolism can only prove embarrassing and injurious alike to faith and to character. The Westminster Symbols : From this cursory considera- tion of the nature, origin and offices of the Christian creeds, and of the field and scope of particular and comparative symbolism, we may now proceed with advantage to take an introductory survey of the Symbols of Westminster, with reference especially to their sources, the history of their formation, the extent of their acceptance, and their relative place among the great historic creeds. This view must of necessity be brief and cursory ; a more minute and discriminating estimate will be practicable at the close of the proposed studies. It is a familiar fact that the British Reformation, so far as it was doctrinal, assumed in general the Calvinistic rather than the Lutheran type. Many of its leaders 18. The British Reforma- iall in Scotiand had received their tion ; antecedent symbols. ,.,.,. , ^ , ., theological impress and tendency rather from Geneva and France and the schools of Holland than from Germany. Melville had been the disciple of Beza, and John Knox who stamped his own convictions so ineffaceably on the Scotch mind, had sat at the feet of Calvin, and — as his treatise on Pre- destination shows — had embraced his teaching even in its most positive and uncompromising features. And as Lutheranism and Calvinism became by degrees more distinct as antithetic types of the common Protestantism, the British and especially the Scotch mind grew into stronger sympathy with the latter, and its belief and teaching were cast more and more in the Calvinistic mold. The EARLY BRITISH CREEDS. 39 English church indeed felt this doctrinal impress more lightly : it- impulses and movements were rather ecclesiastical than theolog ical ; questions of polity and ritual were more prominent than questions of doctrine or belief. The Augsburg Confession, which Schaff has extolled as the most churchly, the most catholic and the most conservative creed of Protestantism, had also at an early day obtained some special standing in England ; mam Episcopalians were much in sympathy with it, especially in ifc mediate theological position and its liturgical trend. It is an illustrative fact that Melancthon, substantially the author of thai Confession, was twice invited to England as Professor of Divinity. Yet the English mind, though never disposed to push its faith ou1 into every logical extreme or to hold that faith in a positively dogmatic temper, still by degrees accepted in general the Reformed rather than the Lutheran system, and affiliated rather with Switz- erland and Holland than with Germany. Of this general fact we have sufficient illustration in the three British creeds which pre- ceded the Symbols of Westminster, — the Scotch Confession of 1560, the Thirty-Nine Articles, 1563, and the Irish Articles, 1615. The Scotch Confession, prepared by six theologians with Knox as chief, appointed by the Parliament of Scotland, was intended to be a definite declaration of the faith of all within that realm who adhered to the cause of the Reformation. In general it went beyond several of the Reformed confessions in its statement of predestination and election, the utter fall and ruin of man, and the limited scope of grace, while in its exposition of salvation by faith and the related truths it fairly maintained the strong position of the earlier Protestant creeds. It was, however, popular rather than dogmatic in form, somewhat inexact in language and state- ment, and thus unfitted to become a permanent formulary of belief. It is remarkable that it contained no distinct Article on the cardinal doctrine of justification. Such as it was, it became the standard and basis of the Scotch church, and did much to impart ■ to Scottish thought that marked Calvinistic cast which it retained through all the eventful struggles of the succeeding century. The Thirty-Nine Articles, prepared by Cranmer and Ridley in 1551, and revised under Elizabeth, and made in 1563 the basis of the established church in England, were also essentially, though less positively, Calvinistic in their type. Framed as they were to be a national formulary, and designed as such to satisfy persons and parties of diverse opinion and tendency, — framed also in the presence of a papal influence not yet overcome, and under the eye of a dominating prelacy, it was natural that these Articles should 40 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. content themselves with generic rather than specific statements, and with affirmations of plain scriptural facts more than with recondite reasonings and deductions respecting such mysteries as the divine decrees and the election of grace. Yet in essence this important symbol was Calvinistic ; and under its training the English mind was led, like the Scotch, to the acceptance at least in outline of the general system of belief bearing that significant name. The Irish Articles, though less conspicuous in their authorita- tiveuess than either of the preceding symbols, have special im- portance to us on account of their closer connection, as to both time and form, with the Symbols of Westminster. Drawn up by the celebrated Ussher, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh and primate of Ireland, based substantially on the Thirty -nine Articles of the English church, and recognizing the prelatic mode of gov- ernment and the ecclesiastical primacy of the crown, they still were in close harmony with the more positive Calvinism of Scotland, and through that affiliation did much to prepare the British mind generally for the more notable Confession that followed. It is a well known fact that in their form, in the order and arrangement and even in the language used, these Articles were made the basis of that later formulary, as their doctrine did much to shape the belief and declarations of the Westminster Assembly itself. These creeds representing essentially the doctrinal belief of the British Isles, and sufficiently clear and full in their teaching, might have met all the necessities of 19. A new symbol needed: which protestantism jn Britain was political and ecclesiastical ., , ■ ,, , occasions conscious, had not other causes, eccle- siastical and political, created a new and urgent need for some further formulation of the popular faith. Of these the developing issues between civil assumption on the one side and religious independence on the other, the related conflict between diverse theories of church order and worship, and espe- cially the dominance of an arrogant ecclesiasticism, under such leaders as Laud, may be named as chief in importance. During the reigns of Elizabeth and James, extending from 1558 down to 1025, Prelacy had not only entrenched itself thoroughly in England as the state religion, but had sought to make itself such in Ireland and Scotland. The Scotch people, still animated by the spirit of Knox, and imbued with his teachings, could only resist such intrusion of a foreign church and service; and the effort resulted rather in the firmer establishment of the Presbyterian faith and polity and worship. Even in England this enforcement of Epis- WESTMINSTER ASSEMBLY. 41 copacy induced the development of extensive dissent, especially of the Puritan type ; and there were many, belonging particularly to the body of positive Calvinists, who strongly preferred the Presbyterian to the Prelatic form and order. During the unhappy reign of Charles I. from 1625 to the convening of the Long Parliament in 1640, this conflict between Episcopacy and Puritan- ism in general, and especially between Episcopacy and Presbyteri- anism, became more and more intense. The agreement in doctrine of which both parties were more or less conscious, was not sufficient to overcome the conscious difference of opinion, and of feeling also, as to worship and government. Many Presbyterians in England could without scruple have accepted the Thirty-Nine Articles as expressing at least the more essential points in their religious belief, and it is certain that some Prelatists could in like manner have fallen in with even the Scotch Confession, had not these ecclesiastical issues, greatly complicated as they were by the mischievous notion of a state church, stood in the way. But these issues were too radical, and too many personal elements and party tendencies were obstructing the path of union ; and in the end, open and complete rupture became the only possible result. During the stormy period from 1640 to 1643, that result was realized in the practical prostration of both the king and the national church of England at the feet of the Long Parliament, which for the time represented the strong hostility to both, current in the popular mind. Early in 1643, the Parliament conscious of its growing power, and realizing the political neces- sity for such an act, resolved in open defiance of the king upon a reconstruction of the established church, with a view to the substitution of some form of ecclesiastical organization more in harmony with the prevalent sentiment of the nation. It had indeed practically overthrown Episcopacy during the preceding autumn; its present aim and purpose were to provide a satisfac- tory substitute. Such had been the degree of intimacy and of mutual understanding between the popular party dominant in Parliament and the General Assembly and Lords of Estates in Scotland, that there was little room for doubt as to what in sub- stance this substitute should be. It was seen that nothing but positive Calvinism in doctrine and Presbyterianism in polity, with recognized freedom from liturgical bondage in worship, could meet the demand of the time. Yet in form the Parliament was seeking simply, as it affirmed, to settle the government and liturgy of the church of England, and incidentally to vindicate and clear the doctrine of the said church from false aspersions and misrepre- 42 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. sentations. And in order to secure these ends, and by the same process to establish its own supremacy in both church and state, the Parliament in June, 1643, passed the notable Act, convening the Westminster Assembly.* This Assembly of learned and godly divines, to use the descrip- tive language of the Act, was convened on the first day of July, 1643. A brief glance at its composition, 20. The Westminster its main eiements an(} tendencies, its cir- Asscmbly: its consiitu- , , , tion, membership, aim. cumstances and labors, is now requisite. Its membership was selected by the same political power which had called it into existence. It was not, as Clarendon said, a convocation according to the diocesan way of government, nor was it called by the votes of the ministers, according to the Presbyterian way, The Parliament selected all the members, and selected them merely with a view to have their opinion and advice for settling the government, liturgy and doc- trine of the church of England. Deliberation was to be strictly confined to such topics as the Parliament proposed ; and the ordinance creating the body expressly forbad its assuming or exercising any jurisdiction, power or authority ecclesiastical whatsoever, or any other power that was not particularly ex- pressed in the ordinance. The presiding officers and the rules governing the proceedings were also prescribed by the civil authorities. Parliament also provided for the compensation of the members at a rate of four shillings daily, with additional remuneration for losses occasioned by absence from their homes and parishes. Of the aggregate of one hundred and fifty-one persons selected, thirty were lords or commoners, appointed as lay assessors to represent the civil government. One hundred and twenty were divines of more or less prominence. As it was the aim of Parliament to bring together, though not in equal proportion, the representatives of all reputable varieties of opinion in respect to religious doctrine or church order, about twenty-five of the clerical deputies were Prelatists : but these with two *In addition to the secular Histories of the period, (Clarendon, Hallam, Froude, Green, Gardiner, and others) and to the general Church Histories, (Fuller, Burnet, Stoughton and others), see Minutes of the Westminster Assembly, edited with Introduction by Mitchell ; Hetherington, History of the Westminster Assembly ; Mitchell, the Westminster Assembly ; Baillie, Letters and Journal ; Lightfoot, Journal ; Gillespie, Notes ; Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I. Also McCrie, Annals of English Presbytery ; Neal, History of the Puritans ; Marsden, Puritans ; Masson, Life of Milton. Also Reid, Memoirs of the Divines of Westminster; and other biographic sketches. MEMBERSHIP AND ORGANIZATION. 43 on three exceptions declined to sit in the Assembly. The Inde- pendent party then rising into prominence had but six or eight representatives; and an equal number were Erastians whose chief purpose was to maintain in every issue the absolute supremacy of the state over the church. The great body were Presbyterians, representing in general that strong and earnest sentiment in England which, from the organization of the first Presbytery at Wandsworth, in 1572, had steadily grown into prominence not- withstanding the hostility of both the crown and the established church. Considerable variety of opinion as to both doctrine and polity existed among those who represented that general senti- ment ; some maintaining vigorously the strict Calvinism of Geneva and Dort and the divine right of Presbyterianism, others holding to a more moderate Calvinism, and representing rather what was termed ihejus humanum as the true basis of ecclesiastical authority. Five divines and three laymen at first, and subsequently one additional minister and three elders from Scotland, were also admitted to the Assembly. Of these Scotch commissioners the leading mind was Alexander Henderson, who was one of the most conspicuous divines at home, and to whom as early as 1539, four years before the Westminster Assembly met, the Scotch church had intrusted the task of framing a creed which should fill out the deficiencies of the old Scotch Confession, and give to the church a formulary adequately expressive of its more matured faith. Three divines of special prominence from New England, Cotton and Hooker and Davenport, were selected for membership, but none of these were able to be present. According to Mitchell sixteen additional lay members and eighteen divines, chiefly to fill vacancies occasioned by death or absence, were afterwards at different times appointed by Parliament. But of the whole num- ber eleven laymen and twenty-nine divines are not on record as having attended any of the sessions, so that the actual member- ship from first to last, including the Scotch delegation and the two scribes, was — so far as can be ascertained — not far from one hundred and fifty. Sixty-nine appeared at the first convocation, and the general attendance probably ranged from fifty to eighty. T : names, the general standing, the personal characteristics and special qualifications of the members have been frequently and minutely described. Manton, who was probably one of them, in his striking Preface to the Confession, describes the body as a synod of as godty, judicious divines as England ever saw. After alluding to the bitter opprobium and opposition which the Assembly encountered, he adds : If in the day of old when 44 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. councils were in power and account, they had but had such a council of bishops as this of presbyters was, the fame of it for learning and holiness and all ministerial abilities, would with very great honor have been transmitted to posterity. The sessions of the Assembly were continued for more than five years, at the rate of two hundred annually, till February, 1649, after Charles had been dethroned and beheaded. The whole number of recorded sessions was eleven hundred and sixty-three; but some of the members continued to meet as a committee for special purposes for three years longer, when the forcible dissolu- tion of Parliament by Cromwell compelled the Assembly to disband, even without formal adjournment. While the sittings began in the main portion of the famous Abbey of Westminster, the Assembly soon adjourned for comfort to a private room in the Abbey, historically known as the Jerusalem Chamber. It is interesting to note everything which history has preserved respecting even the more incidental events and features of this remarkable convocation. Baillie has given us a graphic descrip- tion of the historic room, the arrangement of the seats, the length of the sessions, the order of business, the method of discussion, the formation and reports of committees, together with other like details of very great interest. Gillespie in his extensive Notes, and in his report to the Scotch Assembly at the close of his ser- vice as commissioner, sheds much additional light on the spirit and methods as well as the work and productions of the body. Mitchell records the instructions and rules of procedure prescribed by Parliament and observed by the Assembly for its guidance in all deliberations. The MinuTBS contain many illustrations of the decorous way in which the business was transacted, and also of the freedom with which discussion was carried on, and the re- markable patience with which even the most extreme and objec- tionable opinions were heard. They also contain many interesting details, such as the regulations concerning absences and infrequent or late coming or going away without leave, concerning the private reading of books and private communication among members, the moving from place to place in the chamber during the sessions, and the propriety of being uncovered, the hat off, whenever one was out of his appointed place. The}7 also record the daily prayers, the frequent days of fasting and devotion, the dis- courses delivered on various occasions, the funeral services in the case of Twisse, the Prolocutor, and others who died during the prolonged sessions, the parliamentary appropriations, and benevolent contributions received and distributed: and also the PRELIMINARY PROCEEDINGS. 45 action of the Assembly in licensing candidates, the settlement of ministers over parishes, the appointment of chaplains, and various other ecclesiastical affairs of like character. From these and other sources we may gain a very distinct conception both of the Assembly and its more prominent members, and may almost see the venerable body at work as it went on from week to week, from year to year, in the endeavor to accomplish the great end for which it had been convened. The first, though not the most important, task of the Assembly was ecclesiastical and liturgical rather than doctrinal. The word- ing of the Ordinance of Parliament clearly indicates that this was the primary design of the convocation, — to determine upon a form of government and discipline and prescribe a mode of worship; in a word, to construct a state church with which all classes might be required to conform, and which should take the place of Prelacy as the national church, rather than to formulate afresh that system of belief in which nearly all classes were already sufficiently agreed. It is clear that doctrinal changes or doctrinal affirmations would hardly have been deemed desirable, had not some of these more urgent issues appeared to turn somewhat on the primal ques- tion of belief. To frame a polity, to determine the form of worship, to create a state church, was the original endeavor ; and to this endeavor much the larger part of the time and thought of the Assembly, especially during the two earlier years, was given. The Directory of Public Worship was completed and presented to Parliament late in the summer of 1644, and the Di- rectory (or Form) of Church Government in the summer of 1645. The latter formulary was modeled largely after the Directory prepared chiefly by Thomas Cartwright, for the use of the Pres- byterian churches during the reign of Elizabeth. The doctrinal work of the Assembly began with an examination of the Thirty- Nine Articles and the first ten weeks of its ses- sions were spent in considering the first fifteen of these Ar- ticles. It has been questioned whether this was intended to lead finally to an endorsement or to some emendation of that symbol, or whether it was not rather the purpose of at least some portion of the Assembly to occupy time in this way until opportunity should arise to give different direction to the pro- ceedings. Neal expresses the judgment that the main purpose was to render the sense of the Articles more express and deter- minate in favor of Calvinism, and so to strengthen the church in Britain against the young and vigorous Arminianism of Holland then rising into prominence. It is certain that after the signing 46 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. of the Solemn League and Covenant in September — a step which committed all parties to an effort to secure ecclesiastical uniformity not only in England but throughout the three Kingdoms, and which was substantially an agreement that such uniformity should be secured in and through the Presbyterian system — the consider- ation of the Thirty-Nine Articles was abruptly terminated and never afterward renewed.* From that time onward until the autumn of 1645, the mind of the Assembly was engrossed almost exclusively with what may be termed church questions — questions bearing upon the real nature of the church, the right mode of *In the Appendix to Neal: History of the Puritans, may be found in parallel columns the original Articles and the Revised Articles, together with the passages of Scripture adduced as proofs. Some of the changes made in the titles and also in the body of certain Articles were verbal merely, and were made apparently in the interest of order or clearness, fullness or con- densation. In several instances additions were made, either by way of explanation or for the sake of theological completeness. In Art. II. the words, most grievous torments in his soul from God, were added to the phrase, truly suffered. In Art. III. the phrase, he descended into hell, was explained by the words, he continued in the state of the dead, and under the power and dominion of death. Art. IV. concerning the resurrection of Christ was expanded by the affirmation of the general resurrection of the body — thus harmonizing it with the three ancient creeds. Art. V. was in like manner expanded by the statement that the Holy Ghost is very and eternal God. Art. VI. contained the important addition : All which books, (the books of the Old and New Testaments just named, ) we do receive and acknowledge to be given by the inspiration of God, and in that regard to be of most certain credit and highest authority. In Art. VII. after the statement that the moral law is obligatory upon all men, it was significantly added : By the moral law we understand all the Ten Commandments taken in their full extent. Considerable debate occurred in the Assembly respecting Art. VIII. relat- ing to the three ancient Creeds, but no change was finally adopted. In Art. IX. on Original Sin, a number of changes were made ; one introducing the dogma of the legal and immediate imputation of the sin of Adam to his pos- terity ; another affirming that original sin deserves the divine wrath and damnation ; another, declaring that concupisence is also sinful and deserving of condemnation ; and still another, teaching that this sinful infection remains in the regenerate. In Art. X. on Free Will, besides one or two verbal changes, a clause was added in the interest of the sovereignty and power of divine grace : Working so effectually in us as that it determineth our will to do that which is good The chief debate, so far as appears in the MINUTES, related to Art. XI. on Justification. The definition of Justification — accounted righteous — was expanded by the addition of the phrase, the remission of sins ; the ground of justification was stated negatively, not for or by our own works or deserv- ings, as well as positively ; the imputation of the whole obedience and satisfaction of Christ was given as the true and only ground ; and it was added that God doth not forgive the impenitent, who refuse to exercise faith ECCLESIASTICAL QUESTIONS DISCUSSED. 47 public worship, the scriptural method of church organization, the authority for discipline, and other kindred matters. Two of these church questions, in view of their close relation to the doctrinal teaching of the Symbols, may be briefly men- tioned here. The first of these related to the real nature of the church. After the withdrawal of the Episcopal representatives, there were but two classes of opinion upon this point — the Presbyterian and the Independent. The advocates of the latter opinion, though few in number, were men of marked ability and of extensive influence, especially with the Parliament. To con- ciliate this element, and to secure substantial agreement on this subject, as far as possible, became an important aim of the Pres- byterian majority ; and to this end a vast amount of time was spent in scholastic discussion of such topics as the different offices in the church both temporary and permanent, the relations of particular churches to each other, the right of ordination, the power and limits of discipline. Though such discussion was in the main amicable, and though concessions were made on both sides, the jure divino theory held by most of the Presbyterians, and indeed by the Independents largely, and also the general tendency toward extreme positions on all religious issues, prevented any actual agreement ; and the conflict of opinion ended at last in the adoption of the Presbyterian view, as defined in the Form of Church Government, and the Directory for Public Worship. The other question related to the connection between the church and the state, and to the right of the church to exercise ecclesi- astical authority apart from the state. It being granted that in this gracious mediation. The main discussion on this Art. related to the theological question whether the whole obedience of Christ or only his pas- sive obedience is the specific ground of justification. In Art. XII. on Good Works, it is said by way of explanation, that such works done by believers, notwithstanding their imperfection are in the sight of God pleasing and acceptable in and for Christ. And in Art. XIII. where in the original it is said that the works done before justification have the na- ture of sin, it is declared more positively that all such works are sinful. The changes in Articles XIV. and XV. have no theological importance. The Assembly was proceeding in the consideration of Art. XVI. on Sin after Baptism, when in October it was instructed by Parliament to enter at once upon the formulation of a scheme of government and discipline, and also a directory for worship, to take the place of the Episcopal formularies ; and from this time on, the plan of reconstructing the Thirty-Nine Articles was abandoned, — the proposal to frame a new creed taking its place. There are, however, several indications in the Symbols that the Assembly, while setting aside this earlier creed, still sought to preserve its phraseology and to adhere to the substance of its teaching, wherever this was found to be practicable. 48 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. Presbyteriauism was the true and divine form of government for the Christian church, — it being also agreed that the Presbyterian church as such should be set up in the three Kingdoms as the one church of Christ in the British Isles, there remained in the mind of Parliament and of the Erastian party in the Assembly the further question as to what degree of authority such an organiza- tion should have, and how far such an imperium in imperio could be safely admitted within the English realm. The discussion of these questions was quite as extensive and as absorbing as that around the preceding issue ; and the result, as in the former instance, was a triumph of the Presbyterian view, though not without bringing the Assembly, again and again, as we shall have occasion to note, into serious conflict with Parliament itself. Three years, and more, passed away before the final result was reached. It was not until the summer of 1647, that Presbyteri- anism secured the position it had all the while coveted, and became — so far as it ever did become — the established church of the British Isles. The illusive conception of uniformity, to be attained by means of a state church, and by the repression of all forms of dissent, constantly attracted and misled the Assembly ; and when that result was gained through the formal act of Parliament, the Presbyterian party in both church and state regarded the victory of Presbyterianism over all other types of Christianity as forever assured in Britain. But the day of triumph was the beginning of disaster ; so far as England was concerned, the scheme was a pitiful failure. No theoretical polity could stand in the presence of shifting popular sentiment, and of severe political exigency ; and in a brief period, numbered by months rather than by years, it became evident that the practical issue, in England at least, would be either the submission of everything religious and political to the sway of a loose Independency, under such leaders as Crom- well, or the restoration of the monarchy and the rehabilitation of Prelacy as the established church. It is a startling illustration of the changeful and revolutionary temper of the times that, in less than eighteen years from the memorable day when the Assembly and the Parliament lifted up their hands to heaven and together swore allegiance to the principles of the Solemn League and Cov- enant, that noble document was by royal command publicly burned in the streets of London by the common hangman. These historical glances at the Westminster Assembly on its ecclesiastical side, and in its aspirations and struggles toward civil supremacy, are indispensable to any adequate view of its theological position and teachings. But we may now turn to Till-: SYMBOLS FORMULATED. 49 consider more immediately its doctrinal labors, and note the doc trinal results attained. It has well been said (Gardiner: Puritan Revolution) that in all the varieties of Puritanism the heart was addressed 21* doctrinal labors , , . „ ,, , ,. . and results: Confession through the intellect rather than through and Catecnisms. the eye — by means of doctrine rather than of ceremony, such as L,aud and his associates had sought to enforce. This was eminently characteristic of the type of Puritanism represented in the Assembly. While the members of that body were anxious to secure uniformity in worship and also in govern- ment, it was their chief desire after all to secure clearness and earnestness and harmony of belief around what they conceived to be the essential doctrines of the Christian religion. After the examination of the Thirty-nine Articles had ended, the Assembly felt itself more and more constrained to prepare a new symbol, which should express at greater length and in better form its more pronounced Calvinism. Yet under the pressure of the issues already described, this necessity was postponed for two years or more. Although a committee had been appointed in August, 1644, to prepare and digest material for such a symbol, it was not until the summer of 1645, that the work of framing the Con- fession was actually undertaken, — a committee composed of nine among the ablest and most valued members being appointed at that time, to whom the delicate and difficult task in its varied details was intrusted. This committee was subsequently en- larged by the addition of ten members, and of the clerical com- missioners from Scotland as advisory;* and to it as a whole, and as divided into sections, were committed the general arrangement of topics, the order and titles of the several chapters, the tentative defining of particular doctrines, the special matter of language and expression, and in fact the entire work of formulating the Confession, — subject at all times to the supervisory authority of the Assembly itself. The Minutes show that this supervisor)' function was faithfully exercised, and that as each chapter was finished, it was presented to the Assembly for minute and final examination. In such examination, though the whole matter was carefully considered, only a few subjects seem to have elic- ited prolonged debate, — particularly the relation of the headship of Christ to the civil magistracy, and the doctrines of decrees, *For more extended accounts of the membership of this committee and its mode of procedure, see Mitchell, Westminster Assembly: HeThering- Ton, Hist, inloc: SchaFE, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. I: Neal, Fuller, Reid, Stoughton, Masson, and others. 50 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION'. predestination, election and reprobation. Concerning the latter topics, substantial agreement was at last secured, at least in the form of expression, though not without long and tough discussion. More than a year was occupied in these theo- logical deliberations, mingled with much debate concerning ecclesiastical issues, and requisite attention to various matters of detail; and it was not until October, 1646, that the Assembly submitted to the scrutiny of Parliament the first half of the Con- fession. In the following December, the entire document was presented to that body under the significant title : The Humble Advice of the Assembly of Divines now, by authority of Parlia- ment, sitting at Westminster, concerning a Confession of Faith. Parliament called for scriptural proofs on every point; and the Assembly reconsidered the whole, annexed such proofs to the several propositions in each chapter, and reported the document the second time during the month of April, 1647. Various polit- ical and other exigencies prevented Parliament from giving time to the consideration of the Confession; and it was not until March, 1648, that after full conference between the two Houses, the docu- ment was formally approved; the adopting act giving among others the significant reason, — that this Kingdom and all the Reformed churches in Christendom may see that the Parliament of England differ not in doctrine. Exception was taken, however, to certain particulars in discipline, relating specially to the matter of civil authority over religious affairs, and to the independent rights of the church as asserted by the Assembly; and these particulars were recommitted. Parliament being shortly after dissolved by Crom- well,the Assembly never reported on these excepted clauses, and the Confession stands as originally presented. The title was changed by the civil authorities to, Articles of the Christian Religion, agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament, after Advice had with the Assembly of Divines, — a signal illustration of the mischiefs in which the prevalent theory of church and state was continually involving those who maintained it, whether statesmen or divines. This title has of course disappeared, though the theory indicated by it in some of its phases still survives. While the Confession was thus taking form, committees were also appointed by the Assembly to prepare at first a single Cate- chism, but afterwards two Catechisms, for the instruction of children and of adult persons ignorant of divine truth. The theory of church growth then everywhere current, and the practice of the Protestant churches on the continent, naturally led to this step. The policy of catechetical indoctrination, first DOCTRINAL, RESULTS ATTAINED. 51 developed by L,uther, had become so well established and was so extensively carried out on the continent, as to give practical point to the remark attributed to the Council of Trent, that the heretics have chiefly made use of catechisms to corrupt the minds of Christians. Such use was common in Great Britain almost from the first; the number and quality of the antecedent English and Scotch catechisms are quite remarkable: their name, says Mitchell, is legion. While following such precedents the Assembly deter- mined, however, to complete the Confession first, in order that the Catechisms might be modeled after it in method and phrase- logy; and they were therefore not presented to Parliament until November, 1647, nor with full scriptural proofs, until April, 1648. Nor was, it till the September following, seven months after the adoption of the Confession, that Parliament accepted the two Catechisms and ordered them to be printed. One of the leading minds of the Assembly, Dr. Wallis, prepared a brief and easy explanation of the Shorter Catechism, which was approved by the Assembly and also submitted to the consideration of Par- liament. Such were the doctrinal results and products of the Westminster Assembly. It will be seen on closer inspection that these Symbols taken together constitute a full, definite and valuable statement of the predominating theological opinion in the British Isles at the date of their adoption. Prepared with more of deliberation than any preceding creed of Protestantism, and without much disruptive controversy, they may be regarded as expressing more deliberately the final judgment of Protestant scholarship of the Reformed type, in regard to the vital topics presented. Each Symbol should be studied in connection with the rest, as each is exegetical of all ; and all should in like manner be studied in the light of the strong and peculiar theology of the period. Thus contemplated, these formularies are certainly worthy of the most thoughtful consideration of all who would know what the ablest and purest Calvinism in Europe was, a little more than two cen- turies ago. The editorial Introduction to the treatise of Winer is hardly extravagant in the statement that no Confession so fully expresses the doctrine of the Reformed branch of the Reforma- tion, and none has exerted so much influence in Christendom. It remains to this day the avowed or unavowed directory of the religious faith of all who, throughout the English-speaking world, hold to the traditions of Puritan theology. It may serve to increase our sense of the value of the work, ecclesiastical and especially doctrinal, accomplished by the Assem- 52 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. bly, if we glance briefly at the grave difficulties amid which this work was wrought, and the temper with which the Assembly undertook and carried through its weighty 22. Difficulties con- task The foremost of these difficulties fronted; Temper of the , . ,, . , , . , , Assembly; value of its ma^ be seen m the stramed and mdeed WOrk. painful relations which by degrees came to subsist between that body and the Eng- lish Parliament, and which at some later stages seemed almost to reach the point of open rupture. There is no reason to doubt that Parliament at first regarded the body which it had created, and had entrusted with so serious a commission — to which it had given such implicit instructions, and for whose support it had made pro- vision from the national treasury — with positive friendship, and even with a high measure of confidence. Many indications of this occur in the Minutes and in the Parliamentary Records during the earlier years in the life of the Assembly. Masson tersely describes the Assembly as at the outset a power or institution in the English realm, existing side by side with the Parliament, and in constant conference and co-operation with it. Yet as events progressed, and new causes of difference and friction arose, the feeling of Parliament by degrees obviously changed ; the boundary lines of the respective prerogatives became matters of dispute ; the action of the Assembly, especially regarding the church and its relation to the civil state, was seriously challenged ; and the prevalent temper of Parliament, or at least of many members, grew to be one of suspicion if not of hostility. The political struggles, becoming more and more intense, and the new issues arising from time to time within the civil sphere, helped on the growing alien- ation. One of the most painful illustrations of this developing estrangement appears in the practical arraignment of the Assem- bly by Parliament in 1646, on the charge of an abuse of privilege in its petition to that body respecting the supreme right of the church to determine who should be admitted to the sacrament — an arraignment in which the Christian dignity and patience of the Assembly, and its fidelity to sound principle, stand out in marked contrast with the domineering spirit and imperative language of Parliament and its representatives. Others are manifested in the way in which the House of Commons received and treated the first draft of the Confession, in its imperative call for proof texts, in its unsympathetic criticism, and the needless postponement of the final adoption, notwithstanding the earnest pleadings of the Assembly. It would be impracticable here even to sketch in outline the DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED. 53 political situation in general, with its many complications and embarrassments, as that situation seriously disturbed the Assembly in the endeavor to fulfill its appointed mission. The student of English history will be at no loss to discern such disturbing influ- ences, or to see how inevitably the popularity and influence of the Assembly declined in the presence of such civil commotions. The years were also marked by the spontaneous rise of multitudinous sects and schools of thought, widely at variance with each other, but all agreeing in questioning or reviling the strong doctrines and the high spiritual standard of the Assembly, as well as its ecclesiastical regimen and its staid order of worship. As the Savoy Council testified a few years later, the devil in this small time ran through the whole round and circle of delusions, while men took the freedom to vent and vend their own vain and accursed imaginations, contrary to the great and fixed truths of the Gospel. And there must have been seasons when, in the presence of such strange developments and tendencies, the Assembly was almost ready to drop its high task in despair, and to give England over to the revolutionary forces that seemed to be seeking to corrupt or destroy both state and church at once. It was not Cromwellian Independency alone that gave ground for such discouragement, neither was it an aggressive Prelacy, steadily seeking to return to power. Antichrists were abroad in the land : more dangerous forces still seemed to be at work, both in society and within the religious sphere : and the efforts of the Assembly to resist or repress these seemed as idle as the enactments of a commonwealth to stay some onward sweeping pestilence. Within itself the Assembly had much to bear in the way of em- barrassment and trial. It was a serious matter to call upon so many men of special prominence to leave their homes, their parishes and bishoprics, their university engagements and studies, in order to give themselves up for five long years to the work assigned them. It is not strange that there were prolonged absences, at home and elsewhere, and many failures to be present, even when important action was to be taken. The pecuniary losses involved in such a prolonged engagement were very great, and the wealthier mem- bers were more than once led to forego their share of the parlia- mentary stipend in order to help out their needier brethren. Sickness frequently invaded their ranks, and as many as twelve or fifteen members died during the sessions, — one of whom, Twisse, the venerable Prolocutor, was buried with special ceremonies in Westminster Abbey, only to be sacrilegiously exhumed after the Restoration, and cast with a number of others into one common 54 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. grave, somewhere within the Abbey grounds. The debates were often so prolonged as to justify the gentle remonstrance of Hen- derson, during the interminable discussion on the power vested inherently in the particular congregation : We thought we had been near the harbor, but now we are sailing out into the deep ! Many more loves their own fancies here than I did expect, wrote Baillie during the progress of one of these long debates. He says elsewhere that the members harangue long and learnedly, but their longsomeness is awful, — that they are guilty of prolixity and infamous slowness, — that they spend time on scabrous (rough, troublesome) questions, and in velitations on quiddities,— and that the church business drives on wonderful heavillie. Nor were there wanting asperities in such debate, followed by dislikes and aliena- tions and by contentious opposition to what was decided, — in one or two instances so great as to lead almost to the expulsion of con- tumacious members. The references to such differences, suggested in the Life of Lightfoot and the Letters of Baillie, are both sig- nificant and painful. How quietly and patiently, amid all such tumult without and within, the Assembly went on year by year with its allotted task, — how steadily it adhered to its principles in defiance alike of the as- sumptions of Parliament and the oppositions of sectaries of vari- ous sorts, — how confidently it persisted in the unfolding of its fixed convictions respecting worship and government, and of its pro- found conceptions in theology, — especially with what moral earnestness as well as intellectual conviction, what profound and controlling piety, and what devotedness to God, it went on and on in the discharge of its recognized duty to him and his great cause,* can be known only to those who carefully study the * We shall have occasion to note again and again the religious quality of the Assembly. One striking illustration recorded in the Minutes of Oct. 8, 1645, may be mentioned here. It had been resolved, on the previous Friday, that the body should meet to humble themselves before God ; that the ser- vices should extend from 9 A. M. to 4 P. M.; and that two members should be appointed to preach, and three to offer prayer. Accordingly Dr. Burges began with prayer; Mr. Reynolds, after a short prayer, preached from Matt, xvi : 24; Mr. Whitakers prayed; Mr. Palmer, after a short prayer, preached from Zach iii: 6, 7; and Mr. Ash closed with prayer, — the services ending with a collection for the benefit (apparently) of certain members and their families. Baillie describes another similar occasion in 1644, when the services lasted eight hours : Mr. Marshall praying large two hours most divinely, and Vines and Seaman each praying near two hours, while Arrow- smith and Palmer each preached one hour; — the whole followed by a short, sweet conference and confession of sins. Men who could thus frequently spend entire days in such devotional services, certainly believed in the reality THE SYMBOLS IN BRITAIN. " 55 records of its action, and take proper note of the commanding influence exerted through such action on the thought and experi- ence of that important era in British history. That the Assembly made mistakes and sometimes fell into error, and was occasionally too sweeping and severe in its theological dicta and demands, may be readily admitted. Such incidents are attributable largely to the times, and partly — it may be — to the intrinsic nature of that type of doctrine which the Assembly sought in all fidelity to erect in its completeness. Yet these defects are not so numerous or so serious as to shut out from view the remarkable strength and proportion of that magnificent temple of sacred truth. An un- theologic age, in which plain and square doctrine is ignored, and biblical truths are much confused with human speculation, and loose generalizations and airy fancies are too often substituted for the simple Gospel, may not be able to appreciate either the loftier spirit of the Assembly or the solid grandeur of its work. But the observant centuries will not fail to estimate rightly either the moral elevation of its temper and purpose, or the substantial quality and value of its teaching. Some brief allusion should be made in this introductory survey to the remarkable career and history of the Symbols in the British Isles. — Scarcely had the Presbyterian church been established in England in 22' The Westminster L. , r ^, 1 1 A1 1-^- 1 Symbols in Britain: Their the place of Prelacy, when the political yaried career ^ influence. scepter passed into the hands of Crom- well, and Charles fell a victim to his own folly and to the popular hostility. This event rendered impossible the maintenance of the Presbyterian polity, and a church more in harmony with the mind and taste of Cromwell and his party naturally took its place. The Provincial Synod of London indeed continued to meet until 1653 or later, without encouragement from the Protector, yet without direct opposition. From that time till his death in 1658. Presbyterianism in England grew weaker and weaker; Presbyte- rians were ejected from their livings upon refusal to support the Commonwealth; Independents were appointed to fill the vacan- cies; the power of ordination and of appointment was given to a committee of Triers, of whom a large proportion were Inde- pendents. In 1658, at the Savoy near London, the latter party were convened by civil mandate to prepare a new formula both of of religion and the efficacy of prayer. In the presence of such records, it seems hardly an exaggeration to say (Briggs : Amer. Presbyterianism) that such a band of preaching and praying ministers as was gathered in the Westminster Assembly, the world had never seen before. 5,6 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. faith and of order. This council adopted the Westminster Symbols substantially, but drafted a Platform of Church Polity of which the autonomy of the local church was the central feature. Mean- while, the death of Cromwell and the brief reign of his son were followed in two short years by the elevation of Charles II. to the throne; and after that event both Independency and Presbyteri- anism retired together, and Prelacy with all its theological as well as ecclesiastical peculiarities became again the dominant faith. In Scotland, the Form of Church Government and the Directory for Worship were adopted by the General Assembly as early as 1645, and in 1647, the same body formally approved the Confes- sion. In the following year the Catechisms were ratified in like manner; and from that date the Westminster Symbols, taking the place of the old confession of Knox, became the doctrinal basis of the Scottish church. The language of the Adopting Act is full of significance. After describing the Confession as most agreeable to the Word of God, and as highly conducive to the desired uniformity of belief and the suppressing of heresy, the Assembly expressed its thankful acknowledgment of the special mercy of God in that so excellent a Confession had been prepared and agreed upon in both Kingdoms, as a great strengthening of the true Reformed religion against the common enemies thereof. At the same time the Assembly adopted a series of propositions, prepared by Baillie, one of the commissioners to the Westminster Assembly, which were designed to exclude all Erastian interpre- tations of the language of the Symbols respecting the relations between the civil and the ecclesiastical authorities. To this step they were doubtless impelled by a reasonable fear that the influ- ence of Parliament might have led their brethren of Westminster to some possible swerving from the true doctrine respecting the headship of Christ, and the strict independency of his church from all political control. The subsequent history of the symbols in the two Kingdoms presents a singular and suggestive contrast. In England, Presby- terian Calvinism speedily became a dissenting fragment, possessing little influence either religious or civil. The glory of its name was early dimmed ; and the spiritual decline which followed during the century succeeding, was perhaps a natural consequence. The English mind preferred to dwell in the flowery plains of Moderat- istn, rather than to live amid the rugged summits of a positive Calvinism. Multitudes chose easier and more palatable notions of biblical truth, and readily counted themselves released from the ENGLISH AND SCOTCH ACCEPTANCE. 57 stern and searching demands respecting duty made by the Presby- terian formularies. It was, in the quaint language of the Savoy Declaration, a time of aestuation, fluxes and refluxes of great varieties of spirits, doctrines, opinions and occurrences . . ac- companied with powerful persuasions and temptations to seduce men from the truth. Nor was the disappointing struggle for polit- ical supremacy and state patronage calculated to confirm men in the faith, or to strengthen the religious life within the church. A relapse, first from the practical demands of such a type of belief as had been formulated at Westminster, and then from the car- dinal tenets of that formula, might have been expected. Such a relapse followed ; and within a hundred years from the dissolu- tion of the Assembly, English Presbyterianism had largely become Unitarian. In Scotland, where the political element was relatively less and the religious element relatively much more prominent, a very different result followed. There the doctrinal principles of the Symbols became the basis of church life as well as of church form; the Calvinistic theology produced a corresponding type of reli- gion; the truth developed itself in practice; and, with the local and transient exception of Moderatism, the Presbyterian system of belief became the controlling power spiritually within the Scottish realm. Of the potency of these convictions and experiences, the vsubsequent struggles of Scotland to maintain the church she had adopted, her determined and prolonged resistance to the aggression both of the Monarchy and of English Episcopacy, her sufferings unto blood for the truth and her heroic triumphs, bear ample testimony. Even the subsequent conflicts of opinion within the Presbyterian household, the divisions and subdivisions around minor issues, the ruptures and disruptions of the past two centu- ries,— needless and painful as most of them appear, — signally illustrate the strength of the one creed to which all parties still adhered, and in which all alike gloried. In both the established and the voluntary forms, and under all varieties, the Presbyte- rianism of Westminster, doctrinal and ecclesiastical, is still the strength and the glory of the church of Christ in Scotland. In Ireland also, existing Presbyterianism, transplanted from Scot- land and closely affiliated with it, retains the same strong charac- teristics, and blossoms out under conditions more adverse into the same practical and spiritual fruitage. The record of the transplantation of the Westminster Symbols to America, and of their adoption and position here, deserves 58 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. special notice.* During the closing decades of the seventeenth century considerable numbers of Presbyterians, especially from Scotland and Ireland, emigrated to this 24. The Westminster Sym- continent bringing with them their bols in America ; the Adopt- , . ■. , f ? , , ing- Act.-Theories of sub. ecclesiastical standards and usages. scription. These colonists settled principally in New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Vir- ginia; and wherever they went, they carried with them their ancestral faith. Churches were formed at various points ; and in 1705, or 1706, some of these churches were associated together in the original Presbytery at Philadelphia. The question of a doc- trinal basis gradually became prominent, especially where the immigrant from Britain and the colonist from New England came to be associated in the one community and church. On and after the formation of the first Synod in 1717, this question became still more important, — all indeed accepting the Presbyterian doc- trine as well as order, yet differing as to the principle of subscrip- tion, and the extent of ecclesiastical authority in matters of belief. In 1729, the Adopting Act was passed, determining for the time the nature of the subscription required, and making the Symbols in their totality the standard of American Presbyterianism. Among the causes leading to this result may be named especially the doctrinal defection already becoming apparent in some portions of Britain, and the rise of some new opinions, diverging somewhat from the primitive Calvinism, on the part of those who had entered the Presbyterian ministry from New England. The Adopting Act was not passed unanimously or without resistance. Some members of the Synod, though personally sound in the faith, were opposed to all creeds drawn up by unin- spired men, as involving an assumption of spiritual authority in matters of belief, not warranted by the Word of God. Others were simply opposed to such literal and rigid subscription as was demanded generally by the foreign members, and also to the pro- posal that all who refused to sign on these terms should be excluded from the organization. The final adoption was consequently a compromise, recognizing the force of these objections, but calling for belief in the Symbols simply as being in all the essential and necessary articles good forms of sound words and systems of Christian doctrine. The spirit of this compromise was eminently *Gir,LETT, History of the Presbyterian Church ; WEBSTER, same title ; Hodge, Constitutional History: Briggs, Amer. Presbyterianism; Thompson, History of the Presbyterian Churches in America. ACCEPTANCE IN AMERICA. 59 fraternal ; room was left for differences on all articles not essential and necessary ; and it was agreed that none should challenge or criticise another in respect, as was said, to the non-essential and not-necessary points of doctrine. In the same Act, the Synod further declared its own divergence from the Symbols in regard to civil control in matters of religion ; denying all such right of interference, whether in respect to the exercise of ministerial authority, or to prosecution by the state for any departure from the authorized faith. In 1736, an attempt was made to compel a more rigid subscrip- tion to the Symbols as thus modified. It was maintained that they ought to be accepted without the least variation or alteration, and with no exception in favor of personal scruple or conviction. Though this view was not sustained, the issue thus raised con- tinued to present itself ; and while all parties adhered to the Symbols, they differed widely as to the amount of obligation incurred. On one side, the freer view of subscription opened the door for serious deviations from sound doctrine, and in some instances led on to radical departures from the common faith. On the other side, stress laid on mere doctrinal soundness, mere conformity to rules and ordinances, mere regard for the letter, resulted in the neglect of the spirit, and in the decline of piety itself. In 1741, these differences culminated in an open rupture ; and American Presbyterianism was for the first time rent asunder, partly on account of real difference in doctrine, but chiefly for dif- ference in this matter of subscription. Seventeen years afterward, this rupture was healed, and the church became united substan- tially on the former basis, — though perhaps with some increased emphasis of the stricter theory. In 1788, the United Synod carried through an important alteration in those chapters of the Confession which treat of the relations between the church and the state, and planted itself firmly on the voluntary principle, and on the entire independence of the church from all secular control. Religious liberty became by this change not only a right to be maintained by the Presby- terian church for itself, but also a privilege to be freely accorded by it to all other Christian communions, and even to all forms of error or unbelief. The old theory of subscription remained in force, however, until the practical and doctrinal diversities, springing up during the first three decades of the present century, gave occasion for the introduction again of the old issue. The disrup- tion of 1837, while primarily growing out of questions of organi- zation and method, and partly caused by real differences in respect 60 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. to certain doctrines or statements of doctrine, was also produced largely by a tendency to extreme positions on both sides in the matter of subscription. In general, the two separated bodies may be said to have represented either the more strict and literal or the more broad and substantial theory on this point. In the Reunion of 1869, there was cordial agreement around the accept- ance of the Symbols as containing, in the language of the irenic Synod of 1758, an orthodox and excellent system of doctrine, to be received in its proper historical sense, and with just liberty of interpretation, in the true temper of loyalty and of love. Under this agreement, the leading Presbyterian body in the United States now exists as a representative on this continent of the Calvinism of Westminster. The Symbols were also adopted by the churches of New England, as the Council of Savoy had already approved them, for substance of doctrine, at the Synod of Cambridge, 1648 ; the Synod of Boston, 1680 ; and the Synod of Saybrook, 1708. The Shorter Catechism especially was long received authoritatively as express- ing the essential faith of these churches, and is still regarded by many as among the most valuable expositions of the Calvinistic system. The Declarations of more recent national Councils do not vary from that system in any essential features ; — though they possibly lay greater stress on the broad and noble principle, believed in at Westminster but more fully enunciated at Savoy, that amongst all Christian States and Churches there ought to be vouchsafed a forbearance and mutual indulgence unto saints of all persuasions that keep unto and hold fast the necessary foun- dation of faith and holiness, in all other matters extra funda- mental, whether of Faith or Order. Other Presbyterian bodies of later origin, and organized espec- ially from representatives of the varieties of Presbyterianism existing in Scotland, have either modified the original Confession as to the matter of civil control, and to the nature and scope of ecclesiastical authority, or have received the Confession in its original form, appending to it authoritative testimonies, setting forth their several departures from it. The Cumberland church, wholly American in origin, has made more extensive alterations, amounting to a full revision in both the Confession and the Catechisms, — chiefly for the purpose of eliminating from them all appearance of fatalism, and of presenting in such revision a more mediate, less decisive type of Calvinism. In these bodies, the rule as to subscription ranges from extreme rigidity in some GENERAL POSITION AND INFLUENCE. 61 to a simple and perhaps inadequate acceptance for substance of doctrine on the part of others. The general character, position and influence of the Westmin- ster Symbols will be easily realized in the light of this introductory survey, though the subject will be much more readily appreciated at the close of 25, General character , , , . , , _TT, and position of the Sym- the studies here proposed. What we ^ nature of their in. have already seen justifies the statement fluence. that, in several particulars, these Symbols may be regarded as the most significant group of formularies produced by Protestantism during the remarkable period of the Reformation : First: In respect to the amount of time, and the degree of deliberation in their preparation, they present the nearest Protest- ant parallel to the Canons and Decrees of Trent. Most of the other Protestant Confessions were framed in a comparatively brief period of time. The Synod of Dort held but one hundred and forty-four sessions, and adjourned within six months. The Confession of Augsburg was prepared at intervals during the summer of 1530. The Second Helvetic Confession, the most widely received among the Reformed creeds of the Continent, was prepared chiefly by the single hand of Bullinger, and adopted after a few conferences among the representatives of the provinces and churches interested in its construction. The Heidelberg Catechism, which approaches most nearly the Westminster form- ularies in the statement of doctrine, though revised and approved by a general synod held at the place whose name it bears, was drafted substantially by Ursinus and Olevianus under the appoint- ment of Frederick, Elector of the Palatinate. After the time spent by the Assembly of Westminster in ecclesiastical debate, and in the development of its scheme for making Britain Presby- terian, is deducted, it will still be apparent that no creed of the Reformation, in either the length of time, or the number of persons concerned, or in the other elements calculated to give such a formulary prominence as the product of rare deliberation, can be compared with the Symbols which that Assembly gave to Protestantism. Secondly: This prominence is no less apparent when we con- sider the extent and heartiness of the acceptance which these Symbols, together with the form of polity associated with them, have obtained. Among all varieties of Protestantism, Presbyter- ianism is obviously most widely diffused, and most nearly ecumenical : and among the Protestant Confessions, none is so 62 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. extensively received, none so widely revered, as that on which this Presbyterianism rests. It may especially be questioned whether any takes such strong hold on those who accept it, or so vigorously regulates the thoughts and convictions of its adherents. The reverence paid to it sometimes seems like idolatry itself. The unwillingness to revise it, or even to adopt explanatory declarations or testimonies respecting it, is significant proof of its amazing power over the mind and the heart. The Augsburg Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism are the only Protestant creeds which could justly be compared with it in these respects. Thirdly: Much of this prominence is due as well to the struc- ture of these remarkable Symbols, as to the manner of their preparation and the extent of their diffusion. Prepared after all the rest, and at a time when many of the issues of earlier Protest- antism had been settled, they betray less of the provincial narrow- ness incident to those earlier struggles, — less of the merely partisan feeling and of the intense dogmatism which characterized largely the preceding century, — less of the mere antagonism to Rome which in some respects warped all the earlier creeds. Theology, according to the Protestant conception of it, had been more thoroughly formulated, and was capable of being more calmly, more broadly, more conclusively stated. The principle of tolera- tion had at least received its first recognition, and its benign influence was felt, even amid the sharp diversities which in some cases agitated the Assembly. Traces of fraternal compromise, even on points which at first were centers of strenuous discussion, such as the order of the decrees or the scope of the Gospel or the divine right of the Presbyterian polity, are frequently apparent. There are also many indications, as will appear during these studies, not only of a purpose to incorporate whatever was worthiest in the antecedent creeds, but of a disposition to harmo- nize in belief, so far as possible, with other Protestant and especially with the Reformed communions. Compared with the Canons of Dort, their chief rival, the Symbols are less technical and dogmatic, less strictly theological ; while compared with the Catechism of Heidelberg, they reveal a more thorough doctrinal structure, a more elaborate grouping and union of truth, without the sacrifice of that fine spiritual tone for which the latter formulary is justly prized. This combination of theological construction, with prac- tical expression and adaptation — of an organic completeness not equaled by any preceding creed, with a matured and moderated Christian temper, must be regarded as one of their peculiar excel- lencies. Traces of the period with its special conflicts are indeed THE PROPOSED STUDY. 63 apparent, as we shall have frequent occasion to note, both in the thought and in the spirit of these Symbols, yet they exhibit much in both spirit and thought which the common Christianity for all time will continue to appreciate as the most consummate flower of historic Protestantism. Reserving further statements respecting the excellence of the Symbols until their doctrinal contents shall have passed under specific review,, and the theological system , ,. , . it 1 11 , i 26. Proposed analysis. embodied m them shall have been me- Method Qf th£ Symbols. thodically defined, we may proceed at method of study : general once to survey the broad domain to be object. traversed, and to mark in outline the contemplated course of investigation. The Confession follows in general, not the order of the ancient creeds, or the methods of the earlier Protestant theologians, but rather the more systematic plan of development exhibited in the best theological treatises of the latter half of the seventeenth century. It commences with the Bible as the source and foundation of all belief ; then proceeds with the doctrine of Scripture concerning God in his being and attributes, purposes and administration, providential and moral ; then discus.ses the creation, character and fall of man, with the consequences of that fall ; and then presents Christ in his person and in his mediatorial work in its main aspects and issues. From these fundamental positions, it proceeds to discuss such saving truth in its more practical relations, — to set forth the plan of salvation and the process of salvation as illustrated in the various phases and experiences of the Christian life, and also to expound the moral law as the rule of life, and present the duties which natu- rally spring into view on that basis, and are legitimately required of all who believe in Christ. These discussions are followed by an exposition of the sacraments and the church, of the relations of the church to the state, of the authority of councils, and the right and limits of church discipline; and the whole is concluded with two chapters, following the order of the Apostolic Creed, on death and the intermediate life, resurrection and the final judg- ment. Extensive as this list of topics seems, it is justly ques- tioned whether there are not some important factors in Christian theology, such as the doctrine of the Gospel in its scope, and of the Holy Spirit in his person and work, which are either omitted or too incidentally and cursorily treated. Systematic as the con- struction is, and marked and strong as is the method pursued, it is also questioned with some reason whether this is absolutely the best grouping possible, — whether the method be not more theo- 04 HISTORICAL INTRODUCTION. logical than biblical, and whether the great realities of grace might not be set in connections, articulated into a system, such as would bring out into more glorious light the grand central facts con- cerning Christ and his Salvation. These are queries which will frequently recur to view at later stages in the studies proposed. The method pursued in the Catechisms, while resembling that of the Confession, is yet simpler and more natural. They were con- structed not for the purpose of presenting a consistent and complete system of doctrine, but rather — to use the suggestive phrase of Reynolds — in that way which is most for ingenerating knowledge ; or so as, in the language of Gillespie, to condescend to the capacity of the common and unlearned. Thus their teaching is divided easily into the two main sections, belief and duty. The presen- tation of what we are to believe, includes most of the cardinal elements in the theology of the Confession : what is our duty, as consequent upon such belief, is set forth in an elaborate exposition of the Ten Commandments, and of the form of Prayer taught by Our Lord, and in an associated exposition of saving faith and its fruits. Though both Catechisms adopt this more simple divi- sion, the Larger adheres under it more closely to the theological terminology of the Confession itself. Both are to be regarded as authoritative as well as the Confession, as are also the Form of Government, the Book of Discipline, and the Directory for Wor- ship, so far as they help to explain or emphasize the doctrinal system incorporated in the distinctively theological formularies.* In presenting as is proposed, a compendium or summary of this doctrinal system, it will be desirable to group the chapters of the Confession together according to the theological scheme followed by the compilers, rather than to comment on each chapter separ- ately. A study of these chapters as arranged will make it manifest that they are capable of such grouping, and that what may be termed a system of theology can be built up without disruption or confusion from the material thus furnished. By such treatment the teachings of the Catechisms also may be set in more palpable *See Mitchell, Westminster Assembly, Lect. XII. and also his collection of Catechisms of the Second Reformation, and that of Bonar, Catechisms of the Scottish Reformation. Schaff (Creeds of Christ: Vol. I.) pronounces the Shorter Catechism one of the three typical catechisms of Protestantism which are likely to last till the end of time : see his remarks on the Protestant Cate- chisms generally. On the authority of the Catechisms consult Presbyterian Digest, in /or. See Commentaries on the Catechisms, by Vincent, "Fisher, Green, Boyd and others. The first extensive Body of Divinity published in America, 1720, by Samuel Willard, President of Harvard, was a series of two hundred and fifty discourses on the Shorter Catechism. THE OBJECT SOUGHT. 65 relations to those of the Confession, and the real unity pervading the entire series may be brought more clearly into view. It will also be more practicable under this method to compare the doc- trines of these formularies with those of the three ancient creeds and of the other Protestant confessions, and also with Roman and Greek symbolism, and with the chief product of more recent inves- tigations in the general field of Christian doctrine. Special attention will also be paid in this connection to the various Declarations and Testimonies, and to the actual and proposed Revisions, which bear directly upon present interpretation of these venerable Symbols. If the result shall be a clear, just, liberal, comprehen- sive estimate of what is essential in the Presbyterian system of doctrine, and what is in fact believed by those who now accept these formularies as the standard and index of their faith, the chief aim of these Lectures will be fully attained. It remains simply to be added that such aim not only precludes all dogmatic narrowness and all controversial purpose or temper, but requires also a broad and cordial sympathy with all varieties of the com- mon Calvinism, and no less truly with all other types of evan- gelical belief. The doctrinal specialties in which intelligent Calvinists now differ, are of very small moment compared with those primal and commanding truths in which they are consciously and profoundly agreed. Nor is it any less true that the surviving disagreements of evangelical Protestantism are incomparably less important than are those fundamental doctrines of grace, those saving verities of Scripture, in regard to which all true Protestants of whatever name are consciously and cordially One. LECTURE SECOND— THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. Revelation, its Nature and Process : The Contents of Scripture : Its Authenticity, Authority and Ade- quacy : Right and Duty of Private Interpretation. Confession of Faith, Chap. I ; XIV, Sec. ii ; XXI, Sec. i ; Larger Catechism, Answers 2-5 ; 154-160 ; Shorter Cate- chism, 2-3 ; 89-90. The formal principle of the Reformation was the Supremacy of Scripture, as distinct from either patristric tradition, or the decrees of councils, or the imperative U Protestantism and teachings of the Church through its papal . , _ . , head. The Articles of Smalcald spoke tation in the Symbols. . «. . for all Protestantism in tersely affirming (II.) that the Word of God should frame articles of faith, other- wise no one, not even an angel. It was on this basis only that Protestantism as a new and more intelligent and spiritual type of Christianity could safely rest. The Bible, as supreme above all other sources or authorities, — the Bible as an authenticated mess- age from God to each soul of man, to be studied and interpreted by each in the temper of loyalty to its divine Author, was there- fore seated on the throne as the great arbitrator of doctrine, the true norm of belief, the regulative factor in both faith and life. Hence the prominence which is given to the Bible and its claims m the various symbols of the period : hence the clear, strong, decisive affirmations concerning its authenticity and authority, which are found everywhere in both the creeds and the theologies of primitive Protestantism. See Augsburg Conf.: Conclusion: Formula Concordiae, Introd. I— II : Zwinglian Articles, 1, 5, 13: First HelveticConf . I-II : Second Helv. Cap. I : Heidelberg Cat. -20-21 : French Conf. II-IV: Belgic Conf. Art. III-VII : First Scotch XIX-XX : Thirty-Nine Art. VI-VII : and especially the Irish Articles, 1 to 7; from which the form and language of the Westminster statements were largely derived. The Westminster Confession, like most of these formularies, starts not from the abstract doctrine of the decrees, nor from any other speculative or philosophic basis, but immediately from the GENERAL PROTESTANT DOCTRINE. 67 primary and fundamental fact of Revelation. More fully than any of them it presents to view the vital need of a supernatural communication from God to man contemplated as a sinner, the modes in which such a communication was actually made, and the several writings which combine to make up that communica- tion. As against the Roman theory of tradition in whatever form, and against the opposite theory of an inner light, whether derived from reason or from the independent illumination of the Holy Spirit, it affirms the completeness and authoritativeness, and the entire adequacy of this Inspired Word. In contrast with all other teaching, and all assumption by human authority in matters of belief, it asserts both the right of private interpreta- tion, and the imperative obligation of every one to study the Scriptures for himself. In opposition to the conception of an absolute religion, grounded in the universal reason, in which historic Christianity with its specific disclosures is to be merged at last, it declares this written communication from God to be both sole and final basis of religion, not for any given race or period, but for humanity universally, — affirming that man can never outgrow this Revelation, and that salvation must always flow from faith in this as the perfect and the ultimate message of God to the race. It is a suggestive fact that the Symbols start in this way, not from any philosophic principle, or from any specific doctrine in the Christian scheme, however fundamental, but directly from the Word of God as the only rule alike of belief and of practice. It is also suggestive that their affirmations on this cardinal point are so full, clear, decisive that no important enlargement or alteration of them has been made requisite by the investigations and discussions of the past two centuries around this primal truth. From the outset of the insular Reformation, the supremacy of the Bible as the very Word of God, its absolute authoritativeness within the religious sphere, had been eminently a fundamental principle of British Protestantism. Abundant illustrations of this fact appear in the formularies of the sixteenth century in both England and Scotland. The strong Article (XX) in the Scotch Confession on the Power and Authority of General Councils, sets up the Goddis Worde as the final standard of belief and the ultimate test of all human teachings. The Thirty-Nine Articles (VI) affirm the entire sufficiency and authoritativeness of the Holy Scriptures in all things necessary to salvation. Amid all the religious and ecclesiastical struggles which marked the first dec- ades of the seventeenth century, there was — as the Irish Articles 68 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. clearly indicate — no appreciable swerving on any side from this fundamental principle. And the student of the deliberations and the acts of the Westminster Assembly will not fail to dis- cover such supreme, loving, unflinching loyalty to the Bible signalizing and controlling the proceedings of that venerable body throughout. Its members were not only learned in the Scriptures, but devout believers in all that Scripture taught them, and deter- mined in their purpose — according to the pledge or vow approved by Parliament and solemnly taken by each member at the first organization — that whatever they affirmed as doctrine should be both tested and sustained by the Word of God, and by that Word only. The existence of intellectual and spiritual capacities in man, qualifying him in some sense to receive and appropriate a Reve- lation, is directly declared in the Sym- 2. Man capable of receiv- bols As created, man had, it is said, ing a Revelation : The light ,~. TT, ... ,, „ and law of Nature. a reasonable as well as immortal soul, and was endued with knoivledge as well as true holiness; having the law of God wr Uteri on his heart, and possessing both intelligence to apprehend, and capacity of conscience to feel the claims of that law. Nor are these high capabilities, though impaired by sin, so far ruined as to render man incapable as a sinner either of knowing the truth as God may reveal it, or of appreciating the evidences and the authority by which the truth is endorsed. There is an inward light of nature (Ch. I : i) to which revelation may and does directly appeal : there is a native reason, an inborn conscience, a soul in man, which can and does respond to that appeal. The phrase, light of nature, makes its appearance again and again ; Conf. I : vi; X : iv; XX : iv; XXI : i; and L. C. 2, 60, 151. We may note also the parallel phrases, law wrttten in their hearts, gifts which they had, law of the religion they do profess, works of crea- tion and providence as instructing men concerning God : also, the striking statement respecting the uses and operation of the moral law, If. C. 149-151. This light of nature is sometimes repre- sented as simply the action of our natural intelligence in the sphere of religious truth, — sometimes as a higher intuitional fac- ulty, the reason distinctively, — sometimes as if it were a peculiar intellectual or moral elevation making such truth more apparent and impressive. It is, comprehensively, the capacity to perceive and appreciate certain spiritual verities, even without the aid of revelation. The kindred phrase, law of nature, is sometimes used MAN AND REVELATION. (i(.) to indicate natural illumination, as well as that moral rule and guidance which nature supplies. The possession of such endowments is constantly assumed in the Symbols. They indeed emphasize very strongly the dark- ness and obliquity of mind induced by sin, and the inadequacy of the human reason to judge rightly of the claim of many specific truths revealed in the Scriptures; justly affirming (VI : ii) that all the parts and facilities of soul and body are defied by transgression — rendered inefficient and inaccurate in their action concerning divine things. They also strongly assert the corruption of the moral sensibilities, and especially of the conscience, in consequence of such transgression, — the effectual call of the Spirit manifesting itself as truly in the heart as in the understanding, and carrying with it the restoration of conscience and the sanctifying of every ethical capacity. They especially declare and emphasize the dead- ness of the perverted human will; its indisposition or aversion to any spiritual good (IX : iii) ; its strong instinctive hostility to all the Law and all the Word of God. Yet with equal clearness and strength they insist on such remaining degree of capacity in man as renders him fully and forever accountable to the divine law, and which especially makes it sinful in him to turn away from Christ as the eternal Word and Revealer of divine things. They present the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as containing what man is to believe (S. C. 3) and therefore is capable of believing. They enumerate the truths which human faith is required to embrace : they declare the universal obligation to hear and heed the Gospel; they condemn indifference and unbelief, on the ground that sinners are in some true sense capable of paying attention to saving truth, and of resting upon it as the Word of God. While they carefully guard against the inference that sinful men will in fact exercise these capacities savingly, apart from the influence of the revealing and convincing Spirit, they never pass over to the opposite extreme, or deny to man the possession of qualities such as would enable him to receive or to apprehend a revelation, if given. No conception of Revelation can be sound or satisfactory which does not rest on these cardinal propositions. Waiving here the question whether man, having such endowments, really needs anjT supernatural communication to acquaint him with truth and with duty, — waiving also the remoter question whether God can hold communication with man supernaturally, we must plant ourselves once for all on the fundamental doctrine that man even while sin- ful has faculties and capacities to which such a communication, if 70 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. made, can successfully appeal. We are to be guarded on one side against the impression that these capabilities are so far affected by sin as to be worthless, and on the other against the still worse impression that they are in no degree so affected. There is in the sinner, and even in the regenerated soul, a degree of mental ob- scuration and deadness in sensibility, as well as of weakness in purpose, which renders it certain that left to themselves both sinner and saint will misapprehend and misuse any revelation when given ; and which makes necessary some further supernatural action upon as well as for them, in order to render such divine communication useful in their spiritual life. The existence and the moral teaching of an external world, revealing to man certain preliminary truths, and preparing him to receive the higher truths of Revelation, 3. Nature and Revela- are also preSupposed in the Symbols. tion, how related. Natural ,TrI . . „ j ■ . , u Theology and Religion ; Rev- What 1S called in an OUt7&rd as Wf elation necessary. as inward sense the light of nature, dis- closing to his view in all the varied aspects of the material universe the being and presence and character of God, and making him acquainted with many of the primary relations between God and man, must be recognized as one of the fundamental facts in human experience. What are styled the works of creation and providence are here represented as manifesting, even to all men though sinful, the goodness, wis- dom and power of God, (I: i) and we are taught that these teachings of nature are so definite and so extensive as to leave men inexcusable for any indulgence of sin against the Being so made manifest. Natural theology and natural religion are thus presupposed and affirmed in the Symbols as in Scripture. This natural theology not only furnishes evidences and proofs of the existence of the Deity, and suggests at many points his qualities and his character: it also brings into view the reality and claim of law as regnant in the universe, the existence of moral as well as natural order and government, and the dependent and responsible position of man as a part of this vast system of things. And if to the testimony of external nature on these points we add the decisive confirmation to be derived from the study of man himself — from thoughtful consideration of his constitution and endowments as well as his physical structure, and especially of his rational and moral facul- ties, and the aspirations and capabilities of which he seems to be possessor, both the area and the substance of natural theology become vastly enlarged. Indeed, the witness to the wisdom and NATURE AND REVELATION. 71 goodness and power of God, derived from such investigation of man himself regarded as a creature, is in some respects far more impressive and conclusive than any derived from external nature, even in her most glorious forms. The Symbols seem in this respect, as in some others, to have anticipated largely that change in the great argument for the existence of God by which the proof de- rived from what man himself is as a rational and spiritual being, is taking precedence of the older arguments drawn by Paley and his successors from the study of the external world — the world of nature. Of a theology originating in this way, a natural religion is an essential product and result ; on this basis such a religion becomes not only possible, but in some degree necessary and imperative. Such disclosures tend to develop that sense of fear of the super- natural, which is the main sentiment in all the lower varieties of human faith ; they awaken the consciousness of dependence also, both natural and spiritual, on the superhuman power thus discov- ered. In their higher forms, they afford room for the sense of gratitude, for the consciousness of obligation, for the principle and spirit of duty, and even for the emotions of love and devotion and the hope of immortality. On this basis religion as a species of moral sensibility, and even as a practical rule of life, may and must exist and manifest itself in the human soul. Without the more elevated teaching of the law of God as given in Scripture, men do thus in apostolic phrase become a law unto themselves. While as yet untaught and unvitalized by the immediate action of the Holy Spirit, they may and do discern within themselves the vigorous accusings or excusings of conscience, and may and do tremble in view of a possible judgment to come. A natural reli- gion as well as a natural theology thus exists ; and all men give evidence of being in some degree under its quickening and subdu- ing power. Yet we are to guard ourselves against the inference that man needs no other revelation than this, and no higher religious life than that awakened by this process. The Longer Catechism of the Graeco-Russian church declares in language which evangelical Protestantism would endorse, that man may have some knowledge of God by contemplation of those things which he has created, but this knowledge is imperfect and insufficient, and can serve only as a preparation for faith, or as a help toward the knowledge of God from his Revelation. So, while we are taught in the Symbols that men are left in an inexcusable state on account of their sin against this light of nature, and while they are justly condemned without 72 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. the law for their failure to do what natural religion thus requires, we are also taught that these disclosures though preliminary and precious are (I: i) not sufficient to give that know/edge of God and of his will, which is necessary unto salvation. The Symbols go so far in this direction as to affirm (X. iv) that even those who are diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature — who are in fact obedient to the law of the religion they do profess — will not be saved, if they also reject when it is made known to them, the higher law of life revealed in Christ. These natural revelations may instruct, enlighten, direct ; they may warn against sin, and summon to duty ; they may call for the exercise of spir- itual sensibilities, and inspire to love and worship. But when man has failed to yield to their sweet influences, and has become a sinner against all their warnings, they reveal no way of escape from the guilt so incurred. They open no door of hope to the soul thus estranged from God. While therefore we are not to deny the reality of the theology or the religion of nature, or to indulge in disparagement of them as if they had but little worth, we are not on the other hand to assert their sufficiency, or to assume that no higher revelation is needful. The human reason, however clarified, cannot be regarded as a source of authority respecting divine things, in any way co-ordinate with the revealed Word. Butler wisely says that, though reason is the candle of the Lord within us, it can afford no light where it does not shine, nor judge where it has no principles to judge upon. Deism, in its best varieties, is to be commended for the exposition it has given of the teach- ings and moral demands of nature. Positivism is valuable so far as it gathers up these scattered rays, concentrates them in scien- tific unity, and presses them home upon the human conscience. The contributions which both physical science and metaphysical philosophy are constantly making to natural theology and natural religion, are greatly to be prized for what they are ; — but mostly, perhaps, for the clear evidence they afford of the absolute necessity for some further, some supernatural knowledge of divine things. It is indeed one' essential part of their mission to prove to the world, by every new discovery, by every fresh advance, the indis- pensableness of Revelation. The fact that such a Revelation has actually been given, is not only affirmed, but to some extent argumentatively sustained in the Symbols. Postponing all inquiry 4. Fact and Nature of ... .n r 4.1 • -n n ... „. . .. . . as to the specific contents of this Rev- Revelation; Objections noted. F elation, or to the positive evidences of its authenticity or authority, we may here note simply the general REVELATION — FACT AND NATURE. 73 fact thus affirmed, — that God has superadded to all the dis- closures of nature and to the appeals of nature to the religious element in man, another and higher communication, peculiar in method and in form, peculiarly certified also, and designed both to impart a larger knowledge and to stimulate in man a nobler faith and a worthier type of spiritual life. This is the proper significance of the term, Revelation, — a supernatural disclosure and impartation of religious truth rather than ordinary or scien- tific knowledge, conferred by methods which are also mainly supernatural, for the purpose of bringing about certain super- natural results in the beliefs, experiences and lives of men, both individually and as organized in human society, and involving their highest welfare both for time and for eternity. As the teachings of nature were insufficient, it pleased the Lord (I : i) to reveal himself and to declare his will; meeting in this way the great religious exigencies of mankind. While it is said that this manifestation is made specifically unto his Church or unto his people, — a statement which illustrates the strong hold of the doc- trine of particularistic election upon the mind of the Assembly, and which of itself might convey an inadequate conception of the nature and aim of the Revelation, — we have abundant warrant elsewhere for affirming that the Bible was held to be for man as man — for the church and for humanity also. It is given to all as (S. C. 2) the only rule to direct them how they may glorify and enjoy Godr which is the chief duty, not of the church only, but of all mankind. It teaches (S. C. 3) what all alike are to believe concerning God, and what didy God requires alike of all. This Revelation, is therefore, as described in the Symbols, uni- versal, perpetual, complete. Objections to such a conception of Revelation have been urged on the ground that such supernatural communication is both im- possible and needless. It is asserted that God has chosen to limit himself to what may be classed as natural modes of declaring his existence and character and will, — that he has given us capacities for study, and has furnished in ourselves and in the external universe a vast and adequate field of study respecting religious things, — and that by this arrangement he has in fact precluded himself from the need, if not from the possibility of any further or supra-natural disclosure. It is especially affirmed that there are, and even that there can be, no supernatural modes of communi- cation between him and men ; and that all claims to such super- naturalness are on philosophic grounds to be rejected as incredible and spurious. But surely there can be no philosophic objection 74 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. to the proposition that such a Being as God cannot be limited in such a matter except by his own choice ; and that whenever he chooses, he may use any means, natural or otherwise, which may appear to him best suited to his sovereign purpose. The limitation, if there be any, is one which he has imposed upon himself, and which therefore he may at any time remove. Nor does his adoption of one mode or of one class of modes habitually, in any degree prohibit the use of other modes whenever these are found to be desirable. Nor again can our inability to comprehend or to conceive of the mode in which revelation is made, or even our inability to believe in such a revelation, so far as such ina- bility has a moral rather than a rational basis, militate against the credibility of the fact, whenever such revelation is actually made. God must also be the supreme judge as well as the sovereign agent, in the matter of declaring his will to man. It is not ours to say whether the knowledge received by the light of nature is adequate, — whether man does or does not need more extensive and emphatic disclosures of truth and duty. Especially is this apparent when we remember how far sin has impaired the human powers, — how imperfectly man conceives and uses what God has communicated by natural processes, — how little at the best man can learn from nature respecting the urgent and vital problem of salvation from sin and its results. Here God only is a competent arbiter ; it is his alone to determine what is a sufficient and effectual Revelation. One reason for such a communication is expressed in the words (XXI : i), that He may 7iot be worshiped according to the imaginations or devices of men, or the suggestio?is of Satan. That this Revelation is necessary tinto salvatio?i is to the Divine Mind the grand underlying reason for it. The awful fact of sin, with all its terrific effects upon the mind and heart of the race, is the essential warrant for its existence, and the Bible justifies itself forever by its demonstrated adaptations to this great, this universal need. Both the possibility and the necessity for some declaration of the mind and will of God in supernatural as well as in natural method and form must therefore be recognized. In such a case a priori reasonings adverse to such revelation are clearly invalid: in fact, a priori considerations, so far as available, strongly favor the opposite conclusion. An eminent theologian has justly affirmed that no insuperable difficulty can be urged logically ,metaphysicalfy or physiologically ; a revelation, he adds, is just as conceivable as a sun. Such a Being as God is, can use miracles, prophecies, the- ophanies, voices in the air, wonders in the .sky, to show men his REVELATION NECESSARY. 75 will, just as readily as he can use the familiar facts of nature or the ordinary witness of the human conscience. If He could create the physical universe with all its elements and energies, it is plain that he can produce any changes in that universe, miracu- ulous or otherwise, which may in any way subserve his own sov- ereign or gracious purposes. How pressing the need of such added light and guidance is, even man himself in the bewilderment and terror of his sin, and in the intensity of his longings after deliverance from both its power and its curse, may in some measure apprehend, though that necessity must ever be one which God alone can fully estimate. The disclosure not only of human sin- fulness, but of grace as the antithesis of sin, furnishes the justifying reason for such supernatural revealment, — just as it furnishes the ground for the gracious incarnation of Him who was the divine Word made flesh for us men and for our salvation. And as the divine resources are boundless, and this human need universal, it follows that this Revelation, if given, will be designed not for some chosen portion of the human family specially, but for humanity as such. Though each individual of the race may not be possessed of it, and though the saving understa7iding of such things as are revealed in the Word occurs only where(I: vi) the i?iward illumination of the Spirit is enjoyed, yet in the idea of it Revelation must be regarded as sent comprehensively to the world, and as sus- taining precious relations to the moral state and destiny of every son and daughter of Adam. This is true although as a matter of fact the divine communication to man in the Scriptures was given progressively, through long centuries of time, and given at first to a selected nation, rather than to mankind universally, to be through that nation finally transmitted to the race. Contemplating Revelation at this point as a process rather than a product, the term must be regarded broadly as including the entire procedure, whatever be the form or method, by which God makes known 5' ProceSs of Revelation : , , . , , . Nature of Inspiration : gen- to men such superadded truth or such eral descrjption. enlarged conceptions of duty or of grace. The Symbols describe the divine disclosure as various and com- plex in method as well as universal in scope. We are taught that in its earlier stages the plan of redemption was manifested by promises, 'prophecies, sacrifices, circumcision, the paschal lamb, and other types and ordinances delivered to the people of the Jews, all fore-signifying Christ to come, (VII. v.) which were for that time sufficient and efficacious, to instruct or build up the elect in faith. So within the sphere of physical nature in divers maimers, as by 7<) THE HOLY SCRIPTURK. the burning bush, the pillar of cloud and fire, the Shechinah or the Urim and Thummim, as well as by the mouth of man, did God make known his mind and will. These remarkable manifestations in nature seem to culminate in the disincarnate voice three times heard in the air, (at the baptism, at the transfiguration, and just before the crucifixion) in attestation of the person and mission of our Lord. In a far higher sense is Christ himself the incarnate Revelation, disclosing both before and after his advent, in a man- ner far above all other communications, the truths essential to salvation. He is himself the Logos, uttering these truths not by inspiration, but in virtue of his own nature, and of his specific function in the Godhead as the eternal voice and message of Deity. The confessional conception of Christ as Prophet (L,. C. 43; S. C. 24) implies not merely that his prophecies were higher in quality and scope than all others, or that he was the historical head of the prophetic order, but also that he was intrinsically and eternally the revealer of the divine mind and will, and that in his person and his words are incorporated all the treasures of spiritual wisdom and of saving knowledge. In him therefore we see the process of revelation, not as we behold it in physical demonstrations or disincarnate voices, in types and emblems, but in the highest possible form and measure ; God himself directly speaking in and through the Incarnate Word. In a more specific sense the term, Revelation, is used to des- cribe the divine agency or action upon particular men chosen of God in order that they might receive and communicate to the world his revealed will. The notion of a general revelation merely , imparted simultaneously to mankind in the aggregate — a cosmic disclosure in which all men share or may share alike — is inadequate here. God has in fact chosen rather to impart the knowledge of his will to elect persons, whom he uses as his agents in the trans- mission of illuminating and saving truth to the world. It is impossible to describe the methods in which he first makes known to such men the truths which he afterwards guides them in communi- cating to the race. That there is such a revealing process, which differs in some essential particulars from all ordinary varieties of mental activity, from the highest stimulations of religious enthu- siasm, and even from the most exalted forms of spiritual illumina- tion through the action of the Holy Spirit upon regenerated minds, and which must be referred to God rather than man as its immediate source, is abundantly suggested in the Symbols as in Scripture. It pleased the Lord (I : i) at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal Himself, and to declare His will ; and this REVELATION AS A PROCESS. 77 process of revealing and declaration is expressly distinguished in the Confession from the subsequent commitment of the same wholly unto writing. Some hints in regard to this process are given to us, as in the dreams and visions of prophets, in the ecstacy of seers, in the angelic communications, and in the spiritual exalta- tion given, for example, to Paul or to John on the Isle of Patmos. It is also distinguishable in itself, as well as in its results, from all movements of the Holy Spirit in grace upon the minds of sinners, or even of the holiest saints. It is an interior, immediate, active and infallible disclosing to the recipient of the truth which God desires him to impart, — truth whose fullness he may not himself comprehend, but which he receives in order that he may proclaim and afterwards record it in words which the Holy Ghost teacheth. Inspiration is to be regarded simply as a superadded supernatural process, necessitated by the fact and also by the nature of such antecedent revelation. It may not be true in all cases, though it must be true in most, that the recipient himself recognizes the supernatural source and quality of the truth thus given, and dis- tinguishes it by clear lines from the action or product of his own mind. Such elements are clearly perceptible in such particular revelation, though beyond this the process must be viewed as mysterious, and ineffable. That it is in some sense miraculous, is an obvious fact. It is at least a direct descent of divine potency into the sphere of the natural for the securing of certain spiritual ends ; and this is the essential conception of a miracle. God, in a word, is disclosed in this process of making known to chosen men his will, in a way and form in which he nowhere makes himself manifest in ordinary experience. The term, Inspiration, as distinct from Revelation in either. of the two senses just named, is defined and limited by the language of the Confession : Afterward, for the better preserving and prop- agating of the truth . . . to commit the same wholly unto writing. There is indeed an inspiration of utterance, men of God being moved by the Holy Ghost to speak as well as to record the divine message. There is also an inspiration of act as well as voice, elect persons being animated by the Spirit to the performance of some special work in the interest of the economy of redemption. But as more generally used, the term implies primarily the accurate recording of the divine revelations, however given, so far as such record is deemed by God essential to the spiritual end in view in these revelations. Secondarily it also implies the accu- rate recording of whatever histories, events, circumstances, laws, doctrines, derived from natural or human sources, may 78 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. be regarded by the Divine Spirit as essential in the explanation or enforcement of these revelations. Inspiration is thus the broader term : it is applicable not only to those portions of Scripture which contain direct revelations, but to all the sacred books which make up holy Scripture, and to all the parts and contents of these several books. It is nothing less than a movement of the Holy Spirit upon the minds and wills of the men inspired, by which they were led to produce a volume that is properly \ascribed in its totality to God as its Author. Postponing for the moment the speculative problem involved in this proposition, we may properly pause at this point to note the one remarkable qual- ity, the distinguishing supernaturalness, in this process by which it is decisively separated from all ordinary activity even of the most intellectual or most sanctified minds. To regard such inspiration as only a higher variety of mental power or of poetic or religious fervor, such as appears elsewhere in human experience, is to dissi- pate altogether its divine quality, and also to destroy its religious significance and worth. It is to be specially distinguished from spiritual illumination, even in the highest forms in which such illumination may graciously be induced by the Holy Ghost. Inspi- ration is a still higher type of activity, produced by the Spirit for a broader and loftier purpose, and characterized by more extensive and more permanent results. In an eminent degree such as is discernible in no other human experience, God must be in this pro- cess throughout, supernaturally, immediately, supremely, or it is in no true sense of the term, inspiration. The speculative query in the case is concerned chiefly with the relations of such divine agency to the human activities displayed in this peculiar process. It is not practicable here to describe the widely diversified theories which have been propounded in answer to this speculative query, — theories ranging from the most extreme dogma of literal or verbal or mechanical dictation, down through various gradations, to those rationalistic or naturalistic opinions which reduce inspiration nearly to the level of ordinary human experience. The Symbols cannot be said to present any distinct answer to this question : they are limited chiefly to an assertion of the fact that the Scriptures are, in some adequate and reliable way, given by inspiration of God. Mitchell justly says that the Westminster divines were at more special pains than the authors of any other Confession, ... to leave open all reasonable ques- tions as to the mode and degree of inspiration, which could consist- ently be left open by those who accepted the Scriptures as the infallible rule of faith and duty. In this they simply followed the INSPIRATION — FACT AND NATURE. 79 example of the Divine Word itself, which in various forms and with adequate authority affirms the fact of inspiration, but nowhere tells us how or in what methods or measures holy men of God were moved by the Holy Ghost when they spake or recorded what he theopneustically led them to reveal. There is in fact no clear evi- dence, at least in the Minutes, that the Assembly held tenaciously any specific or fixed theory on the subject. Dickson expresses what was probably the current view at the time in the statement, (Truth's Victory over Error) that by the Scripture or the Word of God we do not understand the bare letters or the several words, . . . which the adversaries may imagine are all the Word of God. But we do understand thereby the Doctrine or Will of God, re- vealed unto reasonable creatures, teaching them what to do, believe, or learn wisdom. Yet it is quite obvious that the Symbols furnish suggestions which at least are sufficient to rule out certain defective notions, if not to lead us on to the true and full conception. For illustra- tion, they do not justify the merely mechanical theory — the theory of verbal dictation — which regards the human instrumen- tality in the case as wholly passive, — the Holy Spirit using inspired men as if they were so many musical instruments, silent until touched by his finger, and giving forth literally and without con- scious movement of their own each word or letter of the revelation he is imparting. It may be possible on such a theory still to recognize differences among the sacred writers, signs of separate personality and action among them, just as different instruments of music sound the same note or strain differently, Yet this theory fails to explain adequately those strong signs and movements of human as well as divine personality, which are almost everywhere apparent in Scripture ; it fails also to furnish any explanation of differences or variations, at least verbal or formal, which all must in some sense recognize as existing in the written Word. No view of inspiration can explain such features, or meet all the essential tests in the case, which does not admit the existence of a free, vigorous, flowing and largely conscious human factor in the holy process. Hodge (Syst. Theol. ) after illustrating the opera- tions of the Spirit in inspiration by his operations in sanctification, adds the statement, that as the believer seems to himself to act, and in fact does act, out of his own nature, so the inspired penmen wrote out of the fullness of their own thoughts and feelings, and employed the language and modes of expresion which to them were the most natural and appropriate. It has well been said by another high authority, that the human is as really blended with 80 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. the divine in Scripture, as humanity is united with divinity in the person of Christ. On the other hand, the Westminster teaching clearly rules out the antithetic opinion that inspiration relates merely to what are called the essentials, but not to the incidentals of Scripture; or that it concerns itself with spiritual concepts, but not with the language in which those concepts are set forth; or that mistakes and errors of various classes may creep into the record from the human side, with the consent of the superintending Spirit, — his agency not preserving the writers from inaccurate or erroneous statement on matters not vitally related to the main purpose of the revelation. The Symbols contain no suggestion of any recognizable distinction between the essential and the incidental, between the concept and the language ; or of an inspiration which is but partial and vari- able, appearing and disappearing in the same composition, at one time strong enough to protect the writer against error, at another too weak to save him from those liabilities to inaccuracy to which human writers elsewhere are subject. The}' recognize the fact that imperfect experiences are recorded in the Scriptures, but never suggest that these experiences are imperfectly recorded. They also admit incomplete enunciations of doctrine, partial and pro1 gressing disclosures of truth and duty, verbal variations in state- ment and quotation, obscuration in language and teaching ; but they none the less claim infallibility in the record as well as in the revelation, and an infallibility which is coextensive with the entire Scripture, and is seen in and through all apparent disagreements. It is not at variance with this general doctrine to admit the fact that the relative manifestation, and even the proportionate activ- ity of these two elements, varies in different parts of Scripture. The divine and the human work together, not always in one way, still less as if connected together mechanically, wheel within wheel, but rather in a large variety of ways and in various forms of con- nection;— as is true, for example, in the kindred work of regenera- tion. It is an old and familiar analysis which distributes the divine factor into three such varieties, — an agency of superintendence, illustrated in that controlling guidance which secures the accurate description of biographical or historical events, — an agency of suggestion and spiritual inbreathing, such as is seen in the teach- ing and temper of the Psalms, or of some among the apostolic Letters, — an agency of direct and immediate dictation, in which truths wholly unattainable by man and even impenetrable to him who utters them, such as the Mosaic code, the higher forms of prophecy, or the cardinal doctrines of grace, are disclosed to the VARIETIES IN INSPIRATION. 81 mind, and are transmitted by the recipient in the very words of God. But it is not to be understood that even in the lowest of these forms such divine agency is less real or effectual than in the highest, though the variety in mode and measure is obvious, and the distinctions resulting are in several aspects important. More of the human element may consequently be apparent in one por- tion than in another; things which are local or transient, or which are less vital in their bearings on salvation, may be more frequent or marked; the infirmities of man may even seem to break in at some points, as if to mar the perfection of the composite Word. But on the other hand, there are portions of Scripture where what is human seems to be awed into almost utter silence, — where the deep voice of God himself is heard in awful reverberations, and every word sounds as if it came directly from the Throne. But however far such distinctions or grades in inspiration may be admitted, the Christian mind must ever hold that an infallible revelation requires in order to its acceptance and influence a record essentially infallible. If the divine disclosure is to be made in human language, such language must properly embody — so far as this is possible to human speech — the divine thought to be recorded. Nor can the Christian mind ever consent to regard the Bible as being a merely human account, more or less complete, more or less fallible, of certain divine communications once made. Sacred Scripture is never to be viewed as a natural transcript merely, even though it were an accurate transcript, of supernatural revelations once given historically to mankind. The Bible is something infi- nitely higher than a collection of religious books, a compilation of Hebrew literature, containing revelations from God, which have been preserved for the benefit of mankind. It is in the deepest sense his word, his message, his book throughout, and therefore an infal- lible rule for men. It may indeed be true, as has been strongly affirmed, that the supernatural quality and authority of the Scrip- tures could be maintained apart from any doctrine of inspiration, or of the entire infallibility of Scripture as resulting from inspiration. But on the other hand it must be maintained that inspiration includes the form as well as the contents of Scripture, — that the Bible is a divine construction as really, though by another pro- cess, as the physical universe, — and that this divine communication can have neither adequate authority nor saving influence, so long as men are in doubt respecting the accuracy of the records which report it. The difficulties evaded by any such line of reasoning are by no means so serious as those which it introduces. If the record be in anjr part of it merely human or fallible, we certainly 82 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. can have no adequate guarantee that the revelation there recorded is really from God. The mistakes of the writers in recording may be indices of mistakes much more vital in apprehending what was revealed ; errors in incidental matters inevitably suggest the pos- sibility of like error in the statement of what is most central and essential. In a word, the Bible must be something more, in form as well as in substance, than a transcript by fallible men in inac- curate language of a revelation once made on the earth : it must itself be that Revelation. The current discussion whether the Bible is a revelation from God or only contains such a revelation, is very largely a dispute about words. The Symbols use both expressions. The Bible is the Word of God : Conf. I : iv-v, L. C. 157; the Word of God is contained in the Scriptures, S. C. 2, — evidently from the Irish Articles, 1, 6. Note the Thirty-Nine Articles, Holy Scripture containeth; First Helvetic, I, Scriptura canonica verbum Dei . . . sola perfecte continet; French Conf. V; Belgic Conf. VII. In one aspect the Bible contains the accurate historic record of a long series of specific revelations : in another, as being in its totality a supernatural communication from God to mankind, it may prop- erly be said to be one Revelation. The former statement is objec- tionable pnly when it seems to imply that these specific revelations stand in an inexact and fallible setting, — that the historic record which contains them is not altogether faithful to fact. The general proposition must be that the Bible both contains revelations, and is throughout a Revelation. But whether contemplated in the one aspect or in the other, a real and efficient inspiration must be recognized in it, not only communicating supernatural and saving truth, but transmitting that truth in language wholly adequate and accurate — infallible, so far as the great purpose of the Reve- lation is in any way involved. That the view here stated was the general doctrine of the Prot- estant churches may be ascertained by careful examination of their creeds, both continental and insular. The Augsburg Confession prefaces its Articles with the statement that its doctrines are derived from the Holy Scriptures and pure Word of God, — re- garded as the infallible and ultimate test of all human opinion and belief. The Formula of Concord declares in the introduction to its confessional affirmations, that the only rule and norm accord- ing to which all dogmas and all doctors ought to be esteemed and judged, is none other whatever than the prophetic and apos- tolic writings of both the Old and New Testaments; this dignity as judge and rule, norm and touchstone, belonging to Holy Scripture INERRANCY OF SCRIPTURE. 83 alone. The First Helvetic Confession affirms that the Scriptures, having been transmitted by the Holy Ghost and set forth to the world by prophets and apostles, alone contain perfectly the most ancient and most complete philosophy, and the supreme rea- son or ground of all life and all religion. In the French Confession it is said that God has revealed himself not only in his works but also in his Word, in the beginning made known through holy oracles, but afterwards committed to writing in the books which we call the Holy Scriptures. In like manner the Belgic Confession declares that this Word of God was not sent or delivered by the will of man, but that holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost; and that these Scriptures so fully contain the will of God that whatsoever man ought to believe unto salvation is suf- ficiently taught therein. Similar declarations might be quoted from other continental formularies, and from the earlier British Con- fessions also. In view of such declarations, there can be no doubt that while the Protestantism of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries set forth no specific theory of either revelation or inspira- tion, it held firmly to the doctrine taught by the Westminster Assembly, after its enumeration of the canonical Books: All which are given by inspiratio?i of God to be the rule of faith and life. In accepting this general conception of an inspired, sufficient, and authoritative Revelation, as presented in the Symbols, and as thus certified more or less extensively in all antecedent Protestant symbolism, ^m^ToSSS! we may not claim that the doctrine is cleared from all difficulties. On one side there are deep mysteries enveloping this divine process which it is not given to man to solve — mysteries even deeper than those which conceal from us so largely the divine activities in the field of providence and in the general field of grace. On another side there are serious perplex- ities discernible by us, which must be duly considered as we study this recorded Revelation, and endeavor thoughtfully to compre- hend its contents, — perplexities which group themselves chiefly around the very practical inquiry whether these Scriptures contain errors such as properly preclude their claim to be an infallible revelation. L,ocke defines error in a subjective sense as a mistake of our own judgment, in giving assent to that which is not true. It should be added to his definition that error in certain spheres, and eminently in the sphere of religion, may spring from an ignorance that is willful, as Paul teaches, or from the action of wrong feel- ing, as well as from mistakes of the judgment. Objectively, an 84 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. error may be an unintentional falsity in statement made by another, growing out of his lack of adequate knowledge. If there be an intention to deceive or mislead, or even to leave the hearer in the dark as to the real fact, such objective error exhibits a moral quality, and he who leads others into false views or judgments in any such method is criminal. In the case before us we cannot suppose that the Holy Spirit was himself ignorant respecting the truth which he professed to reveal, or that he fell through over- sight or accident into inaccuracies of whatever sort, or in any manner conveyed erroneous impressions unintentionally. Still less can we suppose that he intended to mislead or deceive or to leave men in the dark respecting the spiritual truth which he was professing to disclose. In any of these senses error can not be affirmed of the Scriptures : if they are in truth inspired by the Holy Ghost, this degree of inerrancy must be one of their cardinal qualities. This hypothetical view is strongly sustained by several pre- sumptions. For example, if God truly desires to make a revelation to men concerning things needful to their salvation, it is certainly to be expected that, however such revelation may be limited in scope by the end in view, or in form by the mental and moral condition of its recipients, there will be nothing in it that would deceive or mislead, or would leave such recipients in the dark as to even its minuter contents. Again : the great end in view in such divine disclosure, which is nothing less than human salvation, certainly justifies the anticipation that not only the truths pre- sented, but also the very language used in expressing them shall be free from all error in itself, and even from all obscurity or inac- curacy such as would tend to lead the reader astray or to bring the soul into peril. Again : it may reasonably be presumed that if such a revelation, designed to meet such a vital end, shall be given to the world through human agency, the men selected for such service would be distinguished from all other men by being lifted supernaturally above exposures to inaccuracy and errancy such as are apparent in ordinary human experience. And moreover, if the Holy Spirit be truly present in and through their execution of the divine purpose — superintending, animating, inspiring — it is a just expectation that he will not suffer anything to enter into such a record which would in any degree impair its value as a faithful and reliable statement of the truth, — exactly as God desires such truth to be known and diffused among men. Such suggestions — to speak of no others — make it evident that the hypothesis of inerrancy is not an a priori affirmation merely, but THEORY OF ERRANCY EXAMINED. 85 rather justifies itself as not only probable, but reasonable and even conclusive. But we are called at this point to contemplate, not an ideal iner- rancy which may on such grounds be justly presumed to have been an essential quality of the inspired Word, as it came origi- nally from God through the agency of the infallible Spirit, but rather the practical question, whether that inspired Word as we now have it, after many centuries of time, is to be received and cherished by us as truly inerrant — infallible. The noted ecclesiastical deliverance that the Scripture as it came from God is without error, is intelligible only on the hypothesis that Scrip- ture is now exactly what it was at the beginning — a hypothesis which is controverted by some unquestionable facts. And if, more- over, it were ascertained that there are actual errors, properly so called, in the Bible as we now have it, the speculative question whether such errors were in this Holy Book as it first came from God — serious as it is — would be of small import in comparison with the more immediate question whether, in case such errors are really discoverable in it now, we may still rest upon it as a veritable message from the Deity to mankind. There are no traces of debate upon this question in the Westminster Assembly, nor is it probable that the hypothesis of errancy found advocates of any prominence on British soil prior to the rise of English Deism in the succeeding century. Since that period this destructive hypothesis has been often and earnestly urged, and is still a center of strenuous and anxious discussion. The term, errancy, as employed in such discussion, at least among Christian scholars, relates not to any essential teachings of Scripture respecting either doctrine or duty, but only to what may be denoted as its circumstantial or incidental features. So far as the great truths, the binding precepts, the glorious promises, the supreme elements in the scheme of salvation are concerned, all Christian minds are agreed that the Bible as we now possess it, is an absolutely inerrant book; all unite in receiving it as being as truly the very utterance and message of God now as it was when it came forth in its perfection from his gracious hand. Yet we must admit that we find in this divine book, as we now have it, partial or incomplete statements, variant reports of the same acts or sayings, differing citations of the same passages, circum- stantial diversities in the records of the same events, apparent discrepancies in various incidental matters which, taken in the aggregate, seem to furnish considerable warrant for the allegation of errancy. But here it should be noted at once that the number 86 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. of these alleged errancies is found on critical examination to be much smaller than has sometimes been claimed, and is diminish- ing rather than increasing, — that many of these are based on a specific theory of inspiration, specially that of verbal dictation, but fade away in the light of a more philosophic and practical conception of the theopneustic process, — that many exist only in the erroneous apprehension or inaccurate exegesis of those who urge them, — and generally, that in fact much more has been made of such asserted errancies than the actual material in hand justi- fies. It should also be noted that the use of such an abstract or generic term as errancy is seriously misleading and erroneous, inasmuch as it seems to imply that such errancy is a pervading characteristic of the Scriptures, or to suggest that, while the Bible is reliable in its expositions of truth and duty, it is extensively unreliable in its historic and circumstantial portions. Those who have affirmed that Holy Writ is in these particulars marked by error or even incidental errancy, have not always realized the depth of the shadows which their affirmations throw upon its credibility and authoritativeness throughout. For although this Divine Book is neither history nor biography in the main, still if its historical or biographic statements were found to be in frequent conflict with each other or with facts obtained from other reliable sources, — if variation, difference, diversity, discrepancy, contra- diction were discernible on close investigation as a general characteristic of its records, very serious doubt would inevitably be cast upon its instructions and counsels within its own partic- ular field, — the field of religious truth and religious obligation. In studying the Scriptures as we now find them, with a view to determining the exact amount and nature of the errancy alleged, it is incumbent upon us, first of all, to make due account of the long process of transcription and transmission through which the sacred Books have passed — a process running on through many centuries, in different countries and conditions, conducted by thousands of copyists, each one of whom was liable to mistake, and many of whom might venture to attempt correction here or there in the original text. A multitude of such mistakes and fancied emendations have already been discovered by Christian scholars ; others may even yet appear as new sources come to light ; and if the original text were in our hands, some changes might be detected which are not discernible at this stage. It is indeed quite probable that much of the supposed discordance in the historical books of the Old Testament, in the biographies of Christ, and the records of the labors and career of Paul, embarrasses us only DEFECTIVE TRANSCRIPTION: OBSCURATION OF TIME. 87 because we are not in possession of the unaltered records. But as the case now stands, we have large room for rejoicing in the sig- nificant fact that the alleged errancies of whatever class, thus far discovered and verified, are not found to affect seriously the teach- ing of Scripture in any matter of doctrine or of duty. It is almost equally significant and gratifying to discover that none of these circumstantial diversities are of sufficient moment to cast any disastrous shadow on the essential truthfulness of either the biog- raphies or the histories involved. Nor is it unreasonable to suppose that, if we were in possession of the original records, a very large proportion of what is now regarded as errancy would wholly disappear. It is incumbent upon us, in the second place, to remember that some things in the Scriptures have become so obscured through centuries of time and changes that full explanation of them has now come to be impracticable. Many illustrations of such obscu- ration may be gathered up from the Gospels, from the epistolary writings and from the Apocalypse ; still others appear in the pro- phetic and historical portions of the Old Testament, And some of these, which doubtless were entirely plain in the distant ages in which the sacred books were written, seem to us mysterious, or even discrepant, simply because we are not in possession of the local data and conditions which determined their form or their substance. If we take into account the wide peculiarities in thought, experi- ence, custom prevailing in those oriental lauds where the Bible was written, — the special characteristics of the languages and dialects employed in their composition, and the unique design and quality of the sacred writings, — the vast transformations of every type which so many revolutions and developments have wrought in human society since the scroll of Revelation was closed, — the con- cealing dimness that has fallen like dust on so much of ancient civ- ilization everywhere, we may easily infer that at least some things which at this distance seem to us like inaccuracies or contradic- tions, would change into beautiful harmonies, provided we could only see the facts and events just as the sacred writers saw them. The marvel indeed is that the Book is so well understood, its ap- parent discrepancies are so largely explained, its grand disclosures so intelligently apprehended, notwithstanding such chronologic obscurations. It might even be claimed as one mark of its true divinity that it has survived so remarkably all such mutations, and is still in all that is essential to it as a guide to religion and salva- tion, so fully comprehensible not merely in the places where it originated but throughout the earth and throughout the ages. 88 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. Eliminating whatever is properly traceable to faulty transcrip- tion or interpolation, or to the obscuration of time, it is still further incumbent upon us to employ all the available principles of sound and considerate exegesis in testing whatever of alleged error remains in the sacred text. Misleading parallelisms, for example, are to be avoided ; variations arising from differing degrees of prominence or emphasis merely are to be set aside ; differences in narrating various parts of the same event are not to be pronounced contradictory ; varieties of view and statement springing simply from the distinguishing characteristics of the inspired narrators, are not to be regarded as discrepancies. It cannot be denied that the citations quoted with greater or less exactness or with substan- tial accuracy merely, should not be treated as cases of errancy; the absence of logical or rhetorical precision or of grammatical correct- ness should not be viewed as impugning the infallibility of the record; scientific statements, or exact harmony with scientific facts, are not to be demanded in such a book as the Bible. It is not necessary, says Bishop Burnet, (Thirty-Nine Articles) where dis- courses are reported, that the individual words should be set down just as they were said ; it is enough if the effect of them is reported. Nor is it necessary that the order of time should be strictly observed, or that all the conjunctions in such relation should be understood merely according to their grammatical mean- ing .... The design of revelation, as to this part of the subject — he adds — is only to give such representations of matters of fact as may both work upon and guide our belief; but the order of time and the strict words having no influence that way, the wri- ters might dispose them and express them variously, and yet all be exactly true. Failure to apply such just exegetical rules, in the temper of honest loyalty to the divine Word, accounts for very much of the current allegations of errancy. Still it may be necessary, after all such explanatory processes, to admit that there may remain in the Scriptures as we now possess them what has been well described, (Hodge, Syst. Theol.) as here or there a speck of sand-stone showing itself in the marble of the Parthenon — an occasional variation, difference or even discrepancy of statement which, so far as we can see, may have been in the original text as written by holy men moved by the Holy Ghost. Yet the same revered authority regards it as a most impressive, even awful fact, that these Scriptures have been so miraculously kept free from the soiling touch of human fingers, and maintains that any such instances of errancy would not in the least subvert the doctrine of a truly plenary inspiration. A TRULY DIVINE BOOK. 89 As a result of the most careful examination we discern in the Bible, notwithstanding such possible blemish, a thoroughly inspired, a truly theopneustic Book, containing both a series of genuine and precious revelations all bearing on the supreme problem of human salvation, and a large series of facts and events which are of transcendent interest in view of their vital relation- ship to such revelations. We have all these recorded accurately, and without anything that can properly be called error, by the hands of men who were moved for this purpose by the Holy Ghost, and who — while each one wrote, in the phrase of Augus- tine, as he remembered it or had it in his heart, ut cuiqiie cordi erat — were each and all so moved and guided as to be free from the liabilities consequent upon human ignorance or incapacity, and free also from those incentives to deceive or mislead by which other writers are sometimes influenced. We discern the human factor everywhere present, though under considerable variety of aspect, for the most part if not always conscious, and always so acting that the personality, experience, charac- teristic qualities, style, and limitations also, of each writer are seen to be determining in large degree the form and even the contents of the inspired communication. Yet we everywhere discover the divine factor dominating in this peculiar process, guiding in the language and form as well as in the truth expressed, guarding against everything that could properly be called errone- ous,— the divine agent dynamically manifesting his presence at every point, yet in such manner as to leave the human agents free in uttering the recorded truth in forms and terms best suited to themselves. In the Holy Book thus prepared, as we now have it, we may find an occasional trace of what is described as errancy — an occasional instance of verbal inexactness, or circumstantial variation, or deficiency or even discrepancy in statement which we may partly but at this distance of time cannot altogether explain, and which may in part have been even in the original man- uscripts. Yet we may also note the fact that the Bible as we now rejoice to possess it, is found on thorough and correct exam- ination to contain no error or blemish which impairs any doctrine, lessens our sense of any duty, or in any way effects unfavorably the great issue of salvation. We may therefore rest with confi- dence in the strong and just statement embodied in the proposed revision of the Confession of Faith : The Holy Spirit who of old revealed to men in various ways the mind and will of God, hath fully and authoritatively made known this mind and will in all things pertaining to life and 90 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. salvation in the sacred Scriptures, holy men of God speaking therein as they were moved by the Holy Ghost ; and these Scrip- tures, being so inspired, are the infallible word of God, the supreme standard of faith and duty. In conjunction with this specific conception of a positive Revela- tion made to particular men and written by the hand of inspiration, we may at this point note with advan- 7. Revelation Historic and tage ^e more generic conception of Written: Written Revelation Revelation as a ss historically progressive and final. . r . carried forward in the moral experience of humanity, and made manifest through a wide variety of agen- cies. Some interesting confirmations of this broader conception appear in the phraseology of the Symbols. While God on one hand has revealed his will specifically to certain chosen instru- ments, and has guided them in recording that will accurately for the benefit of mankind, so that we have as the result a veritable and sufficient Revelation, registered in adequate and accurate language, He is also described as conducting age by age a corresponding process of revealment in the mind and conscience of the race. He discloses himself to the world in a succession of acts as well as in words : He makes his presence, his authority, his truth, his grace immediately manifest in the revealing light of nature, and through the works of creation and providence. He also works out histor- ically in the souls of men spiritual results which are revelations no less real or significant in their degree than the written Scripture itself. In this generic as well as in the more specific sense, if pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself. This cosmic revealment commenced centuries before the inspired record began to be made. It was illustrated in the giving of the Messianic promises, in the divine dealing with the patri- archs, in the earlier experiences of the nascent church, in the development and growth of piety in the hearts of his people, long before the Holy Spirit had begun to record such processes by the pen of inspiration. Nor is it true that God has put on record the whole of this antecedent, historic procedure of grace. Only so much of it as was calculated to be of permanent service to the race, was thus transcribed by inspired hands. In other words, the written Revelation follows the historic revelation, and is its endur- ing transcript and representative, — the gracious Word faithfully preserving and declaring the gracious works of God. Afterwards, it is said, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the Church, the disclosures first made directly to men in sundry times and divers manners, were committed unto writing, — inspiration EVOLUTION OF SCRIPTURE. 91 taking up the story of grace, and repeating it in written form for the benefit of humanity in all .succeeding ages. And as this grand historic revelation was progressive, exhibit- ing itself at various periods and in various forms, so the written Revelation which describes it, is in its nature progressive, — carried on through a series of stages and methods, until it reaches its final culmination. There is a beautiful and an impressive evolu- tion of truth and of precept and obligation in the Bible — an or- derly unfolding of doctrine and duty, like the unrolling of some splendid scroll, — which is enough of itself to show that a Divine Mind has been present throughout the transcendent process. The being and will and grace of God come out, in this divine record, in ever increasing luminousness and beauty, just as they had already done in the experience and career of his chosen people. A proper appreciation of this fact is essential to any adequate understanding of the forms and varieties under which this Divine Word exists — to any true view of its divisions, methods, authors, teachings. The historical books, with their biographic concomitants, may be regarded as the main thread on which the whole is arranged : these carry with them the successive disclosures of .sin and of character, and the grow- ing series of symbols and promises preparatory to the Advent. In the person and work of the Immanuel all the past is gathered up, and from him the apostolic growths and advances in turn receive their explanation. Christ is the luminous center of the whole ; and every section, every statement of fact from Genesis to Reve- lation, is set in its proper position with reference to its bearings on Him and his supreme mission. More than any other book, the Bible thus reveals a vast, comprehensive, definite plan, both in its interior organization and in its historic evolution. How- ever diversified in its contents, however multiform in language or authorship, time or place, it is thus profoundly, indissolubly one Revelation. Nor is it permissible to say that anything in it, even its list of things that were not to be eaten, or its genealogical registrations, are of no significance to us, since each minutest feature or event is there recorded because it is divinely regarded as an essential element or factor in the composite structure. Each stage in the remarkable unfolding is joined on vitally both with all preceding and with all subsequent stages. The progress seen in every part is progress toward a definite consummation; and when this consummation is reached, the product is found to be divinely complete and perfect. This Revelation is therefore final as well as progressive : it is 92 THE HOLV SCRIPTURE. decisively affirmed that these former zvays of revealing the will of God are now ceased. The whole counsel of God is said to be expressly laid down in Scripture, or to be ascertained by proper application of principles set forth in Scripture. Hence we are told that nothing is at any time to be added to this Divine Word; no new discover- ies of truth, whether imparted by the Spirit, or obtained from any other source, are to be co-ordinated with the Bible. The work of the Spirit both in revelation and in inspiration is viewed as finished and complete. He graciously illuminates, teaches, edu- cates, edifies, but he no longer reveals — he no longer inspires. All assumption of prophetic functions or of apostolic authority is hereby condemned: false communications claiming divine war- rant are cast out : even the inner light of faith, contemplated as supplying to the believer any further or higher knowledge than that here contained, is set aside. The Word thus given is put forth as the only, the universal and perpetual, rule alike of faith and of obedience, — to which therefore it is the imperative duty of all men to give credence, instant and entire. — On the subject of fidelity to this finished and perfect Word, especially as in contrast with the commandments and traditions of men, or the dicta of churches, more will be said at a later stage. The finality of this one and only Revelation is all that needs to be asserted here. Passing from this study of the nature and scope of Revelation to the second general topic, the contents of Scripture, we may first observe the authoritative 8. Contents of Scripture : , . r , , , . « « . , v i «.v «L „ enumeration of the particular books particular books; The Canon. r which are said to be included in this one and only Revelation. The Westminster Confession, like some other Protestant symbols, simply accepts the Canon of Scripture as it stood at the time, with the exception of the Apocrypha whose secondary canonicity it decisively rejects. We have no evidence that the subject was formally considered in the Assembly ; and it may be inferred that no serious diversity of opinion existed. It is a suggestive fact that the Lutheran symbols contain no list of the canonical books, and pronounce no decision against the Apocrypha. This fact may be traceable in part to the prevalent impression that the apocryphal writings had, as the papacy affirmed, some measure of secondary authority ; and partly to the doubts of Erasmus and Luther, and probably others, with respect to the canonicity of certain portions of the received Scriptures. The absence of any such list, though such an emi- nent authority as Dorner regards it as an excellence, is certainly a CANON OF SCRIPTURE. 93 serious defect. Had L,utheranism from the first affirmed the proper canonicity of each and all of the books generally received by Protestantism as rightfully classed among the Holy Scriptures, much of the heretical tendency in biblical criticism current dur- ing this century in Germany would have at least received a salutary check. Two of the Reformed creeds, the French Con- fession of 1559 and the Belgic Confession, 1561, contain a list of the canonical books ; and the same list is found in the Thirty - Nine Articles, and in the Irish Articles. From the latter it was evidently transcribed, together with most of the contents of the chapter, Of the Holy Scripture, into the creed of Westminster. All of these symbols agree in accepting the Canon as it was pro- gressively made up by the early church, and at last authoritatively affirmed by the Council of Hippo, 393, and by the Council of Carthage, 397. These Councils, however, following the general usage of the early Church, and acting under the influence of Augustine, regarded the Apocrypha as having a secondary species of canonicity. The general question respecting the formation of the Canon, was not discussed in the Assembly, and can be considered but incidentially in this connection. Defining the term as descriptive, not of the sacred literature of the Jews in general, or of books- more or less employed in instruction or worship, but only of such writings as came from God through certified inspiration , and were collected together as the divinely prescribed rule of belief and duty, the Canon of the Old Testament must be viewed as a growth, following somewhat closely upon the precedent growth of revelation itself. We are justified by both the Old and the New Testament in believing that the several books of the Law were thus brought together at an early period, and regarded from the first as having peculiar divine warrant. The structure of the Pentateuch has recently been a matter of earnest discussion. The existence of antecedent documents from which Moses derived in part the material for his narrative, is now freely admitted as probable. The fact that some additions, both historical and prophetic, were made after his death, is also generally recognized. The opinion that the final compilation, especially of the three Codes, was made in part by others after his death, but within a comparatively brief period, has distinct evidences in its favor. But the theory which postpones some books of the Pentateuch to a period many centuries subsequent to Moses, — which regards the L,aw as a development running on traditionally down through the theocratic and the royal era, and at last finding written 94 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. expression during the era of the prophets, rests on inadequate grounds, and is questionable if not destructive in tendency. That Moses was essentially the author of this division of Scripture, as he was the chief human agent in the history there recorded, seems to be established alike by many internal evidences and by the general witness of Scripture. The historical books were also preserved and grouped together in like manner, as containing a divinely authenticated record of both the national and the religious life of the chosen people. Collections of psalms and proverbs, probably for purposes of worship primarily, were also made at an early day. The Book of Psalms, as we now have it, is unquestionably a final compilation of such antecedent collections, though the theory that its contents were written not by David or his contemporaries or immediate successors, but at a much later period in Jewish history, and chiefly after the Exile, must be re- garded as at least doubtful. Jewish tradition, which has a high degree of probability in its favor, assigns the final aggregation of this inspired material into one book to the age of Ezra, and specific- ally to the period of the rebuilding of the temple : B. C. 457. From and after this period, it is certain that the Old Testament existed substantially under its present form and arrangement, pre- senting in its unity the divine teaching respecting what man ought to believe, and what duty God requires, so far as the Jewish people were concerned. As such it was confirmed in its totality by fre- quent references, and in its separate divisions by numerous quota- tions and allusions made by our L,ord and by his apostles. As such, it was received by the early church universally ; was trans- lated into the Septuagint, was quoted by the Fathers, both Greek and Latin, as authoritative in each and all of its main divisions ; and by steadily increasing assent became the accepted revelation of truth and duty for those, whether Jew or Gentile, who wore the Christian name. A like principle of growth or aggregation is apparent in the formation of the New Testament Canon. For nearly two centu- ries the books comprised in it existed separately, or in collections which were but partial and provincial. During the third and fourth centuries the process of separating the inspired writings from all affiliated productions went on, — the earlier traditions in their favor being tested progressively by critical inquiry, until at length the judgment of the Church was fully formed, and an author- itative decision was reached. During this long process, books assuming to be sacred if not inspired were examined and rejected; others which were less generally known, or in regard to which THE APOCHRYPHAL BOOKS. 95 partial doubt existed at first, made their way into the sacred list; the conception of inspiration was more fully defined, and the theo- retical standard or test of inspiration raised; copies of the aggre- gated volume were multiplied, and less complete collections were set aside, until at length entire agreement was attained, and the New Testament took its place by the side of the Old, as constitut- ing together with it the one sole and perpetual Word of God. The problem of canonicity is in one sense a problem always open, — a problem which no section of the church in any given period can solve authoritatively for all other sections through all time. It is conceivable that evidences might manifest themselves which would compel the exclusion of some book now regarded as canonical; and on the other hand it is conceivable that some new writing may be discovered even at this late day, which the judg- ment of the church would place among the inspired and authori- tive Scriptures. Yet these possibilities are possibilities only. A very strong presumption certainly exists in favor of decisions reached fifteen centuries ago, and which have stood the tests and scrutiny of the church universal down to our own time. Questions have indeed been and still are raised by Christian scholarship as well as by deistic unbelief, respecting certain books in the New and also in the Old Testament, and all such questions have within just limits some claim to candid consideration. Yet the fact that since the fifth century no book then admitted to the sacred Canon has subsequently been rejected by any section of the church, Cath- olic or Protestant, seems well-nigh to settle the problem for all coming time. The decisive probability is that the Bible as we have it, will be the Bible of the Christian Church so long as the Church exists. Before proceeding to consider the principles which underlie this general process of construction, we should note the corresponding process of elimination, as illustrated in \, . . , . , ^ 9. Apocryphal Books ; the estimation and treatment of the apoc- Thdr position and cla,m . ryphal writings. So far as any such writ- Reasons for rejection. ings were at any time associated with the New Testament or appended to it, the question is comparatively unimportant. These writings are in no case older than the second, and many of them belong to the third or possibly the fourth cen- tury. Their authorship is either uncertain or unknown; their contents are largely trivial and fictitious, and their spirit and tone fall entirely below those of the Gospels and the apostolic Letters. To this should be added the fact that they have never had cur- rency or credence as inspired in any division of the church, 96 THK HOLY SCRIPTURE. Protestant or Catholic. The apocryphal writings belonging to the Old Testament period, though possessing largely the same charac- teristics, have occasioned more frequent discussion, and given rise to wider ecclesiastical diversities. Though they never had place in the Hebrew Canon, as was generally admitted, yet they seem to have passed gradually during the first three Christian centuries into the list of sacred if not inspired writings; and as such were appointed to be read, if not for the purpose of proving from them any divine doctrine, still for instruction and edification. In the first catalogue of authoritative Scriptures, drawn up by any representa- tive body in the Church, the Council of Laodicea, some of these books were directly named as canonical; and in the writings of Augustine and other Fathers they were recognized as in some tribu- tary sense parts of Holy Scripture. The distinction just suggested, though urged by Origen and Jerome, hardly represented the gen- eral conviction. These writings were not only judged to be useful as illustrative of inspired Scripture; they were also regarded widely as having a species of secondary canonicity, and were sometimes accepted even as integral portions of the true Revelation. Wri- ters of the Middle Ages generally so describe and treat them; and down to the period of the Reformation, they were both used in worship and quoted doctrinally — especially in support of certain papal errors, such as the dogma of Purgatory. The Council of Trent, following Augustine and the early Church, pronounced the apocryphal books in all their parts, as they have been accustomed to be read in the Catholic church, and are found in the ancient editions of the Latin Vulgate, sacred and canonical; and anathematized all who should refuse so to receive them. The Council also confirmed its decree by declaring further that the Vulgate, which by the lengthened use of so many ages, as they said, has been approved of by the church, should be regarded and used as the only authoritative translation of the Scriptures. Some Catholic writers have justified the distinction between primary and secondary canonicity, and have regarded the apocryphal books as canonical in the secondary sense only — useful rather than authoritative. But the decision of Trent makes these writings fully authoritative, — although since the exaltation of tradition to a place of co-ordinate authority with Scripture, and especially since the enunciation of the dogma of papal infallibility, the doctrinal necessity for such a decision hardly seems urgent. The Protestant churches were led by doctrinal as well as histori- cal and exegetical considerations to array themselves against the Roman position. It is urged by Moehler as a criticism (Symbolism) REASONS FOR EXCLUSION. 97 that in their decision of the question, regard was had to other considerations than those of a merely historical and critical kind. He probably refers to those doctrinal predilections and those personal impulses by which Luther was led to reject the Epistle of James, and to question the comparative worth of other portions of the canonical Scriptures which did not harmonize, as he supposed, with the Pauline conception of justification. But Calvin was equally emphatic with Luther in setting the Apocry- pha aside as unauthoritative, basing his judgment on the specific ground of the absence in them of the proper signs of inspiration. The Belgic Confession in the same interest declared that the can- onical books are to be received, not so much because the church receives and approves them as such, but more especially because the Holy Ghost witnesseth in our hearts that they are from God, whereof they carry the evidence in themselves. But with refer- ence to the apocryphal writings the same Confession expresses the general sentiment of continental Protestantism in the words : All which the church ma>^ read and take instruction from, so far as they agree with the canonical books; but they are far from hav- ing such power and efficacy as that we may from their testimony confirm any point of faith or of the Christian religion — much less to detract from the authority of the older sacred books. In the Thirty-Nine Articles the same view (VI) is presented : The other books, as Hierome saith, the Church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners, but yet doth it not apply to them to establish any doctrine. This is also the teaching of the Irish Ar- ticles, with the added declaration (3) that these writings did not proceed from inspiration. In the Westminster Confession we have a still more decisive rejection; it being affirmed not only that these books are not of inspiration, and are no part of the canon of the Scripture, but also that they are of no atithority in the Church of God, and are not to be any ot/ierwise approved or made use of than any other human writings. Here the Reformed view comes into most marked and complete contrast with the decree of Trent; canonicity, even in the most secondary sense, is expressly denied; the use of the Apocrypha, even for example of life and instruction in manners, is practically disapproved. The grounds of this strong judgment are not given, but the judgment itself stands out in marked opposition to the general opinion of the ancient Church and to the teaching of Rome. Its foundation and reason lie doubtless in the words of the Confession: not being of divine inspiration. The evidences of the absence of such inspiration here are antithetic to the evidences of the 98 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. presence of inspiration in the canonical Scriptures. That these writings make no claim to inspiration, — that we have no evidence of their having been regarded or received as inspired by the apos- tolic Church, — that the inspired books do not invest them with such endorsement as they clearly give to each other, — that they had no place in the Old Testament canon, and were never prized as inspired by the Hebrews, — and in addition, that they teach no important doctrine, and impart no special stimulus to faith, while on the other hand they contain much that is contrary to both the teaching and spirit of the received canonical books; — these in general were doubtless the grounds on which these writings were not only set aside, but practically condemned by the Assembly. The general principles by which the problem of canonicity is determined, are easily discerned. The Roman church, in harmony with its theory of the permanent in- 10, Tests of Canonicity: , „. , . , . c ., 0 • .. _ , .. ._ . ..„ ' dwelling and mworkmg ot the Spirit False and true tests indicated: & ° ^ value of the external tests. within that church, may consistently maintain that its decision in the case is final: whatever the church affirms to be canonical, is so even if the Apocrypha be included in the affirmation. But Protestantism tests the church by the Scriptures, rather than the Scriptures by the verdict of the church; and therefore, in theory at least, main- tains the opposite view, that the true test of any book found among the Sacred Writings is nothing less than the presence of inspired and authoritative revelation. In the statement and ap- plication of this principle, however, wide variet)' of practice has existed and still exists among the Protestant churches. It is the peculiar glory of the Westminster Symbols that they apply the principle so clearly and so rigidly, and while rejecting the apoc- ryphal writings, do so earnestly approve and receive the books of our Canon on the ground of their demonstrated inspiration only. They aver that the authority of these inspired books dcpendeth not upon the testimony of any man or churchy but wholly upon God: and that the Bible, as made up, is to be received because it is the Word of God. This position stands in irreconcilable contrast with the Roman view, even if we state that view in its mildest form as maintaining, not indeed the right of the church to make any book canonical which had never before been so regarded, but sim- ply its right to express a conclusive judgment on the claim of any book already within the Canon from ancient times. It may justly be questioned, however, whether the Symbols do not follow the Belgic and other continental Confessions in making the test of canonicity too extensively, if not exclusively, TESTS OF CANONICITY. 99 an internal test. While they teach that we may be moved and induced by the testimony of the church to an high and reverent esteem , they lay the main stress on the inward witness, derived from what the Scriptures are found to be interiorly, and from the effects which they produce in the believing soul. The French Conf . for example, strongly illustrates this tendency in the declaration (IV ) that we know these books to be canonical, not so much by the common accord and consent of the church, as by the testimony and inward illumination of the Holy Spirit, which enables us to dis- tinguish them from other ecclesiastical books, — upon which, however useful, we cannot found any articles of faith; see Scotch Conf. , XIX. Nothing can be more exquisite than the reference in the Symbols (I : v) to the heavenliness of the matter, the efficacy of the doctrine, the majesty of the style, the consent of all the parts, the scope of the whole, (which is to give all glory to God) the full discovery of the only way of man's salvation, the many other incomparable excellencies, and the entire perfection thereof. Yet it may justly be doubted whether all these, though they be so many precious disclosures and confirmations to the soul that already believes in the Bible, are arguments whereby it doth abund- antly evidence itself to the unbelieving world to be the Word of God. Even the inward work of the Spirit, bearing witness by and •with the Word in our hearts, is not to be taken as decisive of the point of canonicity : that inward work itself needs external, historical, rational foundation such as a duly authenticated Reve- lation alone can give it. The question is clearly to be decided primarily on external, even more than on internal grounds and evidences. The neces- sity for such external testimony is obvious. Though the O. T. Canon was made up by Ezra, as reliable tradition affirms, we have no adequate warrant for asserting that Ezra was inspired or infallibly guided in his holy task, on the internal ground that the books of the Old Test, commend themselves to our religious taste or feeling. We are also bound to search diligently for all out- ward indications in Jewish history and elsewhere, which may serve to justify or strengthen our inward confidence in their canonicity. Though the early Church has by progressive inquiry and by solemn acts of councils declared its judgment respecting the N. T. Canon, that conclusion is binding only so far as the reasons on which it is based, are in themselves clear and conclu- sive to us. Though the church of Rome proclaims its final decree, assuming to act as the divinely appointed arbiter in the case, and pronouncing its anathema on all who refuse to accept its decision, 100 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. the question is still open to the adjudication of Christian scholar- ship, and a different answer may be given at any time, if adequate external or historical warrant should be found. As Protestants following in the path of Luther and Calvin, and especially as Presbyterians, accepting the principles of our own Confession and the example of the divines of Westminster, we assuredly can take no other position than this. The fact that the Symbols have declared what books are canonical and what are apocryphal, does not prohibit any one from inquiring into the subject for himself, or from holding a different opinion, if on grounds which seem to him adequate and convincing, he is led to such result. The right of investigation, as has been already intimated, is one which the testimony of the church, however earnest and impressive, can never take away. The external evidences of the true inspiration of the received Scripture, and of the proper canonicity of its several parts, can- not be presented in detail in this Lecture. They are found partly in miracles, viewed as proofs of a supernatural presence, working within the sphere of nature to secure certain moral or gracious results, and verified as historical facts on purely historical grounds. They are found partly in prophecies, regarded as pre- dictions of events hereafter to occur in the field of providence, and afterward confirmed by facts authentically established. They are also found in the career and position of the Bible in the world, and in the marvelous influence of the Book as we now possess it, on the life and character of mankind wherever it has been produced. Volumes upon volumes have been written by the ablest Christian apologists in the elucidation of these external evidences, and in the exposition of their weight and conclusive- ness whenever candidly apprehended. The point to be specially noted here is that these proofs present themselves in forms which skeptical minds can comprehend: they base the claim of the Bible to acceptance on grounds which skepticism can neither set aside nor controvert. They furnish in their combination a broad ex- ternal argument for the Word of God, — an argument by which the judgment and conviction of humanity are first reached, and first won over to its acceptation. And on the firm basis which they supply, the inward witness of Scripture comes in as an addi- tional confirmation, certifying afresh to the believing soul that the Bible as we have it in the canonical books is verily the word not of man, but of God. In the Revision proposed for our own Church the words, the truthfulness of the history, the faithful witness of prophecy and PRESERVATION OF THE SCRIPTURES. 101 miracle, were added to the section on the evidences of Scripture as prefatory to the internal proofs there named, for the purpose of bringing out more distinctly this external argument for both the canonicity and the authoritativeness of the Divine Word. It is a fact worthy of note that the Westminster Assembly at one stage in the discussions on this subject adopted the fullfilling of the prophecies as one of the practical evidences in the case. It is also notable that Gillespie, to whom the construction of the Article seems to have been largely due, proposed also the phrases, the irresistible power over the conscience, the supernatural mysteries revealed therein, — referring doubtless to the moral effect of the Bible in human life, and to the confirmatory testimony of miracles in its support. The external proofs thus suggested have assumed vastly greater importance since prophecy and miracle, especially the latter, have become the subjects of so much thoughtful and valuable discussion, and since the argument from history and from the moral influence of Scripture has come to be valued at its proper worth. In view of such developments it is no longer desirable or wise to rest the claim of the Bible on internal evi- dence only. These more external attestations, whose appeal to the reason and the conscience is so potent, have become indis- pensable elements in the vast argument by which the world is to be persuaded into allegiance to spiritual Christianit)'. It is there- fore a matter of regret that the proposed addition failed to gain its proper place in the Confession through the endorsement of a living church, which beyond a doubt accepts the truth which that addition was designed to express. The statements of the Confession respecting the original form of these canonical writings, their providential preservation, and the right and duty of translation into the various languages of men, should "■ Preservation, genu- , . , .,_,-. , , ineness, translation, and dif- be considered here. Referring to the fUSion Old Testament as written in the Hebrew, which was the native language of the people of God of old , and to the New Testament as written in the Greek, which at the time of writing was the tongue most generally known to the nations, it points to the singular care and providence of God by which these sacred books have been kept pure in all ages; preserved to be the light and guide not merely of those familiar with these languages but of all nations. If God doth uphold, direct, dispose, and govern all creatures, actions and things, from the greatest even to the least — as the Confession teaches elsewhere — it may cer- tainly be held that such wise and holy providence would reveal 102 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. itself in an especial manner, not indeed miraculously or super - naturally, yet specifically and immediately, in the preservation of such a book as the Bible. And the history of that Book, of the vicissitudes through which it passed in its original form, of the perils to which it has been exposed from various quarters, of the means and agencies employed in its continuous preservation, and of the verifications historically furnished even to its minutest details, might without irreverence be called miraculous. That history is certainly a remarkable confirmation of its inherent claim to be the Word of God. Through comparison of many early manuscripts, through incidental references in early writings, Christian and pagan, through early translations extending back even to the first centuries, and in many other ways, we are enabled to verify the singular care and providence here asserted, and to recognize in the present Scriptures the genuine and verit- able Word of God as given first to the Hebraic, then to the Christian Church. It should be said here that the terms, genuine and authentic, as applied to any portion of Scripture, refer simply to its historic quality, — to the fact that it can be traced back satisfactorily, as to text and substance, to the sources from which it professes to have originated. The term, canonical, refers rather, as we have seen, to church opinions and decisions respecting the right of any such book, when proved to be genuine and authentic, to be placed in the group of inspired writings. A genuine and authentic book is one which was in fact written by the person who professes to write it, and is handed down to us exactly or substantially as he wrote it. A canonical book is one whose claims to a place in the grouped Scriptures are justified by adequate testimony, and confirmed by the judgment of the Christian Church on the basis of its established authenticity. Our Symbols affirm the verified genuineness of the several parts of the Bible, on the ground of the singular providence and care of God, as concerned with their historic preservation and integrity. They assert in general that each of the books named is to be viewed as authentic, — leaving to the investigation of textual critics all specific questions involving particular passages or individual terms or phrases in the authenti- cated Word. Mitchell (Introduction) justly observes that, so far from desir- ing to go beyond their predecessors in rigor, the Westminster divines were at more special pains than the authors of any other Confession ... to avoid mixing up the question of the can on - icity of particular books with the question of their authorship, TRANSLATION — DIFFUSION. 103 where any doubt at all existed on the latter point. Yet there are many indications that they regarded the question of authorship, and especially of apostolic authorship, as one of very grave, if not vital importance. Especially in their long debates on the nature of the church, the authority of church officials, and the right and duty of church discipline, we hear them again and again appealing to apostolic authority as derived from the sacred writings. One of the cardinal elements in their firm belief that the New Testa- ment books named in the Confession were truly canonical and inspired, and therefore in the highest sense authoritative, was the accepted fact that they were written by Matthew and John, Paul and Peter, and by other inspired persons under apostolic direction. In other words, they accepted these books as inspired and authori- tative largely on the ground of their established apostolicity. Had they been confronted with that current type of naturalizing criticism which questions or denies this apostolic quality, and affirms that the Apostles wrote or indited but little, if any, of these Scriptures, — that the real authors were various unknown men, writing we know not when or where or from what motive, and finally passing off their productions upon the church by prefacing them with apostolic names, — they would have pronounced such an hypothesis not only unwarranted and fanciful, but in essence heretical and destructive to the common faith. It is a fact of great significance that not only the Symbols, but also most of the Protestant creeds, following the example of Paul, speak with emphasis of the foundation of the apostles and prophets — of the basis of faith and acceptance laid in the fact that the sacred writ- ings came directly from the prophets and apostles whose names they bear. To reject such eminent authorship is a long step toward the rejection of the writings themselves. The duty of translating the Scriptures, thus providentially pre- served, into the various languages and dialects of the world is also enjoined in the Symbols. Protestantism universally arrayed itself against the decree of the papacy in imposing the Vulgate upon all as the only proper language or form in which the Divine Word is to be studied, and in repressing if not forbidding all translations into the common tongues of Europe. It was one of the primary desires of Euther, and of the Reformers universally, that this Divine Book should be in the hands of the people, and that it should be read by the people in their native tongues. So long as this Word wTas concealed within the folds of an unknown lan- guage, so long — as they believed — would the force of its teaching be lost, and so long would a corrupt church continue to tyrannize 104 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. over the conscience and the life. Granted full possession of the Word by each believer, and the unrestricted exercise of the right and privilege of private study and interpretation, they were assured that Protestantism could maintain itself triumphantly against the stupendous assumptions of Rome. It is the glory of Protestantism, and especially of the Protestant- ism of this century, that in the free spirit of the Reformation it has thus given the Bible to the world; securing its translation into almost every conspicuous tongue, and even into provincial dialects; creating in many instances written languages for this purpose where none existed before; and diffusing the Divine Word in these multiplied forms in every continent, among all nations, and even in the remotest islands of earth. Nor is this simply a necessity to Protestantism viewed as an organization: it is a necessity which lies in the nature of spiritual as distinguished from a formal and hierarchal type of Christianity. For, true as it is that Protestant doctrine, polity, worship, can be maintained only as they are sup- ported by the living Word in the hands of all, it is still more true that Christianity in its broadest, highest form bases itself immedi- ately and always on an open Bible. The Word of God dwelling plentifully in all, — to use the strong phrase of the Confession — is the source of its best life and of its spiritual power. One interesting illustration of the loyalty of the Assembly to the Scriptures, and of their zeal in the circulation of the inspired Word in its purity, appears in the record of their memorial to Parliament to seize and destroy two defective or corrupt editions of the Bible published on the Continent, and their discussion of the matter of furnishing Britain with true Bibles upon as easy rates as can be afforded. See also their action (Minutes, 193) petitioning the Houses of Parlia- ment to provide means for the printing of the Septuagint, the famous Alexandrian Codex, presented to Charles I. by the Patri- arch of Constantinople. Passing on from these questions respecting the genuineness and canonicity of the Scriptures, we may turn to note more specifically the position of the Symbols as to the ,l2;himthn°^taffneSSpnd credibility and authoritativeness of the credibility of Scripture : Ev_ ._.,, idences internal and exter- Blble'. vlewed as an inspired and au- aal: mandatory power. thenticated Book. Granted the suffi- cient integrity of the text, and the adequate solution of the problem of source and authorship, — granted also the full significance of the judgment of the Church on all points of canonicity, on what grounds shall it be asserted that the Bible thus determined ought to be believed, and on what BASIS OF CREDIBILITY. 105 basis shall its claim to complete authoritativeness on all points, whether of faith or of duty be placed? The subject has been already introduced in connection with the problem of canonieity : it deserves a more specific consideration at this point. It is to be admitted that, as already intimated, the Symbols present no specific array of external evidence by which such credibility and authoritativeness may be proved. They indeed make some provision for miracles in the broad statement (V: iii) that while God ordinarily in his providence makes use of means, and works through fixed laws, yet he is, free to work without, above and against them at his pleasure. So they recognize the reality and worth of prophecy (X. C. 44), especially as represented in the person and the predictions of our Lord, — regarding the latter as illustrations of his omniscient perception of things to come. They also suggest both the historical argument and the moral argument for the Bible in what they say concerning its providential preservation and its peculiar influence as a prime factor in the economy of grace and inhuman life. Yet, as we have seen, they introduce neither miracle nor prophecy nor any other variety of external evidence in adequate form to prove directly that the Bible is, not merely an authenticated book, but also an authoritative revelation from God. But it is noticeable as an illustration both of their type of religious experience, and of their ordinary modes of viewing the truth that, as we have already noted, they press into special prominence what has been termed the internal ground of such authoritativeness. Additional evidence on this point may be quoted here. The Larger Catechism condenses their judgment in the words : The Scriptures manifest themselves to be the Word of God by their majesty and purity , by the consent of all the parts and the scope of the whole, and by their light and power to convince and con- vert sinners, and to co?nfort and build up believers unto salvation. The same truth is still further presented and emphasized by the declar- ation, that the action of the Holy Spirit by and with the Scrip- tures in the soul of man, is indispensable fully to persuade him that they are the very Word of God. To this inward assurance even the judgment of the Church is subordinated, however we may be moved by that judgment to an high and reverent esteem. This statement rests the whole argument in the case on the expe- rience and conviction of those who have already believed : it would be ineffectual if urged as a primary proof of authoritative- ness upon one who should approach the question from the point of doubt or unbelief. The general fact is that none of the Protestant Confessions attempted any description of that strong external 106 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. evidence on which primarily the whole question of authoritative- ness now rests: they simply appealed even from the judgment of the Church and the historic Councils to this interior proof, and were content with the responsive approval of the soul that for itself has tasted and seen that the Word is precious. Yet however defective in their statement of the basis on which such authoritativeness rests, the Symbols are conclusive and most emphatic as to the fact. One who studies the debates of the Assembly, so far as they have been preserved, or who examines the doctrinal products of such discussion, cannot doubt as to the place which the Word of God occupied in their estimation. The amount of time spent in their examination of texts of Scripture, with reference especially to their value as supports of certain doctrines, and the skill shown in the use of such texts in the phras- eology of the Symbols, are convincing evidences of their unswerv- ing loyalty to the Bible. Their biblical proofs, appended to each chapter and section of the Confession and to the Catechisms, though occasionally faulty in the light of more modern exegesis, clearly indicate their supreme desire to confirm and verify everything by the authentic and authoritative Word. In fact it is the presence of this remarkable scripturalness, and of this unflinching adherence to whatever the Word of God declares, however profound in its mystery or perplexing to faith, to which — even more than to the constant fealty of their doctrinal system to logical rule and phil- osophic principles — the enduring hold and sway of that system are to be traced. Whatever the grounds of their judgment, they in fact held it as a fundamental axiom that the Scriptures teach, and that clearly and decisively as well as principally, what man is to believe concerning God and what duty God requires of man. In respect to the kind and measure of the authority thus vested in the Bible, we find the Symbols most distinct and earnest in their affirmations. The authority of the Scripture, for which it ought to be believed and obej^ed, dependeth . . . wholly upon God, the Author thereof: it is to be received because it is the Word of God. The authoritativeness in the case is divine, and is there- fore forever supreme and final. Without taking up just here the contrast suggested between this and certain other asserted sources of authority in matters of religion, we may in brief note, First: the absolute and unchallengeable claim of the Bible, as based upon this fact of a divine authorship. So long as there are doubts respecting this cardinal fact, — so long as the human agency in revelation is lifted into prominence to the relative retirement of this divine agency in its production, so long there ITS AUTHORITATIVENESS. 107 will be room for hesitancy or for unbelief in respect to the biblical teaching and requirements. But the moment it is shown by proof sufficient to carry conviction to the intelligent and unpreju- diced mind, that the Bible has come to us not from man but from God, and is invested with his personal endorsement as its author, there is no further room for hesitation — no possible ground for unbelief. Man in such a case has no other recourse than to hear reverently what God has spoken, to believe implicitly what is spoken on his authority, and promptly and joyously to obey. What is said of the Moral Law in the Larger Catechism (95) is true of the entire Word : It is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and will of God, and of their duty, binding them to zvalk accordingly . Secondly: The absolute and unquestionable nature of the corresponding duty of faith and obedience. Were such duty dependent on any opinions or decisions of man, or on the deter- minations of reason or of human authority in whatever form, the sense of personal obligation would of course be correspondingly weakened or invalidated. But in this case the obligation to believe and obey is imperative and absolute: no question or objec- tion can be raised against it, and no hesitation respecting it can for an instant be justified. All men are alike held under this just and solemn responsibility. The claim of the Bible to uni- versal credence and submission is of the same nature as the claim of God himself; and no human being can for a single moment stand in any position where he is justified in evading or ignoring that sovereign claim. Thirdly: The authoritativeness of Scripture gathers vastly increased significance if we bear in mind its comprehensive char- acter, both as a compendium of belief and as a law of life. For no truth concerning God or ourselves, concerning our moral relations or destinies, concerning salvation in any legitimate aspect of the term, is omitted from the Bible: it comprehends and embraces in the fullest sense and measure all that man is to believe in order to salvation. And in all this comprehensiveness, it comes to every soul demanding credence, not of here and there a portion, but of the whole, and of every essential, integral division of the whole, — credence not as if its statements were probable merely, or credence mixed with conscious discount or reservation, but credence absolute and unconditional, both for the present and for all the future. In like manner, its particular precepts and injunctions are seen to include every relation of life, to apply to each soul in all its varied conditions, to reach into the spirit 108 THE HOLV SCRIPTURE. and the intents of the heart, and thus to rule over man absolutely, comprehensively, interiorly, eternally, — showing us all that God requires of man in order that he may be saved. And in the same way it demands, and will receive nothing less than the most entire, unhesitating, cordial submission, not to some portion but to the whole of its comprehensive law of life. The complete authority of God stands behind each particular requirement in the sacred series: the full potency of his supreme personality pours itself into the very least of these commandments. He is himself, in his totality, revealed in every article of belief, and in each mandatory precept, each gracious promise, each judicial warning. Hence the force and worth of the remarkably strong declaration of the Symbols on this vital point, — a declaration which more fully than any found in any other creed of Protes- tantism, exalts Holy Scripture in both aspects as the rule of faith and the rule of obedience universal, perpetual and perfect.* This supreme authoritativeness becomes more apparent, as we further note the strong contrast here introduced between the Bible 13. Contrast with patristic and all other varieties of authority in traditions, with church Coun- the sphere of religion. The force of this cils : Protestantism against contrast comes into view only in the Romanism: adequacy of the light of the antecedent history and posi- BlWe* tion of Protestantism in the aggregate. That position may be indicated by its historic antithesis in the notable decree of Trent, viewed as an authoritative statement of the doctrine of the church of Rome. That Council not only, as we have seen, regarded the Apocrypha as canonical, and set up the Vulgate as the only authorized translation of Scripture: it also added to the Scripture itself the traditions of the Christian fathers, the decisions of the ancient councils, the judgment and consent of the organized household of faith, in whatever form expressed. It indeed explained that the ultimate basis of all patristic or churchly tradition is to be found, obscurely if not *In affirming thus the sufficiency and completeness of the Bible above all other books as a law of life and a sure guide to salvation, we shall do well to remember the wise caution of Howe, (Sermons on Family Worship) that in declaring the Scripture to be such a rule, we do not mean as severed and cut off from the law of nature, or in opposition to that, or excluding that; but as including it, and as excluding only the unnecessary and arbitrary inventions of men, and the additions that they see fit to subnect to it. Take the Scripture, adds that eminent divine, in conjunction with the frame of most unquestionably natural dictates and sentiments, and then we have an entire discovery of all that is requisite to our acceptable walking with God. ROMAN AND PROTESTANT VIEW. 109 distinctly, in the written Scriptures, yet claimed for such tradi- tion when framed an authoritativeness hardly less potential than that of the inspired Word itself. And though the final step in this direction had not then been taken in the adoption of the dictum of papal infallibility, the Assembly of Westminster was practicallv confronted by the same error which has in our time been expressed in the words: The Roman Pontiff . . . when in dis- charge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines the doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal church, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the Redeemer willed that his church should be endowed for defining doctrine regarding faith or morals; and therefore such definitions are irreformable of themselves, and not from consent of the church: Vatican Council 1870: Dogmatic Constitution, Ch. IV. Against such assumption as this whether in the earlier or in the later form, it became Protestantism to make most earnest oppo- sition. That assumption involves a number of errors, which would have been fatal alike to free inquiry in matters of religion , and to the free development of spiritual experience, around the cardinal doctrine of justification by faith. It was an error to suppose that the church was so fully inhabited by the Holy Ghost, as to be in every case guided infallibly in its perceptions or statements of divine truth. It was an equal error to suppose that its opinions once formed, its teachings once expressed, were incapable of alteration or improvement, and must therefore stand for all time as the final and irreversible rule of human belief. But it was an error still more palpable and gross, to suppose that the judgments of the early fathers on points of faith — judgments often mutually contradictory, narrow, sensuous, and at variance with later conclusions drawn by Christian scholarship from the Holy Oracles — were to be added to and accepted as co-ordinate with the teachings of Scripture; or that the decrees of councils, characterized largely by the same defects, and equally unable to bear the tests of thorough inquiry, were invested with like authority. Over against these errors, pernicious in theory but far more pernicious in their inferences and practical effects, Prot- estantism from the beginning maintained that the Word of God alone is the infallible rule of belief and life, — that while tradition might shed light on the teaching of that Word, it could never become a substitute for or an addition to the Word, — that the H0I37 Spirit is not promised to the church as an independent 110 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. inspirer but rather as a guide in the comprehension of the written Scripture, and in that work does not guarantee the disciple or the church from defective or from erroneous views of the truth, — and consequently that the declarations of councils, Roman of Protestant, even when ecumenical, are not to be taken as authori- tative in any primal or final sense of that term. To this general view, the Symbols give full and elaborate ex- pression. They maintain at the outset that the infallible rule of belief and life is the Scripture itself, — that the whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary is expressly set down in Scrip- ture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from it; and hence that nothing is at any time to be added thereto, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or by the traditions of men. In the remarkable chapter on Synods and Councils (XXXI) the true relation of the church to the Bible is concisely and forcibly des- cribed, and the assumptions of the papacy are guarded against in language to which the experience of succeeding generations has only given added emphasis. It may be, as has been charged, that practically the Assembly in some cases assumed for itself some measure of the authoritativeness which it denied to Rome; and it has certainly been the case that Presbyterians have sometimes asserted for their formularies a degree of significance approaching if not reaching actual infallibilty. Yet it is to be regarded as one of the peculiar values of the Symbols themselves, that they ex- pressly disavow such assumption, and while defining elaborately the degree and kind of mandatory power which the Christian church may justly wield in the sphere of doctrine, guard with more careful precision than any other Protestant creed the rights of the individual as against the church, and the rights of the inspired Word as above both church and disciple. The perfect adequacy of the Bible as the Word of God is of course implied in what has been already said. A Revelation hav- ing such qualities must be sufficient to meet every intellectual or spiritual necessity of man. Hence the Symbols affirm the entire perfection of the Scriptures viewed as a revelation; asserting that the whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, or for the faith and life and salvation of men, are therein contained. To this Word there is therefore nothing to be added even in the form described as new revelations of the Spirit : the Bible as it stands is complete in itself, and is adequate to the needs of humanity universally for all time. The Symbols are thus at variance with all those notions of spiritual communication and enlightenment over and above the Holy Scripture, which SCRIPTURE SUFFICIENT AND FINAL. Ill have so often possessed the minds of men. Mysticism, resting on the assumption that the way to knowledge is through hoi}' feeling, has claimed that the soul may thus attain to the posses- sion of spiritual and even saving truth beyond what the Bible affords. Inward illumination is supposed to include a wider do- main than Revelation brightens. But all notions of a saving and spiritual light which comes into the soul in addition to the light afforded by the Divine Word, and which becomes not only a guide to what is written, but also a source of information above what is written, are here decisively excluded. While the Symbols em- phasize the illuminating as well as regenerating work of the Spirit, they nowhere place the Spirit before us as a complementary or additional revealer of saving truth. Our knowledge of divine things, they tell us, has no other boundary than the Bible : be- yond what the Word teaches, no light to guide us as to what should be believed, is to be expected even from the Holy Ghost. Still less can reliable instruction be derived from any other con- ceivable form of supernatural communication. Among the sins specified in the Catechism (L,. C. 105) are all compacts and con- sulting with the devil, or harkening to his suggestions; all devis- ing, counseling, commanding, using or anywise approving any religious worship not instituted by God himself; all prying into or misapplying of the divine decrees or providences ; all worship of saints, angels or other creatures; and in general all acts which imply discontent with the Word, or a desire to know more than the Word has revealed. Modern spiritualism in all its varieties and pretensions is thus tacitly condemned as a departure from that supreme loyalty to the Bible, which must follow upon the recogni- tion of its entire adequacy as a supernatural revelation. The assumption of prophetic foresight or insight is included in this condemnation: These former ways of revealing his will being noiv ceased. The sundry times are ended; the divers manners have reached their culmination in Him who executeth the office of a Prophet in the supreme sense, in revealing to the Church in all ages . . . the whole will of God in all things concerning their edification and salvation. The Bible nowhere recognizes the permanent or even the occasional existence of the prophetic endowment in the Church : it represents the miraculous function of believers as ceasing with the apostolic age : it describes the charismatic gifts as temporary rather than continuous : and thus by implication it clearly forbids all adding unto the words of the prophecy of this Book. In like manner do these propositions stand opposed to the 112 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. current notion of a great natural religion, so comprehensive as to include all historic varieties of faith, so absolute as to meet every possible demand of humanity in the future : — a religion of which historical Christianity is indeed to form a part, and among whose sacred books there is to be a place for the Bible, but which is to be wider and higher than Christianity, or than any other single form of belief, and is therefore to become the universal faith of the world. Aside from all the objections to such a scheme, growing out of its ignoring the divine existence and presence and ad- ministration among men, or of its idealization of humanity and exaltation of reason, as if man were his own inspirer and the truth were all to be evolved from within; — aside from these, and other overwhelming objections to such a scheme, it cannot for a moment be supposed that the Bible would consent to take any such sub- ordinate position, or that historical Christianity, with its vast array of miracle and prophecy and experimental confirmation, and with its demonstrated adaptations to man in every age and clime and in every spiritual estate, would confess itself a local or provin- cial or temporary faith, destined to exist for a brief period and within narrow limits only, but finally to be dissolved at last in this absolute and ultimate religion. The Bible itself claims to be the absolute and ultimate book for humanity ; and the faith which has sprung in such majestic proportions from that Book, claims to be the absolute and ultimate faith, in which humanity through all its earthly future must rest, and by which alone that humanity can be rescued, redeemed, and united forever with God. One further general inquiry remains, — an inquiry respecting the right and duty of private interpretation of the Scriptures. Res- pecting the right of each believer to 14. Right and Duty of * . BA . , *;. __r , , „ , , private interpretation of read and study the Word of God for Scripture. himself, the Symbols maintain the po- sition assumed by Protestantism from the beginning. It is implied in what has already been noted as to the propriety of translating the Scriptures into the vulgar lan- guage of every nation unto which they come, that the Word of God may dwell plentifully in all. It is also asserted that not only the learned but also the unlearned may in a due use of the ordinary means attain unto a sufficient tinder standing of the truth. In the larger Catechism (156) this right or privilege is made the basis of a solemn obligation: it is affirmed that all sorts of people are bound to read the Scriptures apart by themselves, and with their families; Directory for Worship, Chapter XVI. This right and PRIVATE INTERPRETATION. 1 I 3 this duty are in various other ways presented as universal, — in- eluding not merely those who already believe, but also all persons to whom the inspired message of salvation may come. The Moral L,aw, it is said, is of use to all men, to inform them of the holy nature and will of God, and of their duty, binding them to walk accordingly. Such was in fact the teaching of Protestantism of every type. The appeal of the Augsburg Confession, and of most of the earlier Protestant symbols was from the decrees and tradi- tions of an usurping church directly to the Divine Word, and to this as made available for the edification not of the priesthood only, but of every disciple. It was to this Word as the final test, rather than to the tests and impositions of such a church, that they sought to bring unconverted men as well as believers. By this standard and this alone were all human professions, acts, lives, destinies, to be measured and determined. The grounds of this judgment are easily discerned. It is in the Divine Word alone, that the truths which make wise unto salva- tion, the vital doctrines of grace, are set forth and made authorita- tive and imperative : it is here alone that the proper conception of salvation, in its varied aspects, and especially in the aspect of justification then so prominent and momentous, can be obtained : it is here that the sinner, burdened with a guilt which no other proposed instrumentality can remove, is able to find assurance and peace. This Word both describes the disease of man more faith- fully than all other books, and sets forth more distinctly the divine, the gracious, the universal cure. So far as duty goes, in either its general forms or its practical details, the Scripture alone is a safe ethical and spiritual guide; and only those who walk in the paths it has pointed out, can be assured that they are conforming themselves to the Divine Will. The hopes of man as well as his duties are here distinctly set forth and justified: in this book the foundations of such hope are uncovered, and the oaths and prom- ises of God in confirmation of his grace are recorded; and here, here only, life and immortality are brought to light. And as all these are matters in which each soul must be concerned for itself pri- marily, they demand from each the strictest personal fidelity, not merely to the right to read, but to the supreme duty of reading and studying this divine message for itself. Right and duty, obligation and privilege, here flow together in parallel lines. That such is the teaching of the Scripture itself is obvious. While some portions of the Word are addressed to those occupying official positions, or to particular individuals or classes, its messa- ges in general are sent under both the Jewish and the Christian 114 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. dispensation to the people, without distinction of class or office. Under the training of Mosaism the people were required to study this Word, treasuring up its truths and precepts in their hearts; and to teach them to their children, in order that the youth from generation to generation might know the will of the Lord. Under the Gospel the instructions of teachers, and even of apostles, are said to be submitted to the church as a body, not merely to be comprehended, but also to be intelligently estimated and weighed by it. The universal law is, that personal responsi- bility for personal belief implies a corresponding obligation to know personally what God has spoken ; and for this personal acquaintance the Bible suggests no substitute. In this respect, Protestantism clearly returned immediately to the divine rule which the papacy had overridden with its assumptions, and to that return its influence and success during the grave crisis of the Reformation were primarily due. It is a just consequence from this position that no church or council, whether Roman or Protestant, may assume the right to interpret Scripture decisively, or to enforce its interpretations on the individual conscience as binding. Zwingli commenced his famous Articles with the broad proposition, that whosoever affirms that the Evangel is nothing excepting as the church indorses it, is in error, and blasphemes God. There is indeed a regard for the judgment even of individual men in respect to the teachings of the Word which, especially when such private inter- preters are known to possess high intellectual and moral qualifi- cations, is incumbent upon every student of this Divine Book. Such regard is not only a privilege but an obligation, and the help thus secured is to be devoutly welcomed. Both the privilege and the duty are magnified as the number and qualifications of such instructors are increased; and when such judgment emanates from an organized church or any large body of disciples, uniting in the expression of beliefs to which they have together been led by their common studies of the Scripture, the obligation and the advantage are proportionally enhanced. And if, according to the ancient motto of Vincentius, any truth of Scripture is received alike by all avowed believers, everywhere and at all periods, he would be a vain and reckless spirit who would lightly cast such a doctrine aside, or unhesitatingly differ from a result so obtained. For it is a far stronger presumption that the Church of God is rightly taught by his Spirit and is holding the truth as he desires, than that any individual in that church should have become the RIGHT AND DUTY. 115 sole possessor of such truth while all the rest are still living in ignorance. But there are certain limitations to this general rule which, in view of the assumptions of Romanism in this direction, must be carefully noted. The claim of the Roman church to be the sole expounder of the Word through her priesthood, was openly made and zealously maintained. It was a natural inference alike from her doctrine of the priesthood as a sacred order culminating in the apostolate, and endowed with gifts and prerogatives above those of the household of faith; and from the position assumed in respect to the nature of inspiration, and to the contents and canonicity of Scripture, as defined in the Decreta of Trent. Of a Bible so made up and so authenticated and certified, none but the priestly orders could be legitimate or competent expositors. That famous Council decreed that no one relying on his own skill shall, in matters of faith and of morals pertaining to the edifica- tion (or the establishment) of the Christian doctrine — wresting the Sacred Scripture to his own senses or opinions — presume to interpret the said Sacred Scripture contrary to that sense which holy Mother Church, — whose it is to judge of the true sense and interpretation of the said sacred Scriptures, — hath held and now holds: nor shall anyone dare to interpret Holy Scripture contrary even to the unanimous consent of the Fathers, even though such interpretations may not have been intended to be at any time brought to light or made public. Those who contravene this decree — it was added — shall be revealed by those having spiritual charge over them, and shall be punished with the penalties by law provided. Additional emphasis was given to this conclusion by its obvious relations to the Roman conception of salvation, and to the Roman cultus throughout. Faith according to Rome was wholly a passive grace, and submission to ecclesiastical authority was the sum of duty: the church was the channel of all blessings, and obedience to her teachings as well as her requisitions was therefore a primary obligation, and practically the only ground of salvation. Against this monstrous claim with all its destructive conse- quences, Protestantism was bound by every cardinal principle to protest. Hence the prominence given to such protestation in most of the creeds, both Lutheran and Reformed, whether conti- nental or insular. The Westminster Symbols, though written many decades after the rest, represent the same strong conviction; and the necessity for such representation was probably deepened in the estimation of the Assembly by the persistent urging of the 116 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. opposite doctrine in England, both in the papal and in the modi- fied prelatic forms. For while Episcopacy maintained in the Thirty-Nine Articles that Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation, so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, (VI) yet it did not array itself so decisive^ as most of the other formularies against either tradition or ecclesiastical interpretation and authority in matters of belief. Room was even left for just such assumption in respect to the teaching of the Word as characterized the period when Laud ruled England with nearly regal power, and the mandates of the church were enforced even with civil pain and penalty. That the perception of this liability as exist- ing in prelatic circles and not wholly excluded in the Episcopal S3^mbols, incited the Westminster Assembly to the more earnest and positive enunciation of the Protestant view, cannot be ques- tioned. Hence their more strong and decisive language with respect to the liability of all synods and councils since apostolic times to err, with respect to the authority of such bodies as given not for destruction but for edification, with respect to the neces- sity for strict consonance between their decisions and the divine Word, and with respect also to the primal duty of men of all sorts to study that Word for themselves without fear of ecclesiastical domination. While they were not at all times consistent with their own teachings, and sometimes did what they here con- demned, it is yet to be said for them that they clearly saw and boldly announced the principle on which not Presbyterianism only, but evangelical religion under whatever name must always be based. In accordance with this general position the Assembly further declared that the Bible must be made its own interpreter, — its more difficult portions being explained 15. Scripture its own in- b the u ht afforded by its simpler tcrpreter : Revelation and int.- j j j R statements, and all being regarded and estimated as parts of one organic and adequate as well as thoroughly divine Book. The Protestant principle of the analogy of faith, so termed, is laid down as a fundamental organon in the interpretation of the inspired Word. Eittle recognition is given apparently to the fact that there are mysteries in Scripture, such as are discoverable in its doctrine of decrees, or of the person of Christ or his atoning work in cer- tain aspects; or of obscurities, such as the apocalyptic prophecies, which seem to us explicable only in the light which the future SCRIPTURE AND REASON. 1 1 i unfoldings of providence may shed upon them. As was natural in that age, the Symbols emphasize the plainness, the clearness, the practical appeal of the Bible to man, rather than its obscurity or its mystery. This is apparent, for illustration, in their affirma- tion that the sense of the divine Word is not manifold, but one: — an affirmation which shuts out the entire notion, so current occa- sionally in the church, of a variety of senses, external and internal, physical and spiritual, single and complex, not one but manifold. Mysticism in the interpretation of Scripture, in what- ever variety or form, is here directly excluded. What may be called English common sense protested against all such fancies, — all ways of covering up the simple truth by fictitious guesses or hypotheses: it held forth the Word as a divine light, shining in its own luster, and competent to be the guide of man into all saving truth. This doctrine of the literal sense, as it was termed, seems to have been a matter of some debate in the Assembly, (Minutes, 114) and the answer doubtless indicates what was the confirmed and final view of the body. This view is antithetic also to the notion, less current in that age than subsequently, of antagonism between the Scripture and human reason, with its natural consequence in the exaltation of reason as the true and final judge of Scripture. In recognizing the light of nature both as a light shining into the soul from an external world, and as a capacity of the soul to perceive such light and rejoice in it, the Assembly did not intend to exalt this capacity and opportunity as if they could lift man above the need of revelation, or make him the arbiter of the whole question of revelation and salvation. While it is said to be the duty of every one to search and know, the field of such searching and knowledge is carefully defined; it is within the Scripture, and in due defer- ence to its character as a revelation, that such inquiry is to be conducted. More than once, as in the chapter on the Eternal Decree, are we taught to handle these high mysteries with special prudence and care \ attending simply to the will of God as revealed in his Word. In the Larger Catechism (157) it is said that the Holy Scriptures are to be read with an high and reverent esteem for them, and with a firm persuasion that they are the very Word of God. Yet the question whether the Bible is indeed that Word, is one which can be determined only upon a rational examination of the evidences supporting its claim: and it may justly be said that the Bible ever welcomes such examination, if it be conducted with the thoroughness and the candor which reason itself and 118 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. the nature of the question prescribe. So in the consideration of its particular statements of whatever class, there is always room for the question whether these statements are confirmed by the verdict of individual or of general reason: and here again this divine Word welcomes the most faithful investigation of which the human mind is capable. Indeed, one of the strongest arguments practi- cally for the Bible is derived from this open submission of itself and its teachings to the scrutiny of man, and in consequence from the strong, cordial, combined testimonies of human reason in its behalf. These testimonies, notwithstanding many tem- porary conflicts around particular issues, such as those arising within the domain of physical science, or in the broad field of intellectual or ethical speculation, are steadily increasing in vol- ume and force. The Bible more and more stands before humanity as a reasonable book, — its claims verified by the understanding as well as accepted by the heart. This is its glory, — this is the cul- minating proof that it has descended to humanity from God him- self. Yet the authority of its teachings does not, cannot rest on this human endorsement : it rests rather in Him by whom the Word is uttered. The Book rises above human reason, and is supreme over it; it teaches doctrines which reason cannot fully penetrate, and demands their acceptance because God has spoken them. Even where its teachings seem at variance with certain conclusions of reason, it still requires acceptance and receives it. on the just ground that a book presenting such evidences of divinity is ten thousand fold likelier to be right than the individual reason that judges it. In the interpretation of the divine Word the infallible rule is affirmed to be the Scripture itself, — one portion being compared with another, and each part set in harmony with the rest, until the composite and complete view is gained. In the language of the Confession, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any scripture, it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. Constructed as the Bible is, its truths held in solution rather than in crystal, and distributed diffusively through the entire volume, such comparative study of the Word is obviously indispensable. The doctrines of such a book can be set in their proper adjustments only through such a process: its ethical teachings gather their full force only when they are woven into a system and a law: its psalms and prophecies, its promises and warnings, sustain and confirm each other: even its array of facts, historic and biographic, are comparatively without meaning until they are set in order as parts of the one grand HOLY SPIRIT IN SCRIPTURE. 119 history of redemption. So the corrective to errors which might spring from the exclusive study of one portion, lies in the study of related or antithetic portions; false doctrines derivable from one view are precluded by another; places that speak more clearly explain parts which are more obscure. In the aggregate, the statement of the Confession is clearly justified: All those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but also the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them. The language of the Confession on this point is obviously derived from the British creeds which preceded and largely inspired it. Thus the Thirty-Nine Articles (XX) affirm that the church hath power to decree rights or ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith; yet it is not lawful for the church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture that it be repugnant to another. The Irish Articles (5) say: Although there be some hard things in the Scripture . . . yet all things necessary to be known unto everlasting salvation are clearly delivered therein; and nothing of that kind is spoken under dark mysteries in one place, which is not in other places spoken more familiarly and plainly, to the capacity of both learned and unlearned. Note also the quaint language of the first Scotch Confession (XVIII): In the quhilk we affirme that all thingis necessary to be beleeved for the salvation of mankinde is sufficiently expressed. The interpretation quhairof, weconfesse, neither appertaines to private nor publick persone, nether zit to ony kirk for ony preheminence or prerogative personallie or locallie, quhilk ane hes above ane uther, but appertaines to the Spirite of God by the quhilk also the Scripture was written. While the right and duty of private interpretation are thus affirmed, and church assumptions and prerogatives are clearly defined, and the supremacy of the Bible in its own explication is maintained, it 16* The Spirit interPret' . , * , . : - - in? the Scripture: Natural is also strongly taught m the Confes- ^ say|ng knowledge. sion that the full understanding of the Word, the saving knowledge thereof, is obtainable only through the aid of the Spirit of God. The subject was evidently one of some special interest to the Assembly. It is recorded (Minutes, 111-113) that considerable debate was had about the knowledge of the divine authority of the Scripture; and that the word, 120 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. saving, was added in order to limit the sweep of the declaration respecting what was described as the necessity of the inward illu- mination of the Spirit for the understanding of such things as are revealed. Such necessity was acknowledged in the final framing of the Article, in conjunction with a corresponding recognition of the proper sphere of Christian prudence in the application, under the various conditions of human existence, of the ge?ieral rides of the Word. This position is strengthened by the strong declar- ation in the concluding section respecting the absolute supremacy, above all decrees of councils, all opinions of ancient writers, all doctrines of men, all private spirits, of the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture. In the section on the internal evidence for the Bible, it is urged as a kindred conclusion that, while this book may be seen on general grounds to be divine, and therefore infal- lible and authoritative, yet our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts. Without considering here the full view of the work of the Spirit of God in revealing the truth to man, as well as in regener- ating men through the truth, we may well note the general nature of the relation here indicated. We are practically guarded against the illusion already mentioned, that this work of the Spirit is something over and above the written Scriptures — an additional source of knowledge concerning divine things. The illumination here promised is a real illumination, but the object made luminous by it is the Scripture, and the Scripture alone. Beyond this divinely prescribed territory, that peculiar radiance is not declared to reach. So we are guarded against the error that the natural mind is capable by itself, without such supernatural aid, of ascertaining all that is needful unto salvation. There is a natural, and there is also a saving knowledge, — a knowledge ade- quate in amount, penetrating and potent in effect, from which a true sense of sin is evolved, and from which true repentance and faith flow. And while it is said to be the duty of all men to learn what they can from nature and from revelation concerning their condition and needs, it is also affirmed to be their duty to submit themselves to this divine guidance, and to complete all their knowl- edge by coming personally within the range of this divine illumi- nation. In the Larger Catechism (157) we are reminded of our duty to read the Scriptures with a firm persuasion, not merely that they are the very Word of God, but also that He only can enable us to understand them: and in the definition of Effectual Calling OBLIGATION TO STUDY. 121 (Chap. X) one essential feature in that divine process is said to be, enlightening the mind spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God. Of the ground of the obligation to seek a saving knowledge of the Word of God through the aid of the Holy Ghost, there can be no doubt in any believing breast. If God thus offers by a process upon the mental faculties, or by a work on the moral nature of which such action on the mind itself in order to illuminate or illustrate what is written, is one result, it cannot be a slight thing in his sight to reject that offer, even though such rejection were accompanied by a most sincere or resolute purpose to seek such knowledge by the same methods which are employed in obtaining knowledge elsewhere. But if this offer is made in order to secure moral regeneration through such intellectual quickening, — if divine things are in this way made clearer, so that the soul may be more easily moved out of its sin unto obedience and holiness such as the Gospel requires; — or if such help is given for the de- velopment of the work of grace already begun, and in order to sanctify a soul already in some measure illuminated and purified by divine influences, then the guilt of such rejection 'becomes a thousand fold greater. Not merely the eternal interests of that soul, but also the claims and the honor of Him by whom this gra- cious proffer is made, are trampled under foot. Nor does it lessen the guilt of such a step, that the process proposed is chiefly un- known and impenetrable, and that we see nothing but the issues or results of this divine work. The illumination, however pro- duced, is a demonstrable reality in human experience: the fact is just as certain as is the existence in the Bible of the promise and pledge of such illumination : and we are therefore simply to re- ceive the saving knowledge thus offered, and reverently to hear and obey the Holy Spirit speaking in the Scripture. One final word: These expositions of the doctrine of the Con- fession and the corroboratory teaching of the Catechisms respect- ing the nature and process of Revelation as an inspired communication from 17« Closing; Survey: Com- _ , r . ., . pleteness and value of the God, respecting the canon and contents Symbols on this subject. of Scripture, respecting its authenticity and authority and entire adequacy as an infallible guide of human thought and human action concerning divine things, and respect- ing the obligation and privilege of studying the Bible, with the help of the Spirit and in the light of every available advantage, yet with supreme loyalty to the Holy Word and to our own res- ponsibility thereto : — these expositions, however cursory, are 122 THE HOLY SCRIPTURE. sufficient to justify the strong statement of an eminent English divine (Stanley) that the article on Justification in the Decreta of Trent and the chapter on Holy Scripture in the Westminster Confession, are the ablest presentations of dogmatic truth in the whole series of Christian symbols. Of the justness of this state- ment, ample evidence will be found as to the Westminster chapter, in a careful comparison between its declarations and those of other Lutheran or Reformed creeds. In fullness, in clearness, in prac- tical quality, it may justly be said to surpass every preceding Protestant declaration on the same subject. Compared with the Tridentine decree on Justification, this chapter furnishes a strik- ing illustration of the difference between Protestantism and Ro- manism. That decree is a marvel of dialectic skill, — clear in distinction, poised in proposition, elaborate in language, and skill- ful in its summation of the doctrine affirmed. It was the last and best word of Rome in answer to the Reformation; and it was a word of unparalleled sagacity and weight. In several respects it excels even the finest Protestant deliverances on the same vital theme. It crystallizes in the amber of its error some spiritual truth, and so blends the one with the other that we find it hard to discriminate between them. It was a fabrication of the finest logic, combined with the shrewdest sense of adaptation; and for more than two cen- turies it has held its place as a marble pillar in the temple of Roman belief. But the Presbyterian chapter on the Holy Scripture far surpasses it, if not in logical acumen or elaborate verbiage, still in simplicity of statement, in breadth and power of expression, and above all in true spiritual adaptation. The first was papal and continental and of Latin stock; the second, though insular, was thoroughly Protestant, and full of Saxon sense and Saxon blood. The one was an elaborate construction in defense of a fatal error: the other was an earnest proclamation in support of a divine truth. The aim of the one was to strengthen the power, enlarge the glory, establish the supremacy of the church and the hier- archy ; the aim of the other was to exalt God and his inspired Word. The adaptation of this exposition to the age and to the succeeding ages constitutes one of its most remarkable traits. Chillingworth has well said in language often quoted, that the Bible is the religion of Protestants ; and British Protestantism, amid the remaining pleas of papacy and the assumptions of prelacy, needed to be told once more, as Tyndale and Wiclif had taught it, that the Word of God is supreme everywhere and evermore. Nothing but such steadfast emphasizing of the divinity and adequacy of this THE WESTMINSTER DOCTRINE — ITS VALUE. 123 Word could have saved the reformation in Britain from being tainted by dangerous error — from dying out through human form- alisms. How valuable this declaration became, let the zeal and fidelity and martyrdoms of Scotland during the period following its promulgation bear witness: let the evangelical and fruitful faith which grew up from this root in many parts of England amid trial and sacrifice testify : let the powerful and successful defense of the Bible by the great apologists of England against the able and persistent assaults of English Deism and of French Materialism in the following century, show to the world. The Bible as the very Book of God, high above all opinions of men, high above the authority or voice of the church, uttering its message directly to the individual soul, and ruling all the moral life with a sway only like that which God holds in heaven itself: — this has been the secret of all that is best in British belief, and in the life, personal and political and spiritual, of the men and nations that speak the English tongue. It cannot well be denied that the teaching of this remarkable chapter stands to-day as the unchanged and the permanent utter- ance of evangelical Protestantism. Questions of exegesis, ques- tions of canonicity and authorship, questions as to inspiration itself as well as questions respecting the points of harmony be- tween the Bible and philosophy or science or reason, are arising and are likely to arise, — disturbing or possibly overthrowing the faith of some. It is one of the most painful phenomena of the times that so many issues of this class are being raised, not merely by speculating and arrogant skepticism, but within the church, and by those whose standing in the ranks of Christian scholarship gives dangerous emphasis to their subversive teachings. But all such questionings and teachings from whatever source are to be dealt with, not with dogmatic bitterness or in the temper of parti- sanship, or by the invocation of ecclesiastical pains and penalties, but rather with the most temperate discrimination and fairness, with a more thorough scholarship, and with appropriate charity and sympathy toward errorists, yet with supreme fidelity to the substance and essence of the Truth, and in the serenest confidence that the Word of God, as here described, will abundantly justify itself before the judgment and the conscience of mankind. LECTURE THIRD— GOD IN HIS BEING. The Divine; Existence and Nature : Attributes op God : The Trinity in God. C. F. Chap. II: XXI : i : h. C. Answers 2, 7-11, 104- 114: S. C. 4-6, 46-56. Starting from their broad and lofty conception of the Bible as an inspired Revelation, the Symbols of Westminster follow the order of some antecedent Reformed Confessions in proceeding directly to a discussion of God himself, in his nature, attributes, purposes and administration. In the ancient creeds the analysis com- menced with the doctrine of the Trinity, and with the description of God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. Protestant symbolism began substan- tially at the same point, yet with a more discriminating statement respecting the divine nature and works in general, — a fact trace- able largely to the influence of Scholasticism with its analysis of the older doctrine, and its array of argument and illustration res- pecting the Godhead generically. It is especially to be noted that the three British creeds antecedent began in the same way with God, taking up and expanding the doctrine of the first in the series : We confesse and acknowledge ane onelie God to whom onelie we must cleave, whom onelie we must serve, whom onelie we must worship, and in whom onelie we must put our trust: Scotch Conf. Art. 1. It cannot be doubted that this was a natural result of the strong and clear Augustinianism stamped at the outset on the Reforma- tion, and especially dominant wherever the influence of Calvin pre- vailed. To those who had been trained in that system, it was nat- ural to declare that the Scriptures principally teach what man is to believe concerning God: and furthermore, that it is the main aim of the Scriptures (L,. C. 6) to make known what God is, the persons in the Godhead, his decrees, and the execution of his decrees, — as if all knowledge respecting man, his sin and its fruits, could be apprehended only in the light of this preliminary revelation. Had the Symbols followed rather the order of some more recent theological systems, and commenced with the biblical teachings as to what we are to believe concerning man, approaching from DIVINE EXISTENCE AFFIRMED. 125 that side the ultimate problem of salvation, the subsequent theol- ogy of Protestant Christendom might have been considerably varied. If it be objected that in such contemplation of God as first and primary, we are plunged into great mysteries — confronted by apparently insoluble problems respecting the divine nature and purposes and modes of activity, still we are the more likely on the other side to gain by this process the broadest views of both sov- ereignty and grace, and more readily to apprehend man just as he was and is, and through grace may become. God is legitimately first in all theology, since it is only through the true knowledge of God that man can be made wise unto salvation. Definitions or descriptions of God, more or less full and elabor- ate, are found in most of the Protestant symbols. The Augsburg Confession (Art. I) affirms that. there u Goddefmed: Divineex. is one divine essence which is called jStence affirmed: Qualities of and is God; eternal, without body, this affirmation. indivisible, of infinite power, wisdom, goodness, — the Creator and Preserver of all things visible and invisible: note also the Second Helvetic Conf. Chap. III., and the Belgic Conf. , Art. I. The language of the French Confession, Art. I, is especially definite and emphatic: We believe and confess that there is but one God, who is one sole and simple essence, spiritual, eternal, invisible, immutable, infinite, incomprehensible, ineffable, omnipotent: qui est toute sage, toute bonne, toute juste, et toute misericordieuse. It is interesting to compare with these declarations of continental Protestantism the extensive and fin- ished decree of the Vatican Council of 1870: The Holy Catholic Apostolic Roman Church believes and confesses that there is one true and living God, Creator and L,ord of heaven and earth, al- mighty, eternal, immense, incomprehensible, infinite in intelli- gence, in will and in all perfection; — who as being one, sole, absolutely simple and immutable spiritual substance, is to be declared as really and essentially distinct from the world; — of supreme beatitude in and from himself, and ineffably exalted above all things which exist, or are conceivable, except himself. The first in the Thirty-Nine Articles affirms more briefly, that there is but one living and true God, everlasting, without body, parts or passions; of infinite power, wisdom and goodness ; the Maker and Preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. This lan- guage is transcribed without change in the Irish Articles, and is evidently the germ of the more expanded declaration of the Westminster Confession. But the expansion and elaboration of that germ are so marked as to set that Confession quite above any 126 GOD IN HIS BEING. preceding creed of Christendom, in respect to the fullness and the grandeur of its delineation of the Divine Being. The definitions given in the two Catechisms are equally full and explicit : that in the Shorter Catechism, (4) has never been surpassed; — God is a Spirit, infinite, eternal and unchangeable, in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth. In taking up the doctrine of the divine existence and nature as thus presented in the Symbols, we may first note their broad and strong affirmation of the fact that God exists. It is to be borne in mind that the questions respecting the divine existence which have so much agitated men in later times, were hardly raised during the era of the Reformation. Protestant and Romanist alike rested not merely on the general fact of the divine existence as held in the ancient church, but on the several argu- ments for such existence developed or expanded by the Scho- lastics,— regarding the scriptural statements as abundantly confirmed by such testimonies. Even the more intricate question of the trinity in God and the associated question respecting the character of the triune Diety, and the relations of that character to our salvation, were practically settled beyond question in the general judgment. It was rather the plan of God in salvation, the problem of justification, the nature and scope of grace, the freedom of the will, the ministries of the Spirit, and other kindred problems, which absorbed special interest, and became the center of practical conflict, not between Romanist and Prot- estant only, but largely also among those who agreed in wearing the Protestant name. The Symbols follow naturally this general tendency, and rest the fact of the divine existence rather on affirmation than on reasoning or evidence. The voice of the Divine Word is regarded as sufficient; and that Word simply declares that there is one, and but one, only living and true God. Without referring at this point to any evidences which are introduced incidentally, we may contemplate here the mingled simplicity and assurance of the affirmation itself. It may be presumed that the divines of the Assembly were familiar with both the ancient and the scholastic demonstrations; and the fact that these are nowhere introduced, indicates their conviction that the doctrine might be safely left to make its own way into popular conviction. The question no more needed formal argumentation, in their judgment, than the kindred question whether man exists. It may be that they did not regard the knowledge of God as manifested immediately in consciousness, as the knowledge of self is; but they certainly EVIDENCES OF HIS EXISTENCE. 127 viewed it as a knowledge which the moral nature of man readily receives, to which the human conscience spontaneously pays reverence, and which even the spirit of unbelief cannot well resist. Hence their constant and confident suggestion of the truth as if it were axiomatic: hence their steadfast assumption of the doc- trine, as one which needed no demonstration. It may be questioned whether their example is not worthy of consideration if not of imitation, even in an age when unbelief negative and positive is assailing this, together with almost every other cardinal truth of the Christian religion. Though it be queried whether true knowledge of God as the Infinite One is attainable, or whether scientific or philosophic demonstration of his existence can be framed, or whether the belief in such existence is justifiable even as matter of faith, yet the truth is not likely to be eliminated from the mind or the conscience of mankind, by whatever form of challenge. There are deep neces- sities in human nature, especially when that nature is made to realize its condition as sinful, for which this truth alone can fur- nish adequate satisfaction, and which no possible form of specu- lative doubt or unbelief can really supply. It is a suggestive fact, that the assaults of sin upon the doctrine have been and are more bitter, more often in a sense successful, than those of philosophic infidelity, even in its most subtle or winning forms. Yet out of the soul of the sinner there comes a solemn and forceful protest against his own unbelief; and the truth that there is a God, comes back upon him with a resistless power. His reason, his con- science, his heart alike cry out for the living God. With Augus- tine his moral nature finds no rest, till it finds that rest in the one only living and true Deity. And in fact this deep and universal experience is itself an evidence largely superseding other evi- dences, rendering argumentation comparatively needless, and forever justifying the truth, as the divine Word and the Chris- tian creeds set it forth. Passing to consider briefly such evidences as are incidentally suggested in the Symbols in support of this doctrine, we may note especially the allusions to the argument, cosmological and teleologi- 2' Arguments incident- i , • , i . , . ally suggested : Proofs from cal, which physical nature in so many nature>7rom man. forms supplies. The opening sentence in the Confession affirms that the light of nature and the works of creation and providence manifest the goodness, wisdom and power of God, and therefore his existence as a personal Being possess- ing such attributes, apart from nature and supreme over it. The 128 GOD IN HIS BEING. chapter on Religious Worship (XXI) declares that the light of nature showeth that there is a God who hath lordship and sover- eignty over all; who is good and doeth good unto all; and who is therefore to be feared, loved, praised, called upon, trusted in, and served with all the heart, and with all the soul, and with all the might. Again in the Larger Catechism (2) it is said that the very light of nature in man, and the works of God, declare plainly that there is such a Being. So in the chapter on Creation (IV) it is taught that the final end of all created things — the one great issue in which created existence finds its explanation, is the manifestation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom and goodness, — the whole being designed to bear testimony not only to the fact that God exists, but also to his character as thus made manifest to man. It is a noticeable fact that, beyond merely gen- eral allusions to these teachings of nature, the continental creeds contain no definite suggestion of evidence or proof as to the divine existence. This defect may be traced partly to the absence of speculative opposition to the universal faith, and in part to the general tendency to appeal to internal rather than external testimonies respecting the cardinal elements in Christian belief. Yet it should be said that, if such evidence does not appear in these formularies, the truth was fully recognized by the leading minds of the Reformation. Melancthon, for example, affirmed that the human mind — intuens opvfcium mundi — per- ceives that there is a God, eternal, potent, sapient, just and good, punishing the unjust, hearing and assisting the just. Luther held in like manner that a knowledge of God is thus implanted in the heart and conviction of men. Calvin taught (Inst. B. I, 3-6) that the human mind is naturally endued with the knowledge of God, yet strongly affirmed the need of Revelation in order to make such knowledge effectual in spiritual experience. Whatever may be said respecting the inadequacy of the cosmo- logical and teleological evidences suggested by the language of the Symbols, there can be no question that the argument is in fact one which men will not be willing to set aside. As long as effects and causes are seen, and are discovered to stand in some natural and potential relation, so long will the human mind con- tinue to pass upward from the world or the universe viewed as an effect, to the conception of a cause mighty enough to produce them, — not in the least baffled in its conclusion by the speculative conception of an eternal series of such causes, beginning nowhere and explaining nothing. And so long as men see design in nature, and find proofs at ten thousand points of the existence of FURTHER EVIDENCES. 12^> a mind behind and above nature, stamping these evidences of design everywhere upon what it has created, so long will men pass upward to the conclusion that the cause of which all these are effects, is personal — possesses intellectual and moral qualities such as are manifested in the things that are made. The affirma- tion of Cicero, in the Tusculan Questions, that God can be appre- hended by us only as a mind pure (or simple) and free, separate from all mortal (or fleshly) concretion, knowing and controlling all things, but itself animated by sempiternal energy, is one which will always commend itself alike to the intelligence and to the conscience of mankind. So while men look forward to the outcome and result of nature and of man, and ask for the great end that can both explain and justify all that is seen in the ongo- ings of nature and in the history of humanity, they will find the explanation only in the thought of One in whom and to whom as well as by whom are all things. Though it may be said with some degree of warrant, that such reasonings fail because they rest finally on intuitional hypotheses, or because they cannot be thrown into logical form, or because they prove more than is proposed, or because they do not relieve the doctrine from mystery, yet they have real and convincing force; and men will steadfastly return to them with a deep conviction that they make clearly manifest to the reason, if they do not absolutely demonstrate to the understanding, the truth affirmed. Those who give them any sober thought will spontaneously say with an ancient apolo- gist: Just as when we see a well appointed vessel on the sea, we conclude that she has a pilot on board, so from the regular course of the planets, the rich variety of the creation, we infer the Creator. Or with Gregory of Nazianzus : We infer the existence of the Creator from his works, just as the sight of a lyre reminds us of him who made it and of him who plays it. Herbert Spencer (First Principles) admits that we are obliged to regard every phenomenon as a manifestation of some Power by which we are acted upon. Though that eminent author pronounces this Power incomprehensible, and its omnipresence even unthinkable, yet the nature of the phenomena to which he refers clearly shows beyond question that this power is not only infinite or at least immeasurable in potenc}^ but is no less infinite in wisdom, righteousness and goodness. And such a power, both resident in nature and supreme over it, can be none other than our God, although the astute philosopher refused to draw this inference from his own premise. It is an interesting fact that the Symbols, while thus suggesting 130 GOD IN HIS BEING. the more external evidence, seem to rest more largely upon the inward conviction — on the light of nature in the soul, as more con- vincing even than the wondrous testimonies of the material uni- verse. Man in this view becomes himself the greatest argument, — not merely in the accumulated proof furnished by the biographies of individuals or the history of the race, but rather in what man knows himself to be as a rational and moral being, whose supreme end is to glorify God and enjoy him forever. It is a striking fact that both Catechisms commence with a proposition so abstract, so broad, so powerful as this, — a proposition not derived immedi- ately from Revelation, but rather drawn avowedly from the light of nature, the innate conviction of the soul. The aim of the Assembly seems to have been to start with a statement at once so simple and so comprehensive that, while all would spontaneously accept it, it might be made the corner-stone of their entire super- structure. It implies that God exists as well as man; that this God created man, and created him for an adequate purpose; that the glory of God is the end for which man is made, and that man is such a being that he can find true enjoyment, the highest con- summation and felicity of his being as a creature, only in recog- nizing his relations to God, and in glorifying him, not for time but forever and ever. The argument for the existence of God thus derivable from what man is seen to be, as a creature capable of serving and glorifying and enjoying such a Being, is one of the highest value in our time. The general assumption that God exists, derived from other sources, may be strongly verified by such study of what man is as to the laws of his being, the fixed elements in his constitution, his best instincts and aspirations and tendencies. For, taken in his totality, man is to be accounted for, not simply in the matter of his origin, nor simply in his present manifold life and experience, but still more in his possible growth, experience, and destiny. To fancy that such a being sprang from blind protaplasmic germs, or was developed from a progressive series of creatures having few if any of these mental and moral characteristics, seems strangely unphilosophic. It would be much more in harmony with the facts to think of him as the stray child of some higher parentage, en- dowed with celestial tastes and affinities, but immured in some way within this earthly prison of flesh. But even this better suppo- sition would fail to explain all the obvious facts in the case: a still higher parentage is requisite — a still sublimer origin must be sought. Where is the explanation of man ? From what source did he come; to what purpose was he formed; whither is he moving, THE UNITY OF GOD. 131 and where must he finally pause, with every power rightly util- ized, and his felicity forever complete ? There is but one answer to such questions — but one conclusion to such reasonings. That answer, that conclusion, is God, — the only living and true God. Postponing for the present the inquiry as to the method of God in creation, and specifically in the creation of man, we may note here the singular felicity with which the Symbols seem to anticipate much of modern speculation as to the moral nature and to the spiritual endowments of man, viewed in his relation to the Divine Being whose existence is thus affirmed. Carlyle was none too ardent in characterizing the somewhat current hypothesis that the thoughts of men are but brain secretions, that what we call reason is only a higher form of animal instinct or intelligence, and that the conscience, the moral sentiments, the spiritual aspi- rations of mankind are but evolutions of something which appears in less developed degree in lower orders of existence, as a gospel of dirt. If man could thus be materialized, and all that makes him man could be thus generalized away and exhaled into mere matter or energy in the interest of an anti-deistic theory of nature and its origin, then indeed we might cease to discuss the question whether there is a God above nature and supreme over nature. As if in anticipation of such sensuous conceptions, the Symbols grandly say what both the reason and the heart of humanity affirm: God hath (II: ii)all life, glory, goodness, blessedness in and of Himself and is . . . the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom and to whom are all things. The conception of God as one, one only, presents itself at this point for special consideration. The doctrine of the divine unity is strongly maintained in the chapter ■ i, • j vu 3. The unity of God taught: specially under examination. The polytheism in all forms mi- divine Being is described in the clause cjt# just quoted as having all life and glory in and of himself, and also as alone in and unto himself. Nor is this underlying truth obscured or nullified by the declaration im- mediately following, that in the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons. For whatever the conception of the Trinity may include, it is never to be taken as antagonistic to this fundamental fact of unity. God as a Being is eternally the one only living and true God. In the exposition of the first Commandment (L,. C. 105-110) it is presented as our primary duty to know and acknowledge God to be the only true God and our God, and to worship and glorify him accordingly. What is forbidden in this commandment, is 132 GOD IN HIS BEING. said to be the denying or not worshiping and glorifying the one true God as our God, and the giving that worship and glory to any other which is due to him alone. In various other forms this doc- trine of the divine unity is held forth in the Symbols as one of the cardinal principles of the Christian faith. The doctrine thus stated stands opposed to all forms of polytheism, whether in belief or in worship. Among the sins especially condemned in the exposition of both the first and the second commandment is idolatry, with all its concomitant errors, — its degenerate notions respecting divine things, its multiplied gods, its total failure to conceive of the one God as he truly is. Polythe- ism and idolatry are nearly identical terms ; idolatry may not of necessity be, but in fact almost always is, polytheistic. The great natural religions, which some minds in our time are endeavoring to compare favorably with Christianity, are invariably cor- rupted by the disposition of the natural heart to multiply deities for each of its fancied or real needs. Oriental dualism, based on the apparently conflicting phenomena of good and evil in nature and in human life, is the simplest form of this tendency. Augus- tine (City of God, B. IV) shows vividly to what fearful extent polytheism was carried both in the multiplication and in the degen- erate conception of the gods recognized and worshiped in the Pantheon of Rome. Mohammedanism, which had its root histor- ically in Hebraism, is almost the sole exception to this tendency. But polytheism even in its simplest forms, is necessarily destruc- tive of the power and substance of true religion. The best sen- timents of the soul cannot be poured out in worship at more than a single shrine: the regulative principles in the religious nature lose their potency and become inoperative, if they be not sustained by faith in one God only, both single and supreme. It is obvious that the final election of humanity must be a choice between monotheism and atheism: polytheism and pantheism are at best but intermediate and temporary substitutes. One God or none, must be the ultimate alternative. And this one God must be, not a deity existing simply as the unifying principle in human thought, or an ideal sublimation of all excellences developed in human life, or as an impalpable spiritus pervading nature, but a real Being, existing above nature and beyond the imaginings or analyses of men, in the unity of his own supreme and glorious personality. He who rejects the conception of such a Being, will find rest nowhere except in the utter ignoring or the utter denying of any and all supernatural existence. The doctrine of the absolute unity of God as a Being is an DOCTRINE OF UNITY FUNDAMENTAL. 133 essential element in the faith of Christendom universally. The strong statement of the latest Vatican Council has already been quoted: God is the one, sole, absolutely simple and immutable spiritual substance. Both the Confession of Mogilas and the Ivonger Catechism of the Greek Church affirm the doctrine with equal emphasis. The Protestant formularies invariably declare and teach that, in the language of the Second Helvetic Confession, God is one and one only in essence and nature, subsisting in himself and in himself sufficient unto all things. And in emphasizing the subsequent tenet of the trinity in God, they are in every instance careful to affirm that this trinity in no way antagonizes or sub- verts the underlying and more primal fact of unity. They follow at both points, as we shall have further occasion to note, the method of the Scriptures, — guarding carefully on the one hand against Socinian error, and on the other against what may be described as tritheistic orthodoxy. It is not needful here to pre- sent the varied and numerous forms in which the unity in God is set forth in the inspired Word, — in the Mosaic economy, in the Hebrew psalmody, in the prophetical writings, and equally in the New Testament. Nor is it important to point out in detail the philosophic basis on which the doctrine reposes. That the mind is so constituted that it cannot conceive of more than one such being as God is defined in all Christian symbolism to be, — that the physical universe manifests the exis- tence of one, and but one organizing and controlling Mind, — that the moral nature and convictions of man can be satisfied with no other conception, — that personal religion flourishes in the human soul only as polytheism in whatever variety is thrown aside, and the one God of Revelation is made the single and absorbing object of love and adoration: — these more speculative evidences abund- antly justify on rational grounds our faith in the biblical teachings respecting this fundamental article of Christian belief. We see in nature or in Scripture but one God: we believe in one God only, though he be triune in person; and one God only do we trust, obey, adore. That this one and only God is a Spirit, and that as such he exists in and unto himself, deriving his life and glory and blessed- ness from himself alone, is a doctrine „ M ,. ... . , ' ,. 4. God a self-existent closely associated with the preceding. $mu perSonal, fontal, cre- However difficult it may be to conceive ative. of that primal cause which differs from all other causes in having no relation to any causal force behind or above itself, yet the conception of such a cause presents itself 134 GOD IN HIS BEING. to the reason as the only possible alternative to the absurd hypoth- esis of an endless series of such causes, each potent enough to create its successor, and all personal and intelligent — running back forever. In like manner, difficult though it may be to frame a distinct, intelligible thought of God — incomprehensible as it may seem to the philosophic mind to fashion any rounded conception of the infinite, yet the vision of such an infinite One, from whom all other beings are derived, and in whom they find their consum- mation, is something which philosophy cannot refuse to recognize as a legitimate tenet of faith, and which the heart of man wel- comes as the just foundation of its holiest experiences — its purest life. While Hamilton follows Kant and Coleridge in affirming that the conception of such an absolute Spirit cannot be regarded as having an adequate philosophic basis, he still recognizes the conception as having firm foundation in our moral nature, and as indispensable to the proper development of the religious senti- ment existing in man as man. It is true that self-existence differs from all created existence in certain vital respects, yet the fact of created existence seen everywhere else does not disprove the affirmed fact of self -existence somewhere. Rather is it true that created existence cannot be accounted for in any of its forms, except on the hypothesis that there exists somewhere One who lives in and unto himself. The doctrine of self-existence carries with it the doctrine of the divine spiritualty. As God is one, and as the sole cause and ground of his existence is in himself, so that existence must be independent of matter, and of all materializing appendages. Spirituality is not to be conceived of as merely a quality or attri- bute in God; it is rather his nature itself — the fundamental fact or element in his constitution. In the words of the larger Catechism, (4) God is a Spirit essentially, — infinite in being, glory, blessedness and perfection; and the Confession adds that he is alone in and unto himself all-sufficient because he is thus pure Spirit. Among the things said to be forbidden in the sec- ond Commandment is the making any representation of God, of all or any of the three Persons, either inwardly in our minds, or outwardly in any image or likeness of any creature whatsoever. Anthropomorphic and anthropopathic representations of God, and all kindred delineations of his nature or activities, which seem to bring him down to the level of human life or experience, are here clearly interdicted, so far as they go beyond the language and method of the Scripture itself. The biblical anthropomorph- isms never mislead us or corrupt our spiritual conceptions. In GOD AS A SPIRIT. 135 the same direction we are taught (L,. C. 109) that the acceptable way of worshiping God is instituted by himself, and is so limited by his revealed will, that he may not be worshiped according to the imaginations or devices of men, or the suggestions of Satan, under any visible representation, or in any other way not prescribed in the Holy Scriptures. These prohibitions and injunctions rest specifically on the proposition, that God is a Spirit in and of himself, and is therefore to be worshiped in spirit and in truth. The teaching of the Catechism on this point expresses tersely the intense conviction of Protestantism universally respecting the veneration of images and pictures, as practiced by the Roman and partially by the Greek communion. The Council of Trent emphasizing antecedent usage, declared that images of Christ, of the Virgin Mary, and of the saints ought to be had and retained in temples, and that due honor and veneration should be given them, — not indeed because of any virtue resident in them, or of any efficiency possessed by them as images, but because of the honor due to those persons whom they represent. The Greek Catechism in like manner affirms (518-522) that it is no violation of the second Commandment to honor icons (pictures) as sacred representations, using them as helps in the pious remem- brance of the works of God and of his saints. But the Protestant creeds, from that of Augsburg and the Articles of Smalcald down to the Scotch Confession and the Thirty-Nine Articles, are united and most positive in their hostility to such image-worship in whatever variety. We reject alike, says the Second Helv. Conf. both the idols of the heathen and the simulacra of Christians: we affirm that God cannot be expressed by any art or image, and that all such representations of him are falsity. Calvin denounces such representations as prodigies of impiety, and argues strenu- ously against them as constituting gross and corrupting departure from the simplicity of true spiritual worship such as God requires. British Puritanism was, if possible, even more emphatic in its condemnation, — becoming at times even fanatical in its iconoclas- tic demonstrations. Rutherford (Soume of Christian Religion), expresses the general conviction of Scotland in his quaint saying : Wee ar forbiddin ether to mak or to worship ane image repre- senting God, or to give ether inward or outward worship, ether with heart or knee or bodie to any creature or image. This biblical conception of spirituality is to be carefully dis- tinguished from various false or defective notions concerning God. It differs radically from pantheism in either its ideal or its more material forms. God as a Spirit is no mere principle. 136 GOD IN HIS BEING. unifying and centralizing in itself all human thought. He is no pervasive, impersonal element in material things, — an unconscious anima mundi, holding all other existence, conscious or uncon- scious, in some species of unity. Nor is he a merely subjective conception of the human intellect, uniting thought and matter in one, but having no demonstrable existence objectively and apart from them. As a Spirit God is truly and forever personal; as pure Spirit he exists in complete independence alike of all material existence however etherialized, and of the loftiest dreams or ideals of the mind of man. Back of all his relations to other beings or activities or to all knowledge, — behind even his primal relations to space and time, he is simple Spirit, Spirit only and altogether, and as such in the highest sense of the term a per- sonal Being. Whatever the term, personality, means as applied to man, or to those higher varieties of being which are not associated with flesh and blood as man is, all such meaning is concentrated and illustrated inimitably in God. He is therefore the fontal Spirit — the L,ord and Giver of all life, whether physical or spiritual, in the strong phrase of the Belgic Confession, omnia vivijicantem et conservantem. In the chapter on Creation (IV) it is said that it pleased him to make, or create of nothing, the world and all things therein; and in the same chapter his creation of man in his own image is represented as the summit of his creative efficiency. In the remarkable description of him in the chapter now specially under consideration he is represented as the alone fountain of all being, of whom, through whom, to whom are all things. In the definition of his pro- vidence (S. C. 11) as his most holy, wise and powerful preserv- ing and governing all his creatures and all their actions, it is implied that the lives thus preserved and governed, originated with him, and are under his providential guidance in virtue of that primal origination. This interior vitality in God can indeed be conceived of only through some form of imagery or compari- son; it cannot be defined intrinsically. It is opposed entirely to the observed quiescence of matter; it is contrasted equally with the occasional rest or equilibrium of physical energies; it stands over against all possible forms of disintegration or decay. It is life in the most ethereal form, in the highest degree, in the supremest perfection. It is as incomprehensible as it is underived : it is immutable, illimitable, everlasting. All possible activity, potency, blessedness are in it: it is an ocean of being, past all measurements and past all comprehension. And from this source alt other beings and activities fL iw: i* ; ' ' - true and only fountain GOD AS ABSOLUTE SPIRIT. 1 ->7 of all existence. Angels, other orders of moral existence, man, and even inferior creatures, are but the issue of this countless and prolific vitality: in Him we live and move and have our being. The absoluteness of God, based on what he is in his own spiritual nature, and on his fontal and creative relations to all other existence, is strongly affirmed in the Symbols, both as an independ- 5- God the Absolute Spirit: . . , . . . ' His Dominion original and ent proposition, and as a basis for the comDiete consequent conception of the divine decrees and administration. He is absolute in the sense of being all-sufficient in and unto himself, — not sta?idi?ig in need of any creatures which he hath made, or deriving any glory from them. He is absolute also in the sense of being himself the final end of all his activities, — all things being not merely of him and through him, but also to him and for him. He is absolute likewise in the sense of complete and unquestionable control; having in himself most sovereign dominion over all creatures, to do by them, for them or upon them, whatsoever himself pleaseth. In each and all of these aspects, it is implied that God is the absolute as well as creative Spirit, — sovereign dominion in the most complete sense being of necessity included in the pure and perfect spirituality from which it flows. It is sometimes unjustly charged upon the Confession, that it bases the entire scheme of divine truth on an abstract conception — the conception of decrees or predestination. That some exposi- tions of the Confession have been open to this charge, — have started in this way from a philosophic axiom, rather than from divine verities, and have thus planted the Christian doctrine on an abstraction, is doubtless true. But every careful student of the Symbols will discover that the determination of God as to what he will do — his scheme and plan of things, and his purpose to carry that plan or scheme into complete execution, as well as all his consequent actions, are there rested on what God himself is, especially as the absolute Spirit. His decree or decrees are not presented as abstract hypotheses, intuitively perceived as true in and of themselves, but rather as the manifestations of his own spiritual being — the development even from eternity of his own fathomless nature and life. God is a being such in himself and in his relations to all his creatures, that he cannot be true either to what he is inherently or to their needs as his creation, without having a scheme, a design, a purpose, which includes them and which comprehends the whole of what they are or have been, or ever can become. And for the same reason his supreme and 138 GOD IN HIS BEING. effectual activities, whether in the lower sphere of physical nature where absolute necessity rules, or in the moral sphere where he carries out his will in conjunction with human or angelic freedom, can be nothing else than the orderly evolution of his eternal pur- pose,— the unfolding in fact and history of his sovereign design. This is not an abstract notion; it is hardly a logical deduction; it is but another aspect of the truth that God is a Spirit, pure, complete, absolute. Without forestalling here the analysis of the ruling idea of the divine decrees, as found in the Symbols, we may note the practical fact just described as one which sheds light on the entire problem of predestination. That the Bible associates the divine decrees with the divine nature, and asserts the sovereignty of God, not as an arbitrary, inexplicable, forbidding assumption, but rather as the natural and necessary and glorious outgrowth of what he is as the absolute Spirit, cannot be questioned. It nowhere separates the two, but rather describes the decree as the issue and consequence of the nature — a consequence or issue that must follow from the nature, and that cannot be withheld with- out impairing our conception of the nature, and making God less than he really is. So in the Confession, the chapter on the Eternal Decree (III) strong as it is, forbidding in some aspects, objectionable at least in some of its phraseology, is made much more clear and persuasive, and unquestionable also, when read in the light of the chapter preceding, with its impressive and just and inspiring delineations of the Divine Being, as he is in himself — the fontal, creative, absolute Spirit. Just as much of the criticism made upon the doctrine of predestination, as Calvin presents it, fades away in the judgment of those who carefully study his antecedent descriptions of the One Divine Essence and of the True God as distinguished from all false deities, (Inst. B. 1:11-14), so much of the objection urged against the Calvinistic scheme as set forth in the "Westminster Confession, vanishes when it is seen how clearly, how naturally and how inevitably that scheme in its main features flows directly from the cardinal fact of the divine spirituality. God as a Being, existing in and of himself, the source and fount of all other existence — the primal and eternal and absolute Spirit — must in some true sense, plan, purpose, decree and execute whatsoever comes to pass. And all attempts to limit the sweep or the application or execution of the regulative purpose or decree, by any hypothesis or suggestion that detracts in the slightest degree from this view of him as AS AN INFINITE SPIRIT. 139 such a Spirit, must fall to the ground : neither Scripture nor philosophy can sustain them. As a Spirit thus under ived, personal, fontal, absolute, God is also infinite, eternal and unchangeable in his being and nature. These are qualities inherent in the divine constitution,— essential charac- 6- God as infinite, eternal, -.« ,. . . . ~u unchangeable Spirit: His tenstics of the divme existence. They omnipresence< differentiate God still further, not only from all varieties of physical being, but from all created spirits which are finite in both sphere and capacity, temporal in origin, and subject in many ways to change. The term, infinite, is applicable to him both intensively and extensively. On the one side it is an affirmation that his being is not limited or restrained by any of those boundaries which confine and narrow human or angelic existence. Such infinitude is not a merely negative con- ception; it is also a positive intuition, although it transcends the limits of human reason, and stands before us as a truth too vast and grand for finite comprehension. It exhibits God to us in his transcendence, as existing far above the conditioning limitations which surround all finite being — forever alone and unapproach- able in his sublime infinitude. We cannot say, Luther eloquently declares in his discussion of the Abendmahl, that God is an out- stretched, long, broad, fixed, high, deep Being: he is a super- natural, incomprehensible, ineffable Being, existing wholly in every grain of sand, yet at the same time in, above and beyond all creatures. The term is also extensive in significance; and in this sense is synonymous with such terms as immensity and omnipresence. God is immense in the sense that his greatness is beyond all delineation and measurement, — not in the pantheistic sense some- times suggested, that he includes the entire creation, physical and spiritual, within himself. He is in all things though not included in them; he is without all things but is not excluded from them. He is also omnipresent in the three-fold sense ascribed to him by Scholasticism: present as knowing perfectly all things in all parts of his vast creation, present as exerting his omnipotent energy immanently through both the physical and the moral universe, present also in some transcendent sense essentially in and through as well as over all created things. It is not implied in this statement that God is diffused through space, as light or air may be; — as pure Spirit he cannot be thus distributed. Rather is it true that he is at one and the same time wholly, or in his totality as a Spirit, in each and every place 140 GOD IN HIS BKING. throughout this measureless expanse of finite being. As another has said, diffusion and contraction, extension and circumscription, are not to be affirmed of God: he is equally near to and equally far from every point of space and every atom of the universe. He is universally and immediately present, not as a body but as a Spirit, — not by motion or penetration or filling, as would be predicated of a diffused fluid, or in any way as if his infinity were composed of a countless number of finite parts, but in a way peculiar to his own spiritual and perfect nature. It is a remark of Hamilton that while physical action is limited by both space and time, mental action is not conditioned by space, though it be limited by time. In an infinitely higher sense is God uncondi- tioned by space, though himself immanent in the physical as in the spiritual realm, sustaining and directing all its energies, and making all things subservient to his supreme purpose. To use a familiar scholastic statement, his centre is everywhere while his circumference is nowhere — he is in and through all, yet above all. And as God is above space while in a sense ever present within it, so is he above all time — eternal as well as infinite in his being. As pure and fontal and absolute Spirit, he is entirely beyond those limitations in duration by which all finite creatures are bounded. It is an old and familiar definition which describes his eternity as the perfect possession at once and altogether of interminable or measureless life. All conceptions of duration are lost in his bound- less infinitude. We are not indeed to regard all ideas of success- ion as excluded from the divine mind. God sees events in nature or in human life as occurring in chronological as well as in logical relationships, and himself produces events, such as creation and the fall, the incarnation and redemption, in a distinct order of time, — if not by successive acts of creative or providential or gra- cious efficiency. Yet to him the distinctions of past and present and future exist in a relative measure only. He never forgets the past or loses the sense of it as eternally present: to him the future is no more vague or dim than the passing hour. All succession proceeds from him and is controlled by him from the high throne of his eternity. Through all mutations of nature or of human- ity, he remains the same self -existent and absolute Spirit as before time began to be, and will so remain, the one Eternal Being, yes- terday, to-day and forever. God is also an unchangeable Being, — existing evermore as the enduring ground across whose surface all finite mutations pass, but whose serene depths are never agitated by mortal disturbance. He is unchangeable in respect to all those constitutional elements AS AN UNCHANGEABLE SPIRIT. 141 or qualities which have already been ascribed to him as the one eternal Spirit. He is unchangeable also in respect to all those moral attributes, wisdom and power, holiness and justice, goodness and truth, which belong of right to his character, his moral person- ality, rather than to his constitution or nature. As it is impossi- ble for him to be otherwise than an absolute Person, infinite and eternal, so in a reverent sense of the phrase, it is impossible for him to be otherwise than just and good and true, either in his executive administration or in his interior life as a moral being. Any mutation which should affect either his natural or his moral attributes in themselves, or which should materially modify his manifestations of these attributes in his relations to man or to nature, is simply inconceivable. Change for the better is impos- sible, since he is already perfect: change for the worse is no less impossible to a perfect being such as he. No such change can occur from within by his own volition, nor can any power exist outside of him which is adequate to produce or compel such change. Such immutability is necessarily involved in the conception of his eternity: from everlasting to everlast- ing he must be the same. But such unchangeableness does not imply emotionless passivity in God. The biblical des- criptions of variation in the divine feeling toward man, or of modifications in the divine administration over man, are to be taken as representing important and practical truth, though such truth must ever stand in entire harmony with that underlying immutability — not immobility — which belongs inherently to him as the eternal and absolute Spirit. There may indeed be changes of relation to his moral creatures, or of dispensation or action toward them, which may be figuratively delineated, as is some- times done in Scripture, in such strong terms as almost to imply mutability in his disposition as well as being. The expression of his love may change, and that love may even assume the aspect of holy wrath; his justice may reveal itself at one time in the condemnation of sinners, and at another in their pardon and res- toration to himself through grace; his government may be man- ifested, now in beneficent and sustaining providences, and now in storm and pestilence and retributive visitation. Lactantius (De Ira Dei) has justly argued that if God did not abhor, he could not love; inasmuch as he loves good, he must abhor evil, and must bestow good upon those he loves, evil upon those he abhors. Yet these manifestations however varied indicate no change in either his attributes or his purposes : all his acts of whatever type spring at last from one and the same deep source in his perfect 142 GOD IN HIS BEING. nature. Increase and improvement, loss and deterioration, vacil- lation, changeableness in design or act, are to him impossible. At this point we may fitly gather into one complex conception all that is known respecting God in his constitution or nature, as distinguished from what may be known of him as a being possess- ing the supreme endowment of character. Intrinsically or consti- tutionally, God is not a spirit associated with matter or identical with matter, but is pure and simple Spirit, immeasurably above all that is natural or material. He is distinguished from all other spirits as being self-existent, — having no cause or source of exis- tence back of himself. He is also a personal Spirit, and the fontal and creative source of all other existence. He is also an absolute Spirit as distinct from all related being, and as such is in every sense infinite, immeasurable and eternal in his nature, and forever be- yond change or mutation of whatever type. These qualities each and all belong to him as Spirit; they inhere in his constitution; they combine to make up his perfect nature, and to differentiate him in essence inconceivably from even the loftiest of his creatures. From this general view of the divine constitution and nature we may now turn to the consideration of the moral attributes of God as described in the Symbols — the 7. Moral attributes in God. r ,. ,. - « « , , . _. . . . , if. t- perfections which belong to him as a Knowledge and classification F m of these attributes. hoing possessing character. The dis- tinction between God as a Spirit, pos- sessing the constitutional qualities just described, and God as a moral Being, having and manifesting character in its highest con- ceivable form, and even in a degree immeasurably beyond our loft- iest conceptions, is as vital in religious experience as it is familiar in Christian theology. In accordance with it the Shorter Cate- chism (4) teaches not merely that God is infinite and eternal and unchangeable and therefore perfect in his being, but also that he is equally infinite, eternal and unchangeable and therefore perfect in his wisdom, his power, his holiness, justice, goodness and truth. The Larger Catechism (7) makes the same declaration, in broader form and even with increased emphasis. And in the Confession (Chap. II. and elsewhere) the same high view is affirmed as a necessary inference from what had already been said respecting the divine nature. — Here arises the fundamental question whether God can truly be known by man, not merely as a Spirit ill the natural sense, but especially as a moral Being, having in himself such ethical qualities and virtues as the term, character, suggests when applied to him. There is indeed a profound sense in which KNOWLEDGE OF GOD ATTAINABLE. 143 he cannot be known, even by the angels and archangels who dwell in his immediate presence. The finite can never comprehend the infinite: God is indeed essentially, as he has been described, the Un- knowable One. Yet, though we can know nothing immediately of the divine essence, we may still recognize the ultimate fact that there is in God a substantial ground, an underlying entity or na- ture, by and in which his revealed perfections are sustained, made coherent, unified. God as a Spirit is something more even than the sum of all his attributes, whether natural or moral: his per- sonality stands eternally behind each manifested quality and sup- ports it. Nor is this an ideal generalization or inference; it must be a reality to our conviction, otherwise our confidence in the actuality of the attributes will inevitably be lost or weakened. Hence the definition of the Catechism brings in the being of God as infinite, eternal and unchangeable, before it affirms infinity, eternity and unchangeableness, as belonging to the particular attributes of that being, afterwards named. God as a personal Being is known primarily through the reve- lation to us of his substantial attributes, and especially of his moral perfections. It may even be admitted that we truly know him only by this process. What is termed the intuitive perception of God, the direct beholding of him on the surface of consciousness, as we see ourselves reflected there, can hardly be regarded as pos- sible. Yet the belief in his existence may safely be classed among those great primary beliefs, those fundamental convictions of rea- son and conscience, which lie at the base of all our practical acquaintance with things. We believe spontaneously, primarily, that God exists, and that the constitutional qualities and the moral perfections which are discernible in him, are in like manner real and inherent as well as virtual, although we realize also that as the infinite and unchangeable and absolute Spirit, he rises im- measurably above our highest thoughts, and at best is seen through a glass, darkly. In the familiar phrase of Augustine, we may apprehend though we cannot comprehend him in his nature and in his character. It has been objected that such knowledge as this is not scientific knowledge because it is not complete; and it is urged on philosophic grounds, not only that we do not now know, but even that as finite beings we never can know God in his real- ity. Yet surely we may apprehend, if we cannot comprehend him: we may learn of him through his revealed and illustrated attributes, though we may not penetrate the mystery of his essence or constitution. If it be said that we cannot even know his attri- butes fully or comprehensively, yet surely we may know that they 144 GOD IN HIS BEING. belong to him, and that they are real in themselves, though they are seen to be immeasurably greater than our apprehension of them. We may certainly perceive that they are not merely forms of knowledge, or impressions existing in our minds, rather than in- herent and enduring qualities in the divine Being. If we cannot know them fully, we can know them truly. The fact that God loves, or that he is just, or is mighty, may be matter of certain assurance to our minds, though we have no way of measuring his might, or testing absolutely his sense of justice, or fathoming the vast, deep sea of his love. It should be admitted that the modern doctrine of nescience or agnosticism, whether philosophic or scientific, cannot be met by direct quotations from the creeds of the Reformation. Yet a suf- ficient answer to these subtle types of false opinion may be found in what is inferentially contained in these formularies. He who duly appreciates their practical and spiritual teachings, will not be likely to be caught in the meshes of such speculative error. The old scholastic problem on which philosophic nescience is based, respecting the incapacity of the finite mind to comprehend the infi- nite, is practically answered by the simple distinction already suggested, between comprehensive knowledge of divine things, and real knowledge that is not comprehensive. The scientific objection that God cannot be known, unless he can be known through the principles and methods of physical research — an objection to which the creeds give no answer, because it could not have arisen in the era in which they were framed — may be answered, not by remanding the whole matter to the sphere of sen- timent or faith, but by broadening the definition of science, and by showing that the physical sciences themselves rest on certain philosophic axioms, fundamental verities of the same nature intel- lectually as the conception of God. Further answer to both of these varieties of skepticism may be found in a careful analysis of their underlying temper and tendencies, especially within the sphere of ethical and spiritual experience. And we may justly conclude that, in whatever form, mere agnosticism can never command the cordial or the permanent assent of mankind : the human mind spontaneously shrinks from it, as men draw back involuntarily from the edge of a precipice. It should be noted here that the Symbols attempt no philosophic classification of the divine attributes and perfections: they give us rather, as in the Shorter Catechism, a simple series in which there is an obvious gradation in statement, and in which the glo- ries of the divine character rather than the qualities of the divine WISDOM IX GOD — HIS INTELLIGENCE. 145 constitution are specially prominent. The transition apparent in their definition is a gradual transition from what is natural to what is moral, — infinity, eternity, unchangeableness in being, furnishing the basis for the consequent declaration of wisdom and power, and of the still more distinctively moral qualities such as justice and goodness and truth, which belong to God as a holy and perfect Person. It should also be noted that they continually lay the supreme stress on the spiritual perfections in God, — doubtless for the reason that it is through the disclosure of these rather than through the manifestation of his constitutional qual- ities, such as personality or infinitude or unchangeableness, that sinful man is to be brought back to him in penitence and devotion. If we knew nothing more of God than the fact that he exists, or than the fact that he exists as pure and fontal and absolute Spirit, it is probable that such knowledge would only impel us farther away from him, as our first parents fled from his presence in the garden which their sin had contaminated. But when we see him in his glory as a moral Being — when we are enabled to discern his wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth, as he has graciously chosen to disclose them in the Gospel, we are sponta- neously drawn toward him in humility of spirit, in responsive belief and trust, in penitential love and consecration. The attribute of wisdom is presented in the Symbols in two aspects; as intelligence, shown in perfect knowledge of all things actual and possible; and as wisdom distinctively, shown in the adaptation 8- Wisdom in God: intel- - L , , r 11 vc ligence, knowledge, wisdom, of means to ends, and of all specific distinctively# ends to the one supreme end, the divine glory. Turning here to the first of these aspects, we find the complete, perfect intelligence of God set forth rather as a natural than a moral endowment, belonging essentially to him as pure and eternal Spirit. This intelligence is set over against all pantheistic notions, modern or ancient, of an unconscious imper- sonal entity, either pervading all things as an indwelling force, or brooding over all things as a sleeping spirit. In the chapter under special notice, it is affirmed, not merely that God works all things according to the counsel, and of course the conscious coun- sel of his own will, but also that in his sight all things are open and manifest, and that his knowledge is infinite, infallible, and independent upon the creature. In the chapter on the Eternal Decree (III) it is taught that God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions. He is again and again characterized as most zvise, as having infallible foreknowledge , as 146 GOD IN HIS BEING. knowing all things, as holding secret counsel with himself "in regard to man; — phrases which are alike descriptive of an intelligence that includes within its grasp not only all that is, but all that might possibly come to pass. The characteristics of such intelligence are sufficiently suggested in these descriptions. It is intuitive, in the sense that it comes into the divine mind through no prolonged processes of investiga- tion or reflection, but is seen at once, immediately. It is synchronous, in the sense that the divine mind does not pass discursively from one truth to another, or know things only in their chronologic succession and relation, but rather takes in all truth and things in one comprehensive glance. It is exact and definite, — corresponding entirely to the reality of things, above the range of all confusion or vagueness, independent of image or illustration, crystalline and perfect in the clearness of its vision. It is complete, in the further sense that nothing escapes or ever can escape such comprehending survey ; nothing is to it contingent or micertain; nothing can occur which is not known beforehand alike in its principle, its origin, and its results immediate and remote. This intelligence also includes the possible as well as the actual — the things prevented or not done, as well as the things permitted or ordained. It embraces the whole universe of fact, being, principle, doctrine, possibilitj^; it sweeps at once through the past, the present, the future, and in its light the remotest ages of eternity appear as immediate. Nor was this knowledge ever less, nor will it ever be greater than it is now: being perfect it is incapable of either increase or diminution. Of its processes, of its intensity or of its scope, man can know little; it is too wonderful for us; in its presence we can but tremble and adore. The doctrine of the absolute omniscience of God will present itself again and again for consideration, especially in its relations to the divine decrees or purposes, and to the divine administra- tion in providence and in grace. Yet it is important that such omniscience should be fully recognized at this point, as the under- lying base of the more distinctively moral quality of wisdom. The fact may be inferred alike from the nature of God as Spirit, and from the specific fact of the divine eternity and infinity or omnipresence. It cannot be denied without impugning the divine perfection at many vital points. It is especially important to note that from the necessity of the case such knowledge must include man as truly as physical nature, and the future as well as past choices and acts of men, and also the entire development of the HIS MORAL WISDOM. 147 character and destinies of the race, not merely in this life but forever. All objects and events, future as well as past or present, must be included in it. Nor is this a scientia media, subject to contingencies which are determinable by man: it is direct and immediate, and wholly above all human contingency in its insight and its sweep. In the phrase of another, God sees all things in and through himself; and since he knows himself at once and completely, it is evident that he knows all things in himself at once and perfectly: however things are multiplied or lessened, his knowledge of them is forever complete and unchangeable. Such is invariably the biblical delineation of the divine omnis- cience; and though it be too wonderful for us or wholly inscrutable in the perplexing problems it suggests, we are never at liberty to question it: we can only bow down before it and submit ourselves in deed and thought to its infallible scrutiny. The term, wisdom, is more often applied in the Symbols, as in the Scriptures, specifically to the moral developments and activi- ties of this perfect intelligence. In ordinary life, wisdom is dis- played both in the selection of right or righteous ends, and in the choice and use of right means for the attaining of such ends. It involves always the exercise of a judgment which is both actuated by worthy motives, and determined by sound principles in its practical decisions. As applied to God, the term contem- plates both the one final end toward which he is ever moving, and the particular ends he seeks in given cases, in subordination to that ultimate purpose. It contemplates also the use of none but appropriate and just means, and such use or application of these as shall effect the end contemplated. The sphere of such wisdom is as comprehensive as the universe. It is seen in the plan of creation and in the execution of that plan in all of its details: it is manifested in the complex and manifold develop- ments of providence, from the most minute event in the life of any creature up to the most significant movements of races or of planets: it is specially manifest in the arranging, unfolding, progress and completion of the scheme of redemption. These higher aspects of this attribute are especially emphasized in the Confession. The unsearchable wisdom, as well as the power and goodness of God, is said to manifest itself in his providence , extend- ing to all things and ordering and governing all for his own holy ends. The wise and holy counsel of God is asserted even in his permission of sin, and particularly in his having purposed to order it to his own glory. The plan of salvation is said to originate as much in the wisdom and purpose of God as in his grace; and the 148 GOD IN HIS BEING. unfolding of that plan historically is viewed as a manifestation throughout of the same purpose and wisdom. Even the divine consent to the existence and ravages of the dire evil of sin is not regarded as derogating from the cardinal truth that God is most wise — most wise, first in the permission and then in his most power- ful bounding of sin in a manifold dispensation, so as to secure his own holy ends therein. The divine sovereignty, as taught in the Symbols, can have no sufficient basis except in the recognition of such wisdom as planning, directing, controlling all things. And it is ever to be remembered that the conception of that sover- eignty, so often misapprehended as it is there presented, is always set forth in the light of these antecedent and justifying views of the perfect intelligence, the complete moral wisdom of the Deity. In expounding the associated conception of power as an attribute of God, three relative forms of the doctrine seem to have been present in the minds of the Assem- 9. Power in God: God as bl God as cause, God as will, God cause and as will i His sover- . «, , ^. ., . . - , ■- . as sovereign. — The doctrine that God eignty. ° is both the first cause and the final cause, originating everything by his own interior causative force, and again utilizing every thing for his own purpose and glory, is clearly maintained in the Symbols in many ways. Such causal efficiency is said to lie in his nature as pure and absolute Spirit, — all power belonging to him inherently. In considering their doc- trine respecting divine providence, we shall have occasion to note more distinctly the relations of this primary potency to all vari- eties of secondary causation. But even here it should be noted that all such secondary causation must have originated in and through the first cause; and that secondary causation cannot act so as to secure results independently of this first, originating cause. Whatever theory may be entertained respecting the nature of this connection, or the manner in which God acts in and with and through second causes, there can be no question as to the fact. To deny that secondary causes have any efficiency, or to affirm that there are no such causes, is to lesolve the whole universe simply into one grand, progressive, stupendous movement of the divine will. To suppose that there are such causes in the universe which God did not institute and which he does not con- trol, is to confess that he has no real government over nature or over man, and that the final outcome of things may be something wholly different from his original plan or desire. The Confession (V) teaches rather that he ordereth all things to fall out accord- ing to the nature of second causes; and that back of all these POWER IN GOD — CAUSE AND WILL. 1 4U subsidiary agencies, he himself doth uphold, direct, dispose and govern all. The conception of God as will presents the same fact in a broader form. It lies in his nature as Spirit that he should possess such power of volition: this power is a central element in the idea of Spirit. God is cause, first and final, because he is also will, in the most vital sense. He puts forth his almighty energies, pouring them into each secondary force, and filling the universe with their amazing manifestations, because he wills — because he chooses. His almightiness is the expression of his inward capacity of voli- tion: he is omnipotent, because he is Spirit, pure, free, absolute. Without entering here into any analysis of the various exercises of the divine will, as decretive, preceptive or permissive, or inquir- ing as to the secret of its measureless efficiency, we may note the primary fact that God is will, — his own immutable and most right- eous will being the direct outgrowth and expression of his spiritu- ality. Thus creation occurs because it pleased him: the multiform developments of providence are referred to the free and immutable counsel of his will: the plan of salvation, with all implied or con- tained in it, (VII) he hath been pleased to express by way of covenant. Such language runs almost everywhere through the Symbols, indicating constantly the strength of the conception as one of the dominating elements in the system of doctrine there contained. Without specially considering just here the doctrine of the divine sovereignty as found in the Symbols, we may simply note the fact that such sovereignty is constantly assumed in them, as a consequence of the foregoing view of God as cause and God as will. Being thus both cause and will, God must be sovereign, and that in the highest sense conceivable. Granting the possibility of widely differing notions respecting that sovereignty in its method and scope ; — granting also the existence of great practical difficulties in respect to the relations of such sovereignty to human freedom and responsibility, the fact must still be admitted as un- questionable and fundamental. God is the supreme Lord and King of all the world ; — not merely of the world of humanity, as the phrase implies in the connection in which it is used, but of all worlds, with all their creatures and contents, forever. Such supremacy is an ultimate fact. It is everywhere taught in the Scriptures, as it is everywhere suggested in nature and in the life of man. How this supremacy is exercised in the material universe, and especially as related to the free will and consequent accounta- bility of man, is a problem to be carefully considered at a later stage in our exposition. 150 GOD IN HIS BEING. While Protestant symbolism can hardly be said to present any theory of the divine omnipotence in either of these three aspects, yet it is strongly unanimous in affirming the essential fact. That God is the first and the executive and the final cause of all things and all events, and that his will is everywhere present and everywhere supreme, and this in such sense as makes him absolute sovereign over nature and' over man, is to some extent affirmed, and is uni- versally assumed in these formularies. Even the Arminian Re- monstrance (IV) recognizes this divine potency as the beginning, continuance and accomplishment of all good in the domain of grace, and by consequence in the sphere of nature and of provi- dence also. But as in many other directions so here, the West- minster statements are more full and more explicit than any others — though adhering carefully to the wise rule of stating the fact without attempting speculative explanation. The term, power, as employed in both the Confession and the Catechisms is a very broad term. We find its closest analogue, not in the forces of nature, tremendous and resistless as these often are, but rather in the human will as an energy of a higher order than any force of nature, and capable of producing results which no natural force can effect. As applied to God, it signifies not only the abil- ity to will, but the ability to execute whatever he wills to do. It does not relate to what may be described as natural impossibilities, but only to what may properly be regarded as legitimate objects of power. The scholastic speculation whether there are any lim- its to the divine potency, — whether God can undo that which has been done, — whether he can make anything better than he has actually made, and other similar queries, need no specific notice here. Nor does the term refer to moral impossibility in whatever form. God, it is said, (V: iv) being most holy and righteous, neither is ?wr can be the author or approver of sin; and Holy Scripture teaches that he cannot lie, or in any way deceive the children of men, or deny himself, or abdicate his throne of glory. But whatever comes within the scope of holy power, con- trolled by infinite wisdom and equity and love, he not only knows and desires but is able to accomplish. This is the proper concep- tion of omnipotence as an attribute of God both natural and moral. Such omnipotence is a fact beyond all question. It is implied in what we know him to be as pure and absolute Spirit : it is proved and certified by what we know of the actual workings of such power in the sphere of nature and in human life: it is abundantly declared and established in the inspired Word. Of the instant and the vast and the complete and immeasurable sweep of this divine JUSTICE IN GOD. 151 potency, — of its irresistible efficiency either through means, or without, above and against means as it pleaseth God, — of its in- exhaustible volume and its ineffable grandeur, as seen alike in the ordering of the starry heavens and in his moral administra- tion over man and over other rational and moral beings, it is im- possible for us to form more than an approximate conception. Beside the two primal perfections of God expressed in the terms, wisdom and power, the Westminster teaching brings prom- inently into view three other moral or . ., , ,... . ~ , . .. . 10. Other moral Attri- spiritual qualities in God, -justice, butM. Jus{ice> ^^ goodness, truth — which may here be Truth, considered together. Of those the first is justice. "While there are few indices in the Symbols of those philosophic distinctions respecting the divine justice, which have figured so largely in theology during the past two centuries, espec- ally in connection with theories of the atonement, we may note the frequent presence in them of the scholastic antithesis between justitia interna and justitia externa: God being represented habit- ually as both righteous in himself, and righteous throughout his entire administration. He is first of all righteous in himself or internally, — controlled in his own interior life as truly as in his outward activities by the most absolute and unvarying regard for what he sees to be right. God is not only just — he is justice itself as truly as, in the terse phrase of John, he is love. He is represented as most just, and as studying always the claims of ab- solute justice in the purpose to create, and in all his subsequent plans and determinations. This attribute is never resolved into simple regard for the welfare of his creatures, or into any other kin- dred characteristic: it is described as an inherent endowment, resident in him as pure and free and absolute Spirit. In this sense, it has sometimes been regarded as synonymous with moral excel- lence in general, or with holiness or worthiness, taken as descrip- tive of the complete perfection of Deity. Yet the term more properly has reference distinctively to the intrinsic equity of God in his moral relations to his creatures: it describes the state of mind and will with which he habitually contemplates these rela- tions. His interior desire, his inward and eternal purpose, is to do right always and everywhere. Nor is it ever to be assumed that the right is determined in the divine mind by the mere will of God as an arbitrary matter. While there are instances in the divine legislation, such as the authoritative setting apart of exactly one seventh of human life for worship, which seem to rest directly upon the divine choice alone, yet even such legislation 152 GOD IN HIS BEING. is not to be viewed as in any sense arbitrary. The law which God imposes upon his moral creatures and to which — it may be reverently said — he is himself eternally and internally obedient, is the expression of his infinite wisdom, goodness, holiness, justice and truth, as well as his sovereign power. Viewed on the other side as an active quality pouring its influ- ence into all forms of the divine agency in these outward relations, justice is as fully affirmed of God as either power or wisdom. In his primary decree, in his plan and process of creation, in his dealing with man both before the fall, in the fall and subse- quently, he is described as most just. His creation and support of angels, and his establishing them in holiness and happiness, are in order that (X. C. 19) he may employ them in the adminis- tration of his power, mercy a?id justice. His dealings with men in providence, whatever be the nature of such providence specific- ally, are said to be to the praise of the glory of his wisdom, power and justice. In the chapter on Justification, (XI) the exact justice of God is said to be, equally with his rich grace, glorified in the justification of sinners. The condemnation of such as have rejected the Gospel, the dishonor and wrath brought upon them on account of their sin, are said to redound to the praise of his glorious justice. And in the chapter on the Judgment, ( XXXIII ) , one of the ends sought in the appointing of that awful day is declared to be the manifesting of the glory of his justice, both in the rewarding of the righteous, and in the damnation of those who are wicked and disobedient. Whatever objections may be raised at other points against what is said respecting the divine purposes and dealing, there can be no doubt that the Westminster Assem- bly held strictly, uncompromisingly, to the doctrine that God is just — just inherently and just in every manifestation. Could it be shown that their conception of the divine decrees, or of the scheme of redemption, involved — as has sometimes been said — an actual infraction of the claims of absolute equity, we must still give them credit for honest faith in such equity, and regard them as having failed simply to carry the truth they held, out to its legitimate results. The distinction just suggested between internal and external justice is sometimes expressed by the terms, absolute and rela- tive,— the first referring to the essential rectitude of the divine character, and the second to the equally essential rectitude of the divine dealings with the human race. Other terms, such as rec- torai or legislative, distributive and retributive, governmental or commutative, are used in later theology — as we shall see — to GOODNESS IN GOD. L53 describe certain specific relations, general or particular, which God as Moral Governor sustains toward men,- -the last especially in conjunction writh the scheme of redemption through the mediation of Christ. At this point it is important only to emphasize the underlying truth that God is intrinsically and forever just, both in his disposition toward his moral creatures and in all his admin- istration over them. Some of the questions springing up in the presence of this doctrine, especially those in connection with the permitting of sin and the disciplinary and retributive dealing of God with sinners, can best be considered at a later stage. The doctrine cannot, however, be too strenuously emphasized in an age like this, when the attribute of justice is so frequently merged and lost in the correlative conception of love, — when the divine Fatherhood is set in unnatural antithesis with the conception of God as Moral Governor; when it is broadfy assumed that he is too good to punish or even to require faith and obedience from his sinful and rebellious creatures, and when his holy law with all its solemn requisitions and warnings is so frequently set aside as if it were an obsolete or at least an insignificant code and rule of life. In the presence of such errors far too current, which are not only blunting and impairing the religious sense, but corrupting the morals of the age, it is imperative that the voice of Scripture and the consonant voice of reason and conscience respecting the infinite, eternal, unchangeable justice of God should be most earnestly and constantly proclaimed as one of the cardinal elements in our holy Faith. For a type of Christianity which is not true to the justice of God, will soon prove itself untrue to his love, his grace, his holiness also, and will ultimately cease altogether to be the Christianity of the inspired Word. The almost invariable association of the attribute of goodness with that of justice in the Symbols is a strong confirmation on this point. The justice there affirmed is a quality which har- monizes intrinsically with the purest benevolence, the completest mercy and grace in the divine mind. Much of the objection to the Calvinistic scheme, drawn from views of the divine benevo- lence, although they perchance may be justified partly by what is found in the writings of representative Calvinists, can hardly lie against that scheme as presented in the Symbols themselves. For, while God is always represented as just, working all things according to the counsel of his own immutable and most right- eous will, he is described in the same connection, (II : ii) as most loving, gracious, merciful, long suffering, abundant in good- ness and truth: — phrases which are certainly to be taken into full 154 GOD IN HIS BEING. account in the interpretation of the language just preceding them in the same chapter. His counsel there, and indeed everywhere in both Confession and Catechisms, is declared to be most loving; his will, though most righteous, is also most gracious; his immut- able purpose is one which reveals his abundance in goodness and truth, as well as his changeless equity. The term, goodness, as generally employed, refers but incident- ally to the moral excellence inherent in God, though he is always described as in himself good; it refers rather to his exhibitions of fatherly feeling toward his moral creatures in their various con- ditions and needs. God is good toward the angels who have not left their first estate, and to the redeemed who are assembled with him in glory, — his love complacently viewing them in their holy condition, and rejoicing over them in the peculiar felicities of their perfect estate. God is good in his providence; govern- ing all creatures, actions and things by his most wise and holy methods, in the temper of goodness and mercy — having paternal regard to every need, and ministering most tenderly even to the unthankful and the evil. God is eminently good in his gracious plan of redemption; providing that plan under the impulses of a love which embraced the world; unfolding and applying it in the same fatherly interest, and including within its blessed issues all who could be brought to know and accept it. God is good also in his dealing, not merely with those who are incapable of being out- wardly called by the word of grace, but even with such as reject the offered salvation, — bearing long with their indifference, struggling by his Spirit with their willful opposition, and con- signing them at last, not in the high temper of insulted majesty alone, but most pitifully, to the fate which their unworthiness and guilt have merited. While there are phrases in the Confession which express a severer view of God, and while much in the theology of the age in which it was compiled, and in that of the century following, was dictated in the more forbidding method too characteristic of Calvin himself, yet the broader view of the divine goodness just suggested will be recognized in all candid interpretations of the Symbols, not merely as an occasional but rather as a central, if not predominating characteristic. It is not out of place to remark in passing, that much of the criticism of Calvin based on his severities both of view and of expression, would be essentially modified by a more careful study of his earnest teaching respecting the benevolence and mercy of God, and his correspondent inculcation of the obligation of man- kind to be loving and merciful. The tender nature of the man GOODNESS AND JUSTICE CONJOINED. 155 whose house was always the hospitable home of persecuted refugees, and of the widows and orphans of those who had suf- fered in the Protestant cause, and who when dying gave instruc- tion that no monument should be erected over his remains, but that the few possessions he had should be given rather to the poor of Geneva, deserves worthier consideration at the hands of those who denounce him as a narrow and merciless bigot. Even amid the rigid logic, and the forbidding statements of doctrine, and the stern and solemn denunciations, one may find in his Insti- tutes many a sentence which breathes forth the most earnest faith in the divine love and mercy, and the most benevolent interest in our lost race. Against papal errorists, against vain and false philosophers, against willful skeptics and unbelievers, Calvin was always unsparing in his condemnation; but for man- kind as sinful and perishing, his great soul overflowed always with a compassion born of heaven. It is not strange that the skeptic Renan, while criticising his theology, should characterize him as the most Christian man of his generation. Calvinism itself, viewed broadly and fairly, is like its great expounder in this regard. It always contemplates justice as a primal quality in God, and goodness as forever conditioned by justice. It cannot for a moment consent to the suggestion that God ever has done or ever can do an unrighteous act toward any of his creatures. It cannot for an instant presume that the divine love, perfect and glorious as it is, will ever induce God to be indifferent to the claims of equity, even in the disciplining or the condemnation of those who violate his most holy law. It plants itself upon the impregnable rock of the divine sovereignty, and declares that in the exercise of that sovereignty, God must ever be regarded as just, though every man be a liar. Nor does it hesitate to say that all teaching which exalts the love of God at the expense of the divine equity, is to be viewed as dangerous, if it be not blasphemous heresy. Yet certainly no section of Pro- testantism has ever been more constant, more earnest, more tender or joyous in its exposition of divine mercy toward sinners or of the wondrous grace that saves. A thousand illustrations of this fact might be gathered from the writings of conspicuous Calvinists in other ages, and eminently in our own. That in this respect valuable melioration of the earlier Calvinism has been secured in this age, and is still in progress, is an unquestionable and a happy fact. But such change has involved no departure from the fundamental truth of the system, that God is forever just, supremely and altogether just, in the exercise of his rightful 150 GOD IN HIS BEING. ful sovereignty; nor is to be anticipated that at this fundamental point Calvinism will ever forswear itself. Of the truthfulness of God in every aspect, both inherent and transitive or relative, we find here the strongest possible affirma- tion. He is described as infinitely, eternally and unchangeably true — the living and true God. The authority of the Scripture is said (I: iv) to rest, not upon the testimony of any man or church, but wholly upon God, who is truth itself ; and all the teachings of that revelation have therefore the same quality. It was for the better preserving and propagating of the truths that this revela- tion was committed unto writing: and this revelation is therefore to be read by us with a firm perstiasion that it is the very Word of God, and is consequently an infallible instructor in all things per- taining to duty and to salvation. So God is said to be true in his providence; the lessons of that providence being faithful witnesses to the reality of things, and reliable guides to trust and hope in him. He is especially declared to be true in the disclosures of the Gospel; — its doctrines being so infinitely worthy of trust, its prom- ises and threatenings so certain to be verified, that it is the imme- diate duty of every sinner to assent to the truth of this Gospel, and implicitly to receive and rest upon Christ and his righteous- ness. The infallible assurance of faith which believers are invited to attain, is said to be founded upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation. In himself, therefore, and in all his deal- ings both providential and gracious, God is the living and true God; never mistaking in his knowledge, never misled through any influence, discerning at one glance and completely all things in every sphere; adhering always to his most holy Word, verify- ing his promises, faithful to his warnings, and forever and forever the Truth. It is obvious that this quality sustains the same relation to the other moral attributes in God, which spirituality sustains to his natural qualities. It belongs to him as pure Spirit, free and abso- lute, to be truthful in every utterance and act. As intelligent Spirit, he must know intuitively all things exactly as they are: to him blindness, mistake, illusion, are forever impossible. As perfect Spirit, he can never deceive or mislead; however dark his sayings or impenetrable the mystery of his acts, no error or fraud can possibly attach to them. As Sovereign over his moral crea- tures, vitally interested in their education and their ultimate preparation for an eternity of holy companionship and blessedness, he has the highest motive in leading them into sure, stable, infal- lible knowledge, especially of all spiritual things. And he has TRUTHFULNESS IN GOD. 15, given the highest evidence of his interest in such training by the gift of his Spirit whose special mission it is, in part, to lead holy souls into all the truth. Truthfulness is therefore directly associ- ated with goodness and with justice, as one among the crowning perfections of the Deity. God makes nothing true through his simple statement of it by will or by decree; the sources of truth are to be found rather in the lofty infinitudes of his perfect moral nature. He utters what is true because first of all in his omniscience he discerns and knows it to be truth, and in hisequity and his goodness seeks to make it known to his moral creatures. If God were not thus intrinsically truthful, he could not be regarded as good; if he were not thus truthful, we could have no adequate guarantee for reliance on him as just. What faith, hope and charity are in man as sanctified, truth and justice and mercy are in God, — the three supreme virtues which mark him as per- fect, and which fully substantiate his claim to universal love, trust, devotion. The term holiness as applied to God in the Symbols, signifies not simply inward purity as to specific thoughts or impulses, but also spiritual excellency in general: it * , j . .. 11. Holiness in God : His is a consummating term, descriptive mQral perfection . General of what he is in his perfection, and as view, the appropriate center of all human, all angelic adoration. It doubtless refers in part to that interior moral beauty and freedom from all defect or blemish, that un- sullied glory and grace, which are resident in the divine Being, and which lead angels and archangels in their highest ecstacy to prostrate themselves in ceaseless worship before the penetrating radiance of his presence. It refers also in part to that intrinsic sense of worthiness, that serene contemplation or recognition of himself as flawless and complete, which must stand behind all his activities, especially in his moral administration. But compre- hensively, the term includes all personal and spiritual excellence of whatever type exhibited in God — that combination of infinitude and eternity and unchangeableness with wisdom and power, with justice and goodness and truth, which makes him the glorious as he is the absolute God, and which lifts him up forever as the su- preme object of all trust and devotion. It is more than a state of the divine will, as forever fixed upon what is right and good; it is more than justice and benevolence, regarded as attributes in the divine character; it is that character itself in all its inconceivable elevation, and its absolute flawlessness and sanctity. Charnock, (Divine Attributes) declares that this holiness has an excellency 158 GOD IN HIS BEING. above all the other perfections of Deity, and refers in proof to the threefold ascriptions of praise frequently recurring in the Scrip- tures; Holy, Holy, Holy! So God is habitually represented in the Symbols; — a Being having no sin, and infinitely hostile to all sin, ever perfect in himself; most holy in all his counsels, in all his works, and in all his commands; most holy as well as wise and good in his decrees and in his providences, even when dealing with the wicked: and most of all, infinitely holy in his plan of grace, and in his spiritual ministries to men for their salvation. His minis- tering Spirit is called eminently the Holy Spirit, both as being intrinsically holy, and the source and cause of all holiness in us: his Word is styled the Holy Word; and all the activities of his grace, from our effectual calling to our complete sanctification, are designed to bring us into the practice of that true holi?iess without which no man shall see the Lord. Schleiermacher defines holiness in a special sense as that divine perfection by which, when it is brought into correlation with the life and character of man, the conscience is made to feel the ne- cessity of redemption. The statement brings into view the supreme object of God in the revelation of himself as the Holy One. That revelation assumes a variety of forms. We see it in the divine law as designed to bring men into the consciousness of their guilt as unholy, and of their need of purifying grace. We see it in the Gospel as a divine scheme fitted to educate and train and inspire those who receive it in the practice of true holiness. We see it in the feeling of God toward sin, and in his purpose to punish sin, wherever his grace is found to be ineffectual in its removal. We see it shining out in more winning aspects in all those beauties of nature, flowers and fountains and stars, which are ever suggesting a type of purity higher than can be found in man. We also see it reflected in the moral feeling and conviction of mankind, and in all those aspirations after holiness which have expressed themselves, sometimes in most painful as well as in beau- tiful forms, in the life and history of the race. But the one end in all these disclosures is, in the phrase of Schleiermacher, to bring men to realize their need of redemption, and then to lead them through the nurture of the Holy Ghost and of the Holy Word, into a type of moral experience which shall ultimately make them holy even as God is holy. It is hardly practicable here to refer to the objections urged against this conception of the moral excellence, the spiritual completeness of God, — objections drawn from his decrees or his providence, or from his dealings with men under the Gospel. The THE HOLINESS OF GOD, 159 manner in which such objections are met in the Symbols will better be considered in conjunction with their exposition of these partic- ular doctrines. Yet it is important at this stage to note the philo- sophic breadth and power, the spiritual elevation, the majesty and persuasiveness of the view of the Deity here brought before us. Traditional as is the story that the definition of God presented in the Shorter Catechism was first uttered in prayer, and was spon- taneously appropriated by the Assembly as accurately expressing the essential truth in the case, there can be no question that this definition is one of the sublimest and completest ever uttered. Compared with like definitions in other Protestant creeds it shines out like some bright planet in the sky, filling the whole firmament of theology with its luster. Criticism has sometimes seized upon the strong statements in the Symbols concerning the divine fore- knowledge or power or justice or majesty, as if they conveyed too cold and forbidding a view of the Almighty. But certainly they do not go beyond what the Word of God has plainly affirmed: they rather condense and crystallize its teachings into clear, imperishable doctrine, such as neither the understanding nor the heart can well reject. Moreover it should be constantly remem- bered that all the most tender and benignant traits in God, the most winning aspects of the divine nature and character, are here blended indissolubly with these sterner qualities, and are to be received as making up, together with these, the one composite, harmonious, symmetrical and scriptural conception. Justice has rarely been done to this side of the Westminster formularies. The mountain summits of spiritual thought, the deep and dark abysses, which they bring to view, are in themselves real, and those who ignore them can never attain the clearest and most impressive conceptions of Him within whose nature such heights and depths are surely contained. Yet on these summits and along the sides of these abysses, the sunlight of divine love is ever shining, and flowers of tenderness and grace are springing, and the verdure and beauty of an immaculate holiness are to be seen. Infinite and eternal and unchangeable as God is declared to be in his sovereignty and justice, and in the severer aspects of his dealing with men, he is declared to be no less infinite and unchangeable and everlasting in his benevolence, his providence, his grace — his holiness. A careful comparison with the other Protestant creeds must lead the student to a fresh sense of the remarkable comprehen- siveness and dignity of the general conception of God and his attributes, as thus presented in the Westminster formularies. It 160 GOD IN HIS BEING. has been urged with some significance that the Lutheran Con- fessions, and some Reformed creeds such as the Heidelberg Catechism, have succeeded in bringing out into better light the more benignant and winning aspects of the divine character and relations to men. It may be true that some other types of theology have been more successful in setting forth the Christolo- gical idea, in contrast with the Calvinistic view of paternal sovereignty as standing behind the incarnation and work of Christ, and thus have softened somewhat the severe impressions and experiences which the doctrine of sovereignty, where strongly held, has sometimes produced. But let it not be forgotten that the boundless tenderness and grace seen in the Redeemer are only the incarnate manifestations of the divine power, wisdom, love, which from the first embraced the world and provided for it the plan of redemption. Nor let it be forgotten that the great grace of the Gospel derives its winning appearance, its wondrous beauty and attractiveness, largely from the darker background of might and equity and supreme majesty, on whose solemn surface it is revealed to men. And it is in the skillful and honest blending of these antithetic views of God that the theology of Westminster exhibits alike its fine proportions and its peculiar massiveness. The men who composed it were not insensible to the attractions of Jesus, to the ineffable tenderness of his mission, or to the amazing power of his love to win and save the lost. But they were also men who lived in solemn times, who had great battles to fight, and to whom it was a measureless comfort to know always that God is, and that he rules in infinite majesty and with unfailing purpose over all. From this survey of the divine attributes and perfections, we may pass to the consideration of the great doctrine associated with this conception of God in the 12. Trinity in God: The chapter specially under examination, — underlying ground in the the doctrine of the Holy Trinity. The divine Unity : Unity defined. . J . J . sum of the doctrine is contained in the words: In the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, of one sub- stance, power and eternity; God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. In the succeeding sentence the properties peculiar to each of the three persons are described; and in the chapter on the Covenant with Man (VII) the relations of these per- sons are at least partially indicated. Again in chapter VIII, on Christ the Mediator, the second person in this holy Trinity is particularly described with respect to his divine constitution THE TRINITY IN COD. 161 and relations, and also to his full and true humanity. The two Catechisms simply repeat in briefer form, and with but slight variation from each other, what is thus set forth in the Confes- sion. Gathering up in addition to these statements such inci- dental references as are scattered elsewhere through the Symbols, we may easily find material for an accurate construction of the doctrine as held by the Assembly. At the outset of such construction, the true, substantial, eter- nal unity of the Godhead must be recognized as the underlying ground or basis on which the biblical conception of the Trinity is to be reared. This unity has already been considered in part as one essential' characteristic of God, contemplated as pure and personal Spirit, but needs further examination at this point. God is thus one, not in any merely moral or social sense, as if the three persons in the Godhead were three beings simply agreeing together in thought or feeling or purpose; nor merely in the sense of similarity or likeness consequent upon the possession of a com- mon nature, — as the human race becomes a unit by virtue of a common origin or the heritage of one type of life; but in the deepest and truest sense possible for us to conceive. In essence or substance or nature, God is one Being — indivisibly, internally and eternally one, as absolute perfection must of necessity be. To this great primary fact, abundantly taught in the earliest periods and phases of revelation, and every where made fundamental in theScrip- tures,all conceptions of the Trinity must from the nature of the case be subordinated; — with this fact all descriptions of the threefold- ness of personality, or the three modes of existence in God, must harmonize. The biblical and rational grounds on which this primal truth rests have already been sufficiently stated by way of contrast with all types of polytheism. The united witness of the Chris- tian creeds, and the firm faith of the church universal on this point, have also been recited. It is not too much to say that the truth is indeed axiomatic in the estimate of all who have gained any adequate conception of God as a Being, and as such is to be emphasized here and everywhere in Christian theology as funda- mental. Yet it is important to note also that this underlying unity is in some respects unique: it is not a homeogeneous singleness merely, but an inconceivable and an immeasurable oneness, as far above our apprehension as God himself is higher than man. In fact, unity of being in God as to its nature and qualities, is hardly less mys- terious than are his triune modes of being : Cunningham, Hist. Theol.: Vol. II. Revealing himself to our vision as the one and 162 GOD IN HIS BEING. only cause, whether primal or efficient or final; as the one and only Father and Governor in providence and in moral administra- tion, and as the one and only object of our faith and allegiance and devotion, his essential unity must still be regarded as some- thing inexpressibly deeper and grander than any merely numerical oneness would be. L,essing styles it a transcendental unity which does not exclude plurality. A certain manifoldness is suggested by the conception, whenever with our feeble insight we seek to apprehend it. As a flower, to use the illustration of Luther, is one in nature but distinguishable as triune in form and fra- grance and medicinal value, — as an}' single object in the physical world reveals triplicity in shape and magnitude and color, — as the white light of day is divisible into its three primal or its seven secondary rays, — as there are three distinct forces, the creative the preservative and the destructive, in the one system of nature, — as the one sun displays itself alike in heat, radiance, fructifying energy and the force of gravitation, — as man himself, though one, may be contemplated in several distinct relations, or may be ana- lyzed both physically and mentally into a triple series of constitu- ents, separable in thought though not in fact, so we may discern in the unity of God a manifoldness which is but faintly symbolized in such illustrations — a certain complexity and multiplicity of being, existing in conjunction with this primal oneness, such as it is impossible for any creature to attain or even to conceive. All such illustrations at the best are but finite and earthly: God is one in a sense in which oneness cannot be affirmed of any finite object. It has been tersely said of him, that he is not a natural but a trinal unit. Augustine claims (Civ. Dei. XI.) that, as being nearer to God in nature than any other of his works, and destined to be brought still nearer by grace, we may see in our- selves as spiritual existences a blending oneness and threeness of being which may properly suggest to us the presence in God of a type of unity, in an infinitely higher degree blended with tri- plicity or multiplicity, such as no mortal or angel can experience or apprehend. We both are, he says in a remarkable passage which Hamilton has placed by the side of the famous axiom of Descartes, — we both are, and we know that we are, and we de- light both in our being, and in our knowledge that we are. And if, as Augustine thus teaches, we though single and simple in essence, are thus manifold to our own narrow comprehension, how much vaster and more multiplex may be the oneness resi- dent in God. It has been urged against the Symbols that by their use of the DEFECTIVE CONCEPTIONS. 163 abstract term, Godhead, by their delineation of the personality of Christ as in marked contrast with the Deity in general, and by their description of the work of Christ as set over against the position and claims of God as Sovereign and Father, and in other similar ways, they make tritheistic impressions on the reader, if indeed they do not become inconsistent with themselves, and deny in one connection the unity which they have asserted in another. Such objections lie, not against the formularies of Westminster only, but against the Protestant symbolism generally. That views of the Godhead as in council or covenant, and of the several persons in the Godhead as in antagonism, representing diverse interests and dealing with each other as three beings would in like circum- stances, have prevailed too extensively in Protestant theology, cannot be questioned. There are interpretations of Scripture, somewhat current even in our time, which have largely affected the popular mind in the same direction, — leading to essentially erroneous apprehensions of the Father on one side and of the Holy Spirit on the other, while separating God in Christ, or Christ as the Son of God, far too widely from both. To such an extent has this supposed diversity of interests and activities been carried, that in the relative exaltation of the Son, the separate personality of the Spirit has virtually been ignored, while the pur- pose and feeling of God the Father in redemption have been greatly depreciated. Such tritheism is but a Christian form of polytheism: it leaves the soul to deal in the matter of its salva- tion with three divine Beings rather than with one: it fails to maintain the essential unity and consequent power of the biblical conception, and thus works irreparable mischief practically where the true doctrine, rightly held, might have brought light and blessing. Yet the Symbols, following the example of the older Protest- ant formularies, do certainly affirm most positively the unity, not of the Godhead abstractly, but of God in his being and nature, and in all his attributes and perfections. He is said to exist in and of himself- — alone in and unto himself ; he is described as the one only living and true God; in the threeness of the persons, there is said to be but 07ie substance, poiver and eternity. As such, God is said to plan and decree, to create, to preserve and govern in his providence. And while the antithesis between God and the divine Christ as Mediator is pressed out strongly, and in such ways as to produce in some minds the impression of two beings working in a species of antagonism, yet the primary fact of unity clearly flows into and through all these subsequent 164 GOD IN HIS BEING. expositions of the scheme of grace, and is to be regarded as a regulative principle in the entire construction. It is especially important that this underlying unity should be maintained throughout our analysis of the doctrine of the holy Trinity as presented in the Symbols. It must never be forgotten that God is forever one before he is three; and that no view of the three- ness of persons is admissible which does not preserve this oneness as a clear, unquestionable, regulative postulate. The meaning of the symbolic term, Person, is not easily defined. When it is said that in the unity of the Godhead there be three persons, we can save ourselves from 13. The term, Person ; its contradiction only by limiting at once relations to Being: limita- ., . , r .-, •, .. ,, „ * the scope or contents of the latter tions of the term. r . term; asserting at least negatively that we do not thereby mean, being, or its synonym in such words as nature, substance, essence. The Greek term, hypostasis, has sometimes been called into service as a limiting and explaining word; but it is difficult to fix upon that term a meaning that is clear of mystery, or that relieves us altogether from this sense of contradiction. The L,atin synonym, subsistence, so often em- ployed by Calvin as a literal translation of hypostasis, deepens instead of lessening the mental difficulty. Nor is the phrase, mode, or mode of existence, now occasionally used, quite ade- quate, since we need some further description of these separate modes of being, in order to adjust them properly to the primary fact of unity. The more helpful word, person, must however be used in a sense which is confessed to be exceptional: its exact relation to the word, being, must be disavowed, and an antithesis between the two terms be set up, for which there is no close parallel in ordinary usage. The definition of Locke that a person is a thinking, intelligent being that has reason and reflection, and can consider itself as itself, in different times and places, is obviously inadmissible here. Similarly, to define each person in the Trinity as an intelligent subject, or as a distinct individual existence having the properties of reason and feeling and free will, must inevitably confuse person with being, substantially as is done in ordinary speech, and so lead on directly to a species of tritheism. To define the term as denoting such a threefold dis- tinction in the one divine nature as connects itself with personal properties and acts and mutual relationships; or, in the phrase of Calvin, as a subsistence in the divine essence which is related tc > the other subsistences in that essence, and yet is distinguished from them by some incommunicable property, still leaves the PERSON AS RELATED TO BEING. 165 distinction between person and being in a vague, unimpressive and insufficient form. Yet we have no other term which expresses the divine fact any more precisely, nor is there within the scope of our knowledge any other analogue or resemblance or illustra- tion which is any more helpful to our faith; and we consequently rest in the statement of all Christian symbolism that in the unity of the Godhead there be three persons: Hall, Harmony of Prot. Conf. , second section. At this point the Symbols clearly plant themselves, not merely on the antecedent symbolism modern and ancient, but ultimately on the Scripture itself as their justifying ground. The Augsburg Confession, after indorsing the Nicene declaration, and affirming the existence of three persons of the same essence and power, who also are co-eternal, further declares (Art. I.) that the term, person, is used in that signification in which the ecclesiastical writers, the Fathers, have used it in this case, to signify not merely a part or quality in another, but that which properly (peculiarly) subsists in or by itself. The Article evidently attempts to indicate something deeper, more fundamental, than any specific attribute or perfection in God, — something resident somewhere between such attributes and the divine essence or sub- stance, as a special and ineffable mode of being. The Second Helvetic Confession teaches (Cap III) that there are, not three Gods, but three persons, consubstantial, co-eternal and co-equal, — distinct as, or so far as they are, hypostases, and proceeding each in its own order, but without any inquality. Most of the other symbols of the Reformation, including the three antecedent British Confessions, are content with the exposition of the doc- trine in briefer forms, while frequently referring to the ancient creeds as furnishing satisfactory statements of the essential fact. The Irish Articles are more full than any other; and their descrip- tion of the differentiating properties in the three persons undoubt- edly furnished the basis of the like explanation in the teachings of Westminster. The fact that in all these formularies there is a marked absence of the verbal and speculative distinctions found in the ancient creeds, especially the Athanasian, probably indicates the existence of doubt as to the scriptural warrant for such refinements, or corresponding doubt as to their practical or spiritual worth. The caution and moderation in statement which so vigorous and bold a thinker as Calvin does not hesitate both to exemplify and commend, are apparent generally in the Prot- estant symbolism, though less conspicuous in some of the contro- versial theology of the period. 166 GOD IN HIS BEING. The proposition of the Westminster Confession is also clearly characterized by close adherence to the Scripture itself, above all teachings and commandments of men. It cannot well be ques- tioned that while the Divine Word declares unequivocally the fundamental truth of the divine unity, it also sets forth with equal earnestness the consequent conception of a trinity resident within that unity, and a trinity which is truly personal, — not a rhetorical representation, or an economic exhibition, with no permanent basis in the divine constitution, but a trinity which in some true sense carries with it a profound and enduring three- foldness of personality, within the boundaries of the one divine substance or nature. The baptismal formula, the apostolic benedictions, the frequent references to the three divine persons as distinct from each other, their asserted union and communion in purpose, in feeling, in activity; and the positive declarations as to the existence and attributes and relations of each consid- ered separately, all conspire to force upon the biblical student the Nicene or Chalcedonian description, reproduced almost literally in the Confession, (VIII : ii) as the only one which in any ade- quate sense embodies or unifies these varied forms and aspects of the revelation. To this conclusion the Symbols adhere, not as explaining everything, but as covering the Bible teaching essen- tially, and including all that is indispensable to the truth regarded in its practical aspects and relations. In the associated clause (II:iii), the points of likeness and unlikeness in these three divine Persons are further described; — the likeness in the words, of one snb- 14. Differentiating pro- st power and eternity; and the perties: Likeness and unlike- ... . L. . ness in the Persons. unlikeness m the explanatory sentence, The Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding ; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father; the Holy Ghost eternally proceeding from the Father and the Son. The phrase, substance, power and eternity, was doubtless intended to cover all the divine attributes, and to assert the equal divinity or deity of the three persons as all possessing such attributes in equal degree. As the whole of the divine essence is in each attribute, in such sense that we can never separate the essence from the attribute, or the attribute from the essence, so the whole of the essence and all of the divine attributes are in each person, in such sense that the several persons incorporate and incorporate alike both every attribute and the sum of the divine essence. Thus Father, Son and Spirit, are alike eternal: infinitude in time, or transcendence above time, is an essential quality of the THE THREE PERSONS DISTINGUISHED. 167 Son and the Spirit as truly as of the Father. It follows that th subsequent conception of begetting and proceeding are not to be i taken as implying in any sense the beginning of existence on the part of either Son or Spirit. Again : Father, Son and Spirit are alike powerful, though working in different spheres or relations, and sometimes w7ith an economic adjustment or subordination of activities. Yet the second and third persons %are equally omnipo- tent with the first, and their agency is equally original and underived and adequate. And what is true of eternity and of power, is by implication asserted of intelligence and wisdom, and of all other moral as well as natural attributes, — holiness, justice, goodness, truth being resident inherently in each and belonging alike to all. And the ground of this likeness in duration and in potency and perfection is further presented in the word, substance, with its equivalents in the twro terms, essence and nature. Such affirmation, not of simple likeness in substance but of actual iden- tification, is required by the tenet of the divine unity : as one Being, the three persons must be essentially, substantially unified — one in their inmost nature. Likeness in attributes and modes here changes into oneness; and this oneness is fundamental in the essential Being. The whole is summed up in the words of Stil- ingfleet: We are assured from Scripture that there are three to whom the divine nature (substance) and attributes are given, and we are assured from Scripture and reason that there can be but one divine essence (substance), and therefore every one of them must have this divine nature^ (substance) and yet that nature (essence) can be but One. In distinguishing the three persons, thus unified by the posses- \ sion of common attributes and substance, we have no other marks 4 or guides than those revealed in Scripture. What interior dif- ferentiation there may have been, or may now be, — what distri- bution or interchange in thought or consciousness or volition, we can never know. We recognize primarily the triple order of rev- elation and activity, seen on the one side in the divine Word where the succession of Father and Son and Spirit is so constantly man- ifest chronologically; and seen on the other side in the specific relations of these persons to the creation, government and salva- tion of man. " The underlying basis of this exterior trinity, the trinity of appearance and administration, is suggested especially in the two mysterious terms, begetting and proceeding. Whatever t else these terms suggest, they at Last imply an interior difference. — a difference lying in the constitution of the Deity, and therefore eternal as well as internal. They suggest, in other words, an 168 GOD IN HIS BEING. I immanent and necessary relationship, as well as a relationship of office and function. That the Father begets and the Son is be- i gotten, is a fact so far suggested in the Scriptures that, however perplexing the statement, we may not iully ignore or reject it. We may justly assert that this language does not imply a derived and therefore a dependent existence on the part of the Son: neither may we regard it as including relative subordination or inferior- ity in nature. This eternal begetting is hardly to be viewed, either, as a continuous act of will on the part of the Father, but ^rather as a profound process in the divine constitution, yet not an unconscious process but one recognized by the Father and the Son as making them in the deepest sense one and equal. In the chap- ter on Christ the Mediator, the Son is descrbed as very and eter- nal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father: and the \ declaration of the Shorter Catechism (6) that Father and Son ' are the sa?ne in substance, equal i?i pozver and glory, conveys the same impression of unity, revealing or verifying itself even through this mysterious process going on within the divine nature, theologically called generation. The Symbols clearly stand here not in Arian ground in any of its varieties, nor on the modern theory of subordinationism, even in its highest form, but on the ancient and catholic doctrine of an equality between Father and Son, which is interior, absolute, everlasting. In respect to the procession of the Spirit, the same explanation may be made. It is not simply an economic procession, having reference chiefly to the chronological work of salvation, but one that is inherent and permanent in the divine constitution. The Father, or the Father and the Son, send forth; the Spirit pro- ceeds, and this interiorly, continuously, eternally. Yet the send- ing does not imply inherent or eternal superiority, nor does the proceeding, or the consenting to go forth in consequence of such sending, imply inferiority in nature or attribute. Respecting the addition of the Filioqzie to the doctrine as originally stated in the Nicene creed, the Confession simply Follows the course of the Western church, — induced no doubt by apprehensions of the in- fluence of that form of Arianism which first compelled this addi- tion. Holy Scripture certainly suggests a proceeding from the Father, and also a being sent by the Son in the interest of re- demption, and these phrases imply no contradiction or suggestion of two independent sources, but simply illustrate the separate yet coalescent relations of the Father on one hand and the Son | on the other to the work of salvation as conducted by the Spirit. In what is said in the Symbols respecting the work of the Spirit FATHER, SON AND SPIRIT. 169 as consequent upon that of the first and second persons, the Sou rather than the Father is apparently the more prominent, especi- ally in giving to the Spirit his great commission. The Holy Ghost is said to be his Spirit: souls are said to be saved by Christ through the Spirit: the work of the Spirit everywhere falls in as a direct consequence and issue of what Christ as Mediator has done; and the bestowment of the benefits derivable from his redemption, is said to be especially the work of God, the Holy Ghost. Such association of the third person with the second rather than the first, though a departure from the teaching of the Nicene symbol, is a natural and legitimate result of the funda- mental doctrine of Protestantism, — justification by faith. That doctrine, bringing out into greater prominence the mission and offices of the Son, and concentrating thought and faith around the Cross, naturally led to such associated presentation of Him whom the Son has sent to be the Comforter of his chosen, and to guide and edify his church unto the day of his return. The term proper, as applied to these differentiating features or characteristics, denotes simply the proprium — the peculiar some- thing in each, by which each is distinguishable to our apprehen- sion from the rest. It is that which, in the phrase of Augsburg, properly subsists as the ground or basis of each separate person- ality. As such it is exclusive of the error condemned by the second Helvetic Confession, quasi 'Filius ct Spiritus Sanctus affec- tioncs et proprietatcs sint unius Dei Patris, since the proprium belongs to each, not as an attribute of an attribute, but as the dis- tinguishing characteristic of a Person. Such divisibility in the divine nature is partly expressed in the theological enumeration of the divine persons as First and Second and Third, and still more in the explanatory terms of Scripture, Father and Son and Spirit, viewed not as mere names but as descriptive of both order and relationship and actual existence. Farther than this, as Christian symbolism clearly shows, it is hardly possible for human speech or human thought to reach. The language of the West- minster Confession goes beyond that of most of the continental symbols in its attempt to define such distinctive properties; yet it is far more cautious and more safe than that of the Irish Articles: The essence of the Father doth not beget the essence of the Son, but the person of the Father begetteth the person of the Son, by communicating his whole essence to the person, begotten from eternity. No such statement can be drawn from Scripture, or be justified by any comprehensive view of the Holy Three, as consti- tuting together the one only and true God. 170 GOD IN HIS BEING. The Symbols thus emphasize the doctrine of an immanent Trinity, existing not through the will but in the constitution of the Deity, and therefore eternal, re- 15. The Trinity interior garded as an interior fact. Such em- and exterior : Trinity in Re- ,..,.-. ... demotion phasis is chiefly important as excluding the heretical conception of a modal and transitive trinity only — an economic manifestation of God in time in order to redeem men, but having no existence, except as a divine thought, prior to the introduction of the scheme of sal- vation through Christ. Not only was the thought of such a man- ifestation eternally in the mind of God : He was interiorly triune before men existed, and even when he dwelt alone in the vastness of his own eternity. But while this is true as a theologic propo- sition, the Symbols direct our attention much more fully and frequently to the external trinity, as seen in the divine relations to human life, and particularly to human salvation. Viewing here this threefold distribution as practically economic — having reference to the several functions of the Godhead toward all external existence, we may observe that, while we are taught (Ch. IV) that it pleased God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, in the beginning to create or make of nothing the world and all things therein, yet elsewhere the doctrine of the divine fatherhood is pressed out, in connection with creation and providence, into such prominence as justifies the recognition of the first Person as specially primal and prominent in these spheres of divine activity. It is true that the whole Deity is more apparent here, the trinita- rian distinction being relatively retired; yet even in creation, and still more plainly in providence, it is clearly the Father who comes into the foreground of our vision, making the worlds and order- ing all things in the interest of his own benignant and gracious plans for man. The opinion that the Spirit is the executive agent of the Godhead in all spheres, and that it is He who created and gives life to all, and providentially controls all things, is one for which the Symbols furnish no warrant. They do not even lay stress upon the agency of the second Person, as the instrumental cause in creation, or the final cause in providence; but rather refer these pro- cesses to the first Person as representing herein the entire Deity. Nor do they represent the fatherhood in God as referring simply to relations established by grace: for while the relation of Creator and creature is made prominent, as in the chapter on the Covenant, (VII) it is by no means implied that this is the only relation, or that man is not by nature a child of God as well as a subject. The description of man as created after the divine image, and endued DISTRIBUTION OF FUNCTIONS. 171 with knowledge, righteousness and true holiness, and as existing in a special spiritual relation to God under the covenant of works, implies a fatherhood before the fall; and the description of provi- dence, as wisely and tenderly concerning itself in human affairs after the fall, certainly suggests a continuance of that natural re- lation, even after man had proved unfilial and undeserving. In like manner, the exposition of the plan of grace as originating, not in the action of the Son, but in the mind of God viewed either as triune or as paternal, implies the existence of parental feeling toward our fallen race, — redemption springing as truly from that source as from the pitying love of the second Person or the sympathetic grace of the third Person in the holy Trinity: Crawford, Fatherhood of God. This economic distribution of functions in the Godhead becomes still more apparent and impressive, if we contemplate the person and activities of the Son in creation, in government, and espec- ially in the work of redemption. On a cursory glance it is seen that in each of these spheres, but eminently in the last, the exterior trinity becomes a most conspicuous and most blessed fact. In like manner, the mission of the Spirit, as originating in some sense in the direction of the Father and the choice of the Son, brings out this triune economy of offices and works in most impressive light. While we see the Father planning, determining, bringing the whole scheme of grace to pass, — while we see the Son carry- ing out the paternal decree in his own incarnation, life, teaching and sacrificial death, we also behold the Spirit taking up the mighty work, and by his illuminating, regenerating, sanctifying and organizing power bringing it to its glorious completion. It is God whom we see, and see alike, in all these ministrations to man as sinful: but it is God in his tri-unity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. While this distribution is less distinctly presented in the Symbols than the fact itself would warrant, we may yet observe this trinity of functions and office apparent in many incidental phrases and suggestions. While, for illustration, the interior nature of our L,ord is so fully defined as to exclude all Arian or Socinian error, it is his work, his active and passive relations to human sin and salvation, which occupy the foreground of the picture. In like manner the work of the Spirit is described in a variety of ways and connections and with great earnestness and skill, while his interior affiliations in the divine economy are disposed of with the simple statement that he is a Person of like nature with, and that he proceedeth eternally from, the Father 172 GOD IN HIS BEING. and the Sou. It is thus clear that the compilers of the Symbols, whatever may have been their sense of the doctrinal importance of the conception of an interior trinity, regarded this external trinity as practically and for all purposes of religion the matter of highest moment. And in this they were in accord alike with the general judgment of believers, and with the deepest demands of sound and pure theology. Hagenbach tells us (Hist, of Doct. ) that what he styles the trias of revelation was held in complete form by the early church long before any clear state- ments had been made concerning the essential trias: and his pre- sentation of the subject shows that while certain speculative minds have in all ages been largely engrossed with the contem- plation of the latter, the former has generally been the trias on which the faith and the heart of believers have most readily and joyously reposed. Neander says (Hist. Dogmas,) that the doc- trine of God as the Creator and Redeemer and Sanctifier of humanity in and through Christ was an essential element in the Christian consciousness from the beginning, and that in this form it has therefore always had a place in the faith of the Christian Church. While studied on its interior and more recondite side, the trinity is always in danger of becoming a speculation, inter- esting acute understandings and furnishing a field for ideal and abstract debate, — studied on its exterior side, and especially in connection with the matter of salvation, it becomes not merely an intensely practical truth, but the ground and basis of all other truths which are practical or saving in their influence. On this side therefore, it is continually expressing itself in the sacred formula of baptism, in the triple benediction, in the more biblical confessions and professions of faith, and in the songs and prayers and purest life of the Church of God. It is impracticable here to present in any detail the massive argu- ment derivable from Scripture in support of the doctrine of the Trinity as thus defined. It may be 16. Proof of the doctrine; fred admitted that whatever evi- Scripture and experience: , ... . , , objections noted. dences or lustrations may be drawn from physical nature, from the human constitution or experience, or from the nature of God as a spir- itual being, or his contemplation of himself in the profound recesses of his inward experience, the real and conclusive proof must be obtained from the Bible alone. With the light of the New Testament as our guide, we may discern words, phrases and facts, which are suggestions of the trinity in the Old Testament, and even in the earliest portions of the primitive Scriptures. SCRIPTURE WITNESS TO THE TRINITY. 17-> The triple form of benediction, the triple ascriptions of praise, the manifestations of the angel of the covenant, the peculiar revelations of the Jehovah, the special works and ministries ascribed to the Spirit, the striking personification of wisdom, are the more prominent illustrations. In the New Testament, gospels and narratives and epistles alike, direct testimonies are apparent in such number and such variety as to render it almost impossible for any one who accepts the several books as canonical and inspired, to set aside the doctrine. In the baptismal formula, in the apos- tolical benedictions, and in numerous passages which associate the three persons together as distinct and permanent personalities, having co-ordinated relations and activities, we are compelled at least to recognize an external and economic, if not an interior and perpetual trinity in God. Passages still more numerous speak of the Father and the Son and the Spirit separately, as each in an individual sense God, having attributes, filling positions, performing works, which imply and prove the full divinity of each. It is a noticeable fact that these evidences grow more and more distinct, more and more conclusive, as the New Testa- ment advances toward its culmination, and that some of its most decisive and irresistible affirmations occur in the book with which the roll of Revelation fitly closes. So extensive and so decisive are these testimonies, that those who refuse to accept the doctrine are in many instances driven to the dark alternative of rejecting as uncanonical those portions of the New Testament, such as the Gospel and Epistles of John, which most repeatedly and directly inculcate the truth, or challenging in general the inspiration or the final authoritativeness of the clear teachings of Holy Writ on this subject. The fact that the truth is gradually evolved in the Scriptures, appearing first in occasional phrases and sugges- tions, becoming distinct in the incarnation, steadily increasing in clearness and cogency during the ministry of Christ, formulating itself in the apostolic letters, and reaching its completeness only at the close of the entire process of biblical revelation, is fully explained by the nature of the doctrine, and by the peculiar office it subserves as in fact both foundation and capstone in the Christian system. Had it been revealed at an early stage in that process, it could not have been apprehensible by the Hebrew mind, nor could it have been made, as it afterwards became naturally and readily, a fundamental tenet in religious belief: Bernard; Progress of Doctrine. One of the most convincing corroborations to the truth of the doctrine as thus enunciated in Scripture, is discoverable in its 174 GOD IN HIS BEING. marked effect upon the spiritual experience, the religious life, of those who intelligently receive it. Instead of being, as has some- times been alleged, a mystery confusing and injurious to faith, the doctrine is found to sustain vital relations to practical piety in many ways; and the argument drawn from Christian experi- ence in its favor, is in itself almost conclusive. It has well been said that, if there were eliminated from the common Christian consciousness all those elements which have flowed into it from the recognition of God as Father and Son and Spirit, Creator and Preserver, Redeemer and Sanctifier, very little of value would remain. The best religious experience, as the history of practical religion clearly manifests, grows out of the soil of trinitarianism, when such trinitarianism is set forth, not as a dry and perplexing dogma, but as a blessed spiritual verity and a divinely opened fountain of religious refreshing and life. On the other side, there are many historical illustrations of the fact that, wherever this vital truth has been either rejected or regarded as a mere specula- tion, practical religion has declined, the consciousness of relation- ship to God has faded, the sense of duty has relaxed, the spirit of worship and of service has died away. It is an eloquent state- ment of an eminent English divine (Smith, J. Pye) that believers in this truth, and in the other doctrines of grace directly associ- ated with it, are in general most distinguished among all classes of mankind for their personal holiness, their self-denial, their readiness to take up the cross, to bear hardships, make sacrifices, and go through difficulties and sorrows for the sake of God and religion; their seriousness, gravity, humility, temperance; their patience and meekness, their benevolence and activity, and their zealous laboring in those works of beneficence to which worldly motives are the least likely to conduct men. The objections urged against the doctrine of the Trinity are to some extent drawn from the Scriptures, but for the most part are speculative, and in some- cases simply rationalistic. That the Bible teaches the absolute unity of God, is not merely granted but affirmed by those who accept its instruction respecting the trinity in God: nor has it ever been shown that they are involved thereby in the meshes of a contradiction which, if real, would constrain them to reject the claim of Scripture to have come down from God for the enlightenment and salvation of mankind. The Bible is profoundly consistent with itself in inculcating both the one truth and the other, and in the manner in which it reveals and inculcates both, it proves itself to be the production, not of man or by man, but of and by the Holy Ghost. Nor is it any OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED. 175 real objection to this statement that, although the Scriptures are thus distinct in their teaching, the Christian Church existed and nourished for the first two centuries or more without any formu- lated statement of the doctrine, and even without making much spiritual use of it; since it is true, that such doctrines are gener- ally realized in Christian experience before they find expression in definite creeds, and also that Christian experience is itself a growth, or a form of spiritual progress, in which what is simplest in doctrine comes first into practical apprehension, and afterwards that which is more complex and abstruse. The speculative objections in the case are chiefly interesting as illustrating alike the natural incapacity of the human mind to apprehend profound and complex truth in whatever sphere, its in- ability when unvitalized by grace to perceive and rejoice in spir- itual doctrine, and its pitiful inclination to flee into any available cave of objection whenever summoned to a life of faith and duty. It is of course to be admitted that a doctrine which concerns itself with God rather than with men, and with that transcendent pro- cess of disclosure which, starting in the recesses of the divine nature, becomes visible to us in the three forms of Fatherhood and Sonship and the Holy Ghost, would carry in it mysteries which the intellect of man is unable to solve. It is to be expected also, that in such a manifestation there would be much against which the natural heart, misled by its own sinfulness, would revolt. But it is also true that there are no such intellectual or ethical diffi- culties involved in this doctrine as constrain the human reason to reject it, while on the other hand there are blessed exhibitions of Deity in it, precepts and promises carried with it, joys and inspi- rations and hopes justified by it, which make it inexpressibly welcome to the soul that is truly seeking after God. Reserving further discussion of the divine nature and attri- butes and the trinity in God until these topics shall again present themselves in connection with other ■c <- <.u • tt, rM, • *• 4- l*> Concluding- review: specific truths in the Christian system, Characteristic qualities of we may pause for a moment to note in this general presentation, conclusion the theological comprehen- siveness, the spiritual elevation, and the practical power of the general doctrine of God thus summarily presented in the Sym- bols. It cannot be questioned that their statements exhibit marked familiarity on the part of the compilers with the philo- sophic and theologic problems involved, and with the experimental aspects also of this fundamental doctrine. It is not indeed to be presumed that they had special foresight of the multiplied errors 170 COD IN MIS BEING. and issues which have originated in later times around this group of sacred truths, and which especially are so current in our own day. Pantheism in its later varieties was to them an unknown delusion: Spinoza was a youth as yet unfamiliar with philosophy, when they were framing their terse expositions. English deism and French atheism did not then exist except in their ruder germs; and little could the Westminster divines have realized what on- slaught these enemies of the Gospel were hereafter to make upon this cardinal section of Christian faith. Materialism with its doubts and negations, and with its supposititious substitutes for the one primal, personal force from which all other forces and potencies flow, had then no recognized existence. Yet it is a remarkable fact that the clear, direct, strong declarations of the Symbols just as they stand, are at this hour substantially the re- sponse of the common Christianity to each and all of these later forms of criticism and unbelief. The arguments here suggested have indeed been expanded: the field of illustration has widened; the force of the divine testimony in the Scriptures has been more clearly apprehended and stated. But there has been no essen- tial advance in the doctrine concerning God in his Being, because there can be none. The answer of Westminster is in substance the answer of the Christian church to-day; and that answer is a barrier against which the waves of error have been vainly dashing for more than two hundred years, and against which they are vainly dashing now. And the answer of to-day will be the answer of Christianity through all the future: God is a Spirit, infinite, eter- nal and unchangeable in his being, wisdom, power, holiness, justice, goodness and truth. And in the unity of the Godhead there be three Persons, the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost; yet these three (L,. C. 9) are one true, eternal God, the same in substance, equal in power and glory, although distinguished by their personal properties. The spiritual elevation of these statements is as marked as their theologic comprehensiveness. No one can read the records of the the Assembly without being convinced that, stern in aspect and severe in manner as the members were, and shrewd as were some of them in all affairs of church or state, they were as a body men of true and deep piety. The evidences on this point, already mentioned in part, are numerous and convincing. Such high views of God spring only from genuine acquaintance with him. If these views sometimes verged on puritanic rigidity or severity, — if they sometimes led on to conclusions which sound harsh re- specting the divine purposes or administration, they certain!)' WORTH OF THE WESTMINSTER DOCTRINE. 17, inspired and exalted in a peculiar degree the men who held them. It is in no temper of cant, in no blind mood of adoration, that we pronounce them holy men — men of God. Their exaltation of God in his being and nature, their reverential mention of his attributes and perfections, their worship of him in his glory and eminently as seen in his Gospel, their devout recognition of his presence and power in all things, and their entire and loving sub- mission to his will, are qualities not in equal measure exhibited in any earlier formulary — not so forcibly or tenderly manifested by the framers of any other Christian creed. It will always stand to their credit that at the very outset of their exposition of sacred doctrine they not only recognized the supremacy of the Word of God, but set God himself on the throne, — that they so heartily believed in him as the only and true God, — that they so adored his perfections, revered his will, and pronounced it the highest duty of every soul of man first to glorify him, and then to enjoy him forever. Hence the vast practical as well as speculative power of their teachings. The simple proposition just quoted has beyond a doubt done as much as any utterance of uninspired man to influence the purposes, desires, aspirations and daily living of mankind. Comprehensive and abstruse when viewed as a dog- matic truth, it changes when considered ethically into a great spiritual principle, reaching all men alike, and comprehending in its claim the entire life. It is a rule which, like the Sermon on the Mount, needs no special explanation or enforcement: all, even the youngest, can see it and feel it at a glance; and wherever it goes, it leads the heart, not to theology, but to duty and religion. It is an impressive remark of Carlyle in his later years: The older I grow — and I now stand on the brink of eternity — the more comes back to me the first sentence in the Catechism which I learned when a child, and the fuller and deeper its meaning becomes. The entire teachings of the Symbols concerning God in his being partake of the same spiritual and practical character: they are quite as much religious as theological. Their prime tendency is to quicken feeling, to stir and arouse the soul to loyalty and devo- tion. Especially do they lead to humiliation in view of sin, to the honest confession of guilt and spiritual deadness, to cordial submission to the divine will and working, to the dedication of self to him whom they represent as the infinite and eternal Spirit, hav- ing all life in and of himself, and in his own being embodying all possible majesty and perfection. LECTURE FOURTH— GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. The Divine Decrees : Creation : Providence : Moral Administration. C. F. Chap. III-V : L-. C. : 12-20. S. C. : 7-12. The ground thus far traversed in this survey of the Westminster Symbols, is chiefly ground common to all varieties of evangelical Protestantism, so far as these formulated their beliefs during the prolific era of the Reformation. With minor variations as to the degree of fullness and exactness, as to the order of presentation, and to the measure of emphasis, all were agreed in holding to the Scriptures as being, above all opinions of men or churches, the one absolute and perfect revelation from God, containing all that man needs to believe in order to salvation, and all the duty God requires of man. All were agreed likewise in the general conception of God himself in respect to his existence and nature, his attributes and character, and his triune modes of being. Nor does there appear to have been any important debate on either of these subjects in the Westminster Assembly. Much as the mem- bers were inclined to differ on points yet to be considered in this survey, all consented to appeal to the Word of God as the final arbiter of faith : To the I^aw and to the Testimony all were read}7 alike to pledge allegiance. Nor can we doubt that in the devotions which were mingled with their earnest discussions — in the days of fasting and worship which were throughout a significant feature of their sessions, they cordially bowed together in true loyalty before the one spiritual Being, infinite and eternal and unchange- able in each attribute and quality, whom — as we have seen — they so elaborately and powerfully delineated as the one and only God, forever perfect and supreme. Still it is true that in this theologic conception of the Godhead, the Assembly had practically determined the contents, arrange- ment and theological character or qual- l. Relations to subsequent .. - , , .. , ... , .. , , . . . r„ . .„„ ?. „ lty of the entire creed which they had doctrine: God essentially J J acilve# undertaken to formulate. From that conception, the doctrines which they subsequently enunciated concerning the divine plan of things, and the divine sovereignty in creation and providence and grace, were GOD ESSENTIALLY ACTIVE. 179 legitimate and even necessary inferences. It is indeed probable that the Arminian party whose intense conflict with the strong Calvinism of Dort had been the great theological event of the preceding generation, would have held, in form at least, the same general doctrine of God in his essential being. But it is obvious that their efforts to work out a modified theory as to the divine efficiency and purpose, especially in the sphere of grace, perhaps inevitably reacted, even more decisively than they were themselves aware, upon their practical apprehension of the more cardinal truth respecting God himself. In their struggles against what they regarded as a false view of the divine sovereignty, in their endeavor to protect the correlative truth of the freedom and respon- sibility of man, in their desire to exalt the universality of grace, and justify the free and full offer of the Gospel to all mankind, they were led to put limits upon the knowledge, the regulative capacity, the absolute right of God over his creatures, which could not be carried out to their legitimate issues without seri- ously impairing the full biblical view of what God is in his being and attributes, and in his physical and moral administration. This may be an inevitable result of all such effort. The history of the more positive Arminian theology in later times, even in its most spiritual forms, reveals again and again the presence of such a tendency. On the other side, it is certain that such a concep- tion of God as is found in the Westminster Symbols will by logical necessity lead on to just such a group of doctrines as are imme- diately associated with it in the succeeding chapters on the eternal Decree, Creation, Providence, the Fall, and the original Covenant with Man. Without raising at this point any question as to the desirableness of introducing into a church creed everything that is contained in these chapters, we may recognize at least the theolog- ical necessity for the chapters themselves, in the order in which they are here presented. And we may now therefore turn from the contemplation of God in his constitution and character to consider him in his activities — in those activities which are generic, and which relate to the world and to man, reserving for future examination those which especially exhibit his plan and method in the field of grace. That God is continuously and essentially active in the general sphere just described, is everywhere assumed in the Symbols as a necessary inference from the conception of him as a pure, free, personal, absolute Spirit. They give no countenance to the notion that, after finishing the initial work of creation, he left the physical universe to run on by itself without his presence, through 180 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. the action of the secondary causes which he had introduced into it in the beginning. Still less do the}'- furnish warrant for the more injurious notion that, having created man, he has left him also to the action of such causes, — the human will as an inde- pendent cause being chief among them; while he himself, as in the Brahminic fable, sleeps in solitary grandeur among the stars. It is in the very nature of such a Spirit to be eternally active in all spheres of existence, though he is indeed unchangeable in his being and nature. There can be no abatement or intermission in the activities of the divine Spirit, whether arising from any inward election or from any outward constraint. Nor is such expression of energy the result of unconscious instinct or of forces dwelling in the divine mind, and constraining God to action as by necessity. That he is thus ever active by virtue of what he he is in himself as a perfect Being, is abundantly apparent. His moral perfections also compel us to the conclusion that his omniscient intelligence sees, and his omnipotent wisdom rules, and his justice and goodness are ever manifest throughout his vast creation. The Confession is in harmony with the profound- est philosophy, and with the deepest convictions of the human heart, in affirming (V : i) not only that God is the great Creator oi all things, but also that he doth uphold, direct, dispose and govern all creatures, actions and things from the greatest even to the least: and this not merely by the exertion of his sovereign energies ab extra or occasionally, but also by an immanent presence and power. When faith, says Calvin (Inst. B. 1 : 16), has learned that God is the Creator of all things, it should immediately con- clude that he is also their perpetual governor and preserver; and that not by a certain universal motion, actuating the whole machine of the world, but by a particular providence sustaining, nourishing and providing for everything which he has made. It is in itself incredible that he should have created either the physical universe of things or the moral universe of beings in such a method that they evolve themselves eternally without his omnipresent aid. Still more incredible is it that he should have fabricated a creation which is capable of producing results that are intrinsically at variance with his originating and domin- ating will. It is most of all incredible that he should ever become indifferent to the movements or the issues of the two universes which he has made, or should grow weary of his pro- vidential administration over them. Whatever difficulties may present themselves in the effort to apprehend his activities, — whatever insoluble problems may confront ns in the study THE ETERNAL DECREE. 181 of his transcendent movements, we can never find explanation or refuge in the opinion that he is not thus resident as the supreme energy in the evolution or government of all creatures, actions and things. The doctrine of the divine immanency and permanency in nature and in the life of humanity, however mysterious or even incomprehensible it may seem, is one of the fundamental principles in Christianity: without its explanatory radiance both nature and man become alike inexplicable. In taking up the subject of God in his general activities as thus introduced, the doctrine of the eternal decree or decrees first presents itself (Ch. Ill) for careful scrutiny and exposition. The term, 2' The Eternal Decree. The , . , , , . ,, term defined: analysis and decree, is here employed to express the exn0cjtj0n generic proposition that God from all etei nity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely a?id unchangeably ordain whatsoever conies to pass. Such terms as predestination, foreordination, election, reprobation, pretention, relate to the divine decree as manifested within the particular sphere of grace. In the more generic or comprehensive sense, covering the entire field of the divine activity, the term, decree, has its closest synonyms in such words as plan, design, purpose, scheme, project, ordinance, edict. It is both a thought resident eternally in the divine mind, and an intention to give expression to that thought in correspondent action wrought out in time. It involves both prevision and predetermination — the ability to devise and the ability to execute what is devised in every sphere. It does not imply volition or action without purpose, or a merely arbitrary election without regard to conditions, or activity unregulated by the moral qualities inherent in Deity. It differs radically from the pagan notion of fate, by the cardinal fact that it is personal both in the design and in the execution. It involves a true and proper sovereignty such as a supreme per- son may exercise, but a holy sovereignty which carries in it not only omnipotence but wisdom and love and righteousness. In substance it implies, in the words of another, (Smith, H. B. Christ. Theol.) that the present system of the universe in all its parts, as it was and is and is to be, was an eternal plan or purpose in the divine Mind. Postponing inquiry as to the moral qualities of this divine ordination, or to the methods in which it is accom- plished in whatsoever comes to pass, we may now simply analyze the conception itself. This conception contains the following elements, — that God has a plan according to which his activities are exercised, — that this plan was formed, not in the course of 182 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. his activities as specific occasions might seem to require, but rather from the beginning, from all eternity, — that this plan was not partial or limited, but universal, embracing all beings and all events in its scope, — that the actual outcome of events, the his- toric order of things as they are, is the consequence of this divine plan, — and that the power and wisdom and varied perfections of the Deity are all actively engaged in securing such historic results according to the original purpose. First: The conception of God as having such a comprehen- sive and conclusive plan is an inevitable consequence from what we have already learned concerning him in his nature and per- fections. To conceive of him as putting forth such vast, con- stant, measureless energies as are requisite to the creation and the providential and moral control of the universe, without intel- ligent acquaintance with the immense process in which he is thus concerned — without wise adaptation of means to ends, and perfect adjustment of the whole to some appropriate consummation, would be a fatal impugnment, not merely of his capacity but also of his character. To suppose that in the outworking of this plan things may occur of which he was ignorant when he devised the plan, or that he would set in motion a series of agencies and forces, the will of man especially, whose working he could not tell beforehand or chose not to foreknow, would be equivalent to a denial to him of that wisdom which as a moral quality we must ever regard as among the chief of his perfections. The doctrine of God as the absolute Spirit, endowed as such with all possible perfections, inevitably carries with it the conception of such a sovereignty as is here described, in respect both to com- plete prevision and to absolute predetermination. Moreover, the relations of such a Being to the universe natural and moral, are such as in a sense constrain him to frame and to execute his own sovereign plans for that universe. Still further, the utter incom- petency of any creature, though endowed with angelic powers, to undertake such a task is manifest. And assuredly the relig- ious sentiment in man could find rest, amid all the measureless fluctuations of nature and of life, only in the belief that God, not man or angel, is thus superintending and controlling all. Secondly: It is obvious that this plan was formed from all eter- nity— before the execution of it began, and before anything out- side of God himself had an existence. Such is the meaning of the term, eternity, in this connection. While the Bible often suggests what seem like temporary schemes or expedients, changes of design or administration, it furnishes no warrant for the THE DECREE INCLUSIVE AND CONCLUSIVE. 183 supposition that the general plan of things is itself fragmentary or indeterminate in the divine mind, — the result of a knowledge developing through time. There is indeed an important modifica- tion of the doctrine of decrees which comes in at this point, and which in some degree relieves that doctrine from the taint of fatal ity, so commonly regarded as attaching to it. But the funda- mental truth must remain, — that the divine plan by its own nature is eternal. As according to an ancient Confession there never was a time when the Son was not, so there never was a time when this plan was not, so far as the conception of it in the mind of Deity is concerned. And as being eternal, it was also uncondi- tioned,— formed in absolute freedom, above and beyond all con- tingency that could be imagined to arise from the presence or influence of any creature. The comprehensive decree could have had no existence except in the divine mind, and it was throughout simply and solely what the divine wisdom and will determined. It is therefore unchangeable also — infinitely beyond and above all temporal mutation. There are indeed modifications here or there in the chronologic evolution of this sovereign purpose, but the pur- pose itself must be fixed in its unconditioned comprehensiveness at the outset and forever. Thirdly: This divine plan, thus formed in eternity, must also be inclusive of all things and events: in other words, all the agen- cies, forces, principles, elements combined together in it, were introduced and set in position by him who framed it. Were there any single agent or principle which had broken into this pre- conceived system of itself, or whose workings were beyond his cognizance or control, it would be impossible for God to be assured of the product of this complex arrangement at any point, or confi- dent of the holy and happy outcome of his own scheme, whether in providence or in grace. Whence could such agent or principle come, and by what energy could it be supported in its action, and toward what intelligent end could that action be directed, and in what way could this end be fully and forever assured ? God himself is in fact not merely the only possible fountain of all the intermingling elements in his comprehensive system of things: he must also sustain, vitalize, control all these elements, fully includ- ing every one of them in his plan, even from the beginning. There can be nothing in nature or in man, so far as constitutional ele- ments or qualities go, which is not there in consequence of his knowledge and his determination. Whatever difficulties may be met in the attempt to account for the presence of any of these, sin especial!}', or in apprehending the method in which God may L84 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. work out his purposes in and through them, especially when malevolent, such difficulties are certainly not removable by the supposition that there are elements or forces in the universe with whose presence there God had nothing to do, or that his plan was so limited or partial as not to include or control them. All sugges- tions of this sort impugn either the divine capacity or the divine character, and are therefore to be set aside as inadmissible. Fourthly: It is also obvious as an important element in the con- ception of the divine decree, that this plan, formed in eternity and inclusive of everything outside of God, is carried into exe- cution in some real sense by his own supreme will and energy. Such a plan does not execute itself: He alone must secure its ful- fillment. Raising no question at this point as to the particular methods in which God secures the realizing in fact of his own plan, or to the relations of his responsible activity to what seem like sad malformations or misfortunes under that plan, we can rest in no other conclusion than that all the forces or princi- ples incorporated practically in the scheme must have come from him, and must in like manner be in some way sustained and regu- lated by him at every stage of their operation. To hold any lower view involves either the conclusion that these principles or forces have somehow become independent of God, or the still darker conclusion that he has himself consented to the creation of a universe wherein by his own choice things are moving on confusedly and conflictingly toward some chaotic catastrophe, in which he and the universe may perish together. To avoid such dark hypotheses we must at all hazards rest in the conviction that what the mind in God conceives, and what his wisdom determines to accomplish, his omnipotent will and energy will surely bring about. Here at least the Symbols of Westminster rest : the Eternal Decree stands back of all created things, as not only con- ceiving but ordaining whatsoever comes to pass. Fifthly: Such a comprehensive and controlling plan or purpose as has now been described must be in itself a sublime and ineffa- ble expression of all the perfections of Deity, and therefore furn- ishes occasion in all its forms, not for questioning or revolt, but for adoration and rejoicing, for comfort and repose in all believing souls. Instead of being an abstract dogma, valuable only as a speculative basis for a theological system, the doctrine is intensely practical, and to the rightly constituted mind, inexpressibly pre- cious and profitable. It is invariably so described in the Symbols, in other Protestant creeds, and in Calvinistic or Augustinian theology general^. The eternal decree is neither an unconscious WISE, FREE AND HOLY ACTS'. L85 effloresence from the bosom of God, nor an arbitrary edict, rep- resenting his sovereign will alone. In itself and in all its multiform evolutions, it is a clear disclosure of all that God is as a perfect Being, infinitely worthy of love and adoration. These are postulates which nothing in such evolution, even the dark mystery of sin or the kindred mystery of condemnation on account of sin, should ever lead us to question. Neither should any aspect of such disclosure lead us to question the correlated truth of human freedom or responsibility, or to suppose that man is living and act- ing under a law of natural necessity as inexplicable as that which rules the planets in their rotation around the sun. Still less should it ever incite us to plunge as an alternative into the dark abysses of a pagan fatalism, or of a pantheistic philosophy which seeks to explain human life as evolving passively under the resistless action of some unseen and unconscious power. All such altern- atives can afford neither light nor comfort to the soul. They rather involve the understanding in perplexities which it can never solve, and crush the moral nature under a paralyzing weight which it cannot throw off, but must endure forever. An interesting discussion seems to have arisen in the Assembly respecting the use of the singular or the plural term, decree or decrees, in the exposition of this gen- , , M. T \. -. c . ° 3. Decree and decrees: eral doctrine. In the Confession, the Different views in the Assem- singular is employed throughout, — j)iy< the divine determination being viewed as one in fact, however various its historic manifestations. In the Catechisms the plural form is used; and the one comprehensive plan is described, as a series of wise, free and holy acts, issuing from the eternal counsel of the divine will. These decrees or acts are further set forth as unchangeably ordaining whatsoever comes to pass in time ; and a further limitation is indicated in the added language, especially concerning angels and men. The secret of this variety in statement is at least partly revealed in the records of the debate: Minutes: 150-2. In that debate Rutherford sug- gests that all agree in this, that God decrees the end and means, but whether in one or more decrees . . . it is very probable but one decree: but whether fit to express it in a confession of faith. Seaman, referring to the then recent conflict in Holland, replies: All the odious doctrine of the Arminians is from their distinguish- ing of the decrees; but our divines say they are one and the same decree. To this Reynolds answers: Let us not put disputes and scholastical things into a confession of faith: I think they are dif- ferent decrees in our manner of conception. And Gillespie, though 186 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. himself holding that in ordine naturae God ordaining man to glory goes before his ordaining to permit man to fall, suggests in the same spirit of liberty: When that word is left out, is it not a truth? So everyone may enjoy his own sense. And Calamy emphasizes the pertinent query of Rutherford in the question : Why should we put it into a confession of faith ? Yet the singular term, embodying as it did the conception of the divine plan and purpose as one, both inclusive and conclusive, and as formed from all eternity, did pass into the Confession, and is consistently maintained throughout the chapter now under examination. In the subsequent consideration of the Larger Catechism, as if in deference to the opinion of the other party, the plural term was admitted, apparently without much debate; and the one decree is distributed into a series of decrees, which are described as the wise, free and holy acts of God, flow- ing from the counsel of his will, and ordaining or bringing into existence whatsoever comes to pass in time. Questions indeed arose subsequently as to the order of these divine acts, viewed logically, and specially as to the matter of permissive decrees, involving the admission of sin into the world, and of elective decrees respecting the saved and the lost, severally. Yet those who insisted on the unity of the conception as indicated in the singu- lar term, probably felt that its introduction in the Confession was a sufficient protection against the Arminian error, and that the more chronologic plural form might be helpful in forestalling criticism and in commending the teaching of the Symbols more readily to popular acceptation. One is tempted to say with the astute and saintly Rutherford: If there be any argument to prove a necessity of one and the same decree, we would be glad to hear it. Had the scholastical conception of the one divine purpose and activity in the produc- tion of all actual events and issues given way, in the Confession as in the Catechisms, to the more historic form of the same truth, as seen in an actual series of such purposes and acts, no small proportion of the misapprehensions of the doctrine, and of the criticisms upon it now widely current, would have been avoided. There can be no question in the mind of any intelligent Calvinist whether a chapter embodying the general truth be fit to put in a confession of faith, as Rutherford and Calamy had queried, since that truth is to all who hold the Calvinistic system, a natural and necessary consequence of their doctrine respecting God himself. Yet as God hath been pleased to express by way of convenant, or a succession of convenants following in chronologic order, his ORDER OF THE DECREES. 187 scheme of moral administration and grace, so in general he hath been pleased to reveal his one eternal purpose in a series of wise, free and holy acts, which are evidently conditioned upon each other, and are limited in the sphere and measure of their activity, and which may be studied both independently and relatively, in their proper historic form and connections. As the covenants are to our apprehension many rather than one, according to the biblical description of them, so the decrees are to our apprehen- sion rather many than one, — a series of divine acts, each con- taining its own specific revelation of the divine counsel, and all combining to exhibit in some aspect that one sovereign scheme, of which in a just sense all created things, all events and issues, are the ordained result. In respect to the order of the decrees viewed as chronologic acts, two views were also manifest in the Assembly. Many held with Rutherford that in ordine naturae God ordaining man to glory goes before 4« 0rder of the Decrees : t. •. • • . •• r 11 Supralapsarianism and Sub- his ordaining to permit man to fall. lapsarianism. Some held with Whittaker that in reference to the element of time, the decrees are all simul and semel: in eterno there is not prius and posterius. Calamy desired that nothing may be put in one way or other; and referring to the logical issue of the strict supralapsarian dogma, -described it as making the fall of man to be medium executionis decreti. Yet it is evident that there was a strong party in the Assembly who leaned rather toward the supralapsarian view. According to that view the salvation of the elect was the final end of God in the creation of the human race; and the ultimate exhibition of his own glory, whether in the salvation or in the eternal condem- nation of men, was to be taken as the regulative principle in the case. To secure this end a scheme of salvation was to be provided for those who were ordained thereto: as essential conditionally, the fall of the race must be permitted, and indeed in some sense produced: as initiatory, the creation of both man and nature was to be devised and accomplished; and as co-ordinate, the condem- nation of a certain proportion of the race must be predetermined from eternity. Sin especially was to be admitted, so far as the divine permission extends, in order that salvation might be intro- duced, and the primal decree of election carried into execution, — the glory of God being manifested both in the final redemption of the elect through grace, and in the final condemnation of the wicked to the praise of his glorious justice. That the sublapsarian explanation had strong representatives 188 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. in the Assembly is already apparent. According to this view the divine decrees, contemplated as a series of sovereign acts, were to be considered, not in their abstract philosophical quality, with reference to their final end simply, but rather in the order of their historic manifestation in the Scriptures. In this light, creation is seen to be the first, initiating act; followed by the permissive decree respecting the fall, and the consequent sin- fulness of the race; and the decree or act of election is regarded as introduced in full view of what mankind through sin have already become. By most of those who held this view such elec- tion was contemplated as prior in time to the further decree or act by which the salvation of the elect was provided for; the indi- viduals to be saved being first chosen, and the general scheme of salvation being then devised in order to secure this result. It is claimed that this view predominated in the Assembly, and is indicated in the declaration, (Chap. Ill) that God appointed the elect unto eternal life, in view of the sinfulness which had already come upon mankind, while he determined to ordain others to dishonor and wrath for their sin as actually committed. A similar indication is supposed to reveal itself in the Shorter Catechism, (19:20) where God is said out of his mere (or pure) good pleasure to have elected some — some of those already con- templated as under his wrath and curse — unto everlasting life. Yet the strong statements of the Confession as to the absoluteness and the eternity and the singleness of the divine decree hardly seem to justify this claim. The noted treatise of Twisse, the first Prolocutor of the Assembly, in support of the dogma of absolute reprobation, is suggestive here.. The question whether the Westminster Assembly as a body inclined to the supralapsarian or to the sublapsarian position, has been zealously discussed. Hodge (Syst. Theol. ) claims that the great majority of its members were sublapsarian, but admits that the Symbols were so framed as to avoid offense to those who adopted the supralapsarian theory. Macpherson quotes the rejec- tion, during the discussion, of the phrase, to bring this to pass God ordained to permit man to fall, as evidence of the supreme influence of sublapsarianism in the Assembly. Mitchell refers to the same action, and to the language of some members during the debates, as indicative at least of the fact that the positive supralapsarianism of Twisse and others did not have its own way altogether in the deliberations. But indications are not wanting that, if indeed that type of Calvinism did not control the body, it was so far influential as to prevent the sublapsarian view from DIVERSITIES OF VIEW. 189 having clear or sufficient expression in the Symbols — specially in the Confession. If a majority were inclined to that view, as Hodge on what seems to be insufficient ground affirms, they were not positive or earnest enough to gain any decisive victory for their own dogma. Several phrases occur in the Confession which, if they do not absolutely sustain the supralapsarian con- ception, do still give no small support to those who held it. And, were the Confession ever to be revised so as to bring it into harmony with the milder and wiser doctrine now current, there can be little doubt as to the fate of these supralapsarian phrases. Whether it is in harmony with the doctrine of the Symbols to go farther in this analytic view of the decrees, as acts in some sense successively conceived and successively occurring in time. and to represent the particular election of believers as consequent upon the general plan of salvation — God devising and determin- ing first the plan, and then choosing those in whose case that plan should become effectual — has also been matter of earnest discussion. If the historical conception of the decrees is to be followed out exactly, according to the sublapsarian method, this would seem to be the more appropriate mode of arranging them — the plan first, and the specific election subsequently. Is it neces- sary to regard the particularistic selection of a certain number of individuals out of the whole race, or out of what has been described as creatable man, — a selection made from all eternity, and without any foresight of faith, or any reference to character in the persons thus chosen — as the necessary antecedent to the devising and determining upon a plan of salvation for mankind viewed as fallen ? Is this the legitimate interpretation of those portions of Scripture which represent the salvation of the elect as from all eternity; or of those which set forth salvation as having sole and exclusive reference to the elect? Would it not be just as much in harmony with the ordinary presentation of the whole matter in the Word of God, if the divine plan of grace were placed first in the order of time, and the salvation of the indi- viduals under that plan were viewed as correlative and consequent ? These inquiries will call for closer consideration when the doc- trine of the Symbols respecting the plan of redemption, its scope and its working, comes up more immediately for consideration. It is enough here to note the fact that, whether the letter of the Symbols may or may not justify it, this view of the historic order of the decrees is widely held by persons who are true Cal- vinists in belief, and whose loyalty to the general doctrine can- not be questioned. 190 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. It is interesting to observe the care and skill with which the mode of executing the one decree or the several decrees of God, is stated in the Symbols. It cannot be 5. Modes of executing the doubted that the conception of the decrees : Second Causes : The ,.. , . i * , , . human will divine decree as single tends to bring in a correlated view of the divine exe- cution of that one decree as single, invariable and absolutely resistless. And, as the system of nature furnishes the primary illustration and type of such executive energy, it is natural that many minds should conceive of a like potency, equally necessary and resistless and supreme, accomplishing results in the same way within the higher sphere of character. Some statements of the Confession give significance or color to this misconception; as the declaration that God in his providence maketh use of means, yet is free to work without, above and against them at his pleasure ; or the strong doctrine of the chapter on God, that he hath most sovereign dominion over all things, to do by them, for them or upon them whatsoever himself pleaseth. If his working in whatever sphere, in the exercise of his most sovereign domi?iion, were all of one type, and that type were illustrated simply in the grand move- ments of physical nature, it is hard to see how such dominion would fall short of practical fatalism, or how any room would be left either for human liberty or for human accountability before him. But it has well been said (Smith, J. Pye), that it is one of the attributes of the Infinite Being, the First Cause and Supreme Upholder and Governor of all things — an attribute peculiar to his own unparalleled and incomprehensible nature — that he brings all things to effect, in such manner as is becoming to his infinite excellence, without any compromise of his own holiness, and with the full preservation of all true liberty to rational creatures. The corrective to all erroneous tendency is found in the clear proposition of the Confession (V : ii) that, although in relation to the decree of God, the First Cause, all things come to pass immut- ably and infallibly, yet he ordereth them to fall out according to the nature of seco?id causes, either necessarily, freely, or contin- gently. While therefore it is maintained abstractly that God majr work out his purposes independently of all secondary agencies, as he certainly did in the primal fiat of creation, yet this declaration teaches the great correlative truth, that ordinarily he makes use of such agencies, working in and through them to the accomplish- ment of his own supreme ends. It may be that the affirmation of his independence upon the creature — his ability to work with- out, above and against means at his pleasure — was intended THE DECREES, HOW EXECUTED. 191 especially to provide room for the recognition of miracles as events occurring in the sphere of nature, but produced by a power wholly above nature. In this view that affirmation is certainly in entire harmony with the general truth already stated, — that God ordi- narily ordereth all things to fall out according to the nature and through the activity of what generically are called second causes. These causes are instituted by him, receive their causal capacity from him, work under limitations which he has imposed, toward ends and issues which in some deep sense he has chosen and pre- determined. He ordereth them so that, while all things fall out according to them, and in harmony with them, these things also eventuate as he in his sovereignty determines. This divine activity in and through such second causes is described as working necessarily, freely, or contingently ; in other words, in full accordance with the nature of these causes respect- ively. The active agencies of nature, for example, work under necessity, — without intelligence or volition of their own, and without choice or even knowledge of the results toward which they are working. The entire sphere and operations of physical creation come under this law of material necessity; in other words, that creation is a vast mechanism, moving on by forces above itself toward issues not chosen by itself, under the irresistible guidance of him who made it. But in the sphere and realm of humanity, God causeth things to fall out freely rather than necessarily, — according, in other words, to the constitution of the human will viewed as a second cause, having an inherent capacity for free action, and according to the principles incorporated in his moral as distinct from the material system of things. While the will of man is itself not a first but a second cause, and as such must be empow- ered even in its freest or wildest activities by God himself as the first cause, yet he hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty (IX : i) that it is neither forced nor by any absolute necessity of nature determi?ied to good or evil. Here a clear distinction is made between second causes working necessarily in nature, and the will as a second cause of a peculiar class, working freely in a region above nature — the region of moral life and action. The importance of this distinction will further appear when we come to the consideration of man as a subject under the moral govern- ment of God : it is well here to record the fact that such a distinction is made, and made so strongly and unequivocally. The conception of second causes working neither necessarily nor freely, but contingently, is doubtless brought in to provide for an explanation of the introduction and permission of sin. 192 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. While nothing can be viewed as accidental in the divine adminis- tration,— while even sin is said to be on the one side permitted by God, but on the other side powerfully bounded and held in check by him, yet the Symbols carefully deny that God either is or can be the author or approver of sin; the incoming of that dire calamity being in some true sense contingent in his scheme — contingent, but not fortuitous or irresistible in his sight. It is said with justice, that there is no contingent event or issue with God; yet in his Word he often seems to make events turn on specified contingencies, and even his decree respecting the irrup- tion of sin into our world must be viewed as dependent upon an abuse of human liberty and choice which he neither ordained nor approved, in any full sense of these words. Contingency clearly implies something more than possibility: it implies both a foreknowledge of the event contingently introduced, and a cer- tain measure of causal force with respect to it. But this causal force differs radical^ from that which regulates the procession of the seasons, and also from that which directs and aids a soul in the pathway of holiness, — God seeming in his sovereignty to stand aside and suffer the human will as a second cause to work out results which he never created it to produce, and for whose production he holds it to a strict accountability before him. As a corrective to certain erroneous tendencies respecting the exaltation of natural law in the spiritual sphere on one side, and a fatalistic rationalism on the other, it should be affirmed with emphasis that in executing his decree or decrees God invariably adapts his activity to the nature of the specific sphere in which his particular purposes or determinations are to be accomplished. In creation his own will acts directly, immediately, in absolute sovereignty, with no subordinate agency intervening or assisting. In the sphere of providence he secures his intended results through second causes, — these causes acting with an efficiency imparted by him, and in subordination to his own supreme causa- tion. In moral government he executes his purposes through the human mind as a particular cause or agent, — his specific designs being accomplished by processes which do no violence to the constitution of man as a free and responsible creature. In the sphere of redemption the divine decree is executed primarily through the Holy Spirit as an agent, working in and through both providence and the moral nature of man, — not ignoring or overcoming the human will, but so regenerating and sanctifying it, that the designed result in grace is certainly effected. In every sphere, God truly executes his eternal purpose, Avhether it MORAL QUALITY OF THE DECREES. 193 be through physical necessity as in creation and providence, or as in moral government and redemption through a necessity which is not physical but moral and gracious, — adapted perfectly to the nature of the soul in man, yet as assured in its results as any event in the world of nature. These propositions will recur for closer consideration in conjunction with the doctrine of pro- vidence, and especially with the plan and process of redemption. One further point in the doctrine under examination remains to be noted, — the spirit in which the decrees of God are said to be executed, and the moral qualities revealed in the forming and accom- 6* sPirit in which the , . , , r ... decrees are executed : MoraJ phshment of the divine purposes, quality 0f the decrees, whether in nature or moral govern- ment, or in the sphere of grace. In the latter sphere we are not left in doubt as to the impelling motive in the divine mind. God out of his mere, (pure) free grace and love, and without anything in the creature as conditions or causes moving him thereunto, devised the plan of salvation, and poured all the energies of his perfect nature into its accomplishment. So also the almighty power, unsearchable wisdom, and eminently the infinite goodness of God, are said (V:iv) to manifest themselves in his providence. Even when he doth leave for a season his own children, suffering them to fall into trial and subjecting them to chastisement, he is said to be most wise, righteous and gracious in such severer provi- dences, working out not only what equity requires, but also what the purest love desires for its cherished objects. In these spheres the paternal quality in God, his boundless interest even in the natural life and happiness, and still more in the spiritual develop- ment and blessedness of his creatures, is both clearly recognized, and forcibly stated; and so far as the specific decrees in these spheres are concerned, we are taught that the love, tenderness, grace of God are as fully expressed in them as is his justice or his sovereignty. Here the Father blends with the Creator and the King; and over the majesty of royalty a smile is ever breaking. Is it either unphilosophic or unscriptural to carry the same view into every part or section of the one divine decree on which everything from creation to salvation turns ? Is not the infinite goodness of God just as apparent in creation as in providence: — in that primal determination of fatherhood which produced these myriads on myriads of creatures, gave them their capacities, and made them competent to move through all their varied cycles of life and enjoyment devised by him, as in those specific minis- trations of interest and care which are so abundantly seen in the 194 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. actual ongoings of such a creation ? Looking at the decree of God once more as one, — contemplating his single and individual purpose in all its sublime vastness, may we not as truly say that all the perfections of the Godhead — goodness and fatherhood, as truly as wisdom or justice or omnipotence — are combined together in that stupendous plan, ever}'- attribute blended with every other, alike in its conception and throughout its progressive execution ? Must we even say that the darkest, most mysterious and painful aspects of that decree are exhibitions of one class of faculties or perfections only, rather than the illustration of what God is in the unity and the glory of his perfect character ? Must we affirm that the admission of sin, and the enforcement of law, and the punishment of offenders, and the final condemnation of the lost, are events which are referable to inscrutable sovereignty or to vindicatory justice simply, with no trace in them at any point of that unfathomable goodness which ever dwells in God, and which must ever be recognized as one in the circle of jewels encrowning Him as King and Father of us all ? It is obvious that the Assembly took what must be regarded as the severer view of the divine character, as exhibited in these aspects of the one divine decree. Following the general current of antecedent Calvinism, they referred that decree to the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordaining whatsoever comes to pass. In thus emphasizing the divine ivill, viewed simply as sovereign volition, the}' failed to grasp the cardinal fact that the will of God can be none other than the expression of all his perfections, — of his complete and holy personality. They affirmed that God, for the manifestation ■of his own glory, — the glory of his righteous and powerful sover- eignty rather than of his fatherly love — predestinated some men and angels unto everlasting life, and foreordained others to ever- lasting death. They declared in respect to the latter class, that they were thus ordained to dishonor and wrath, not merely for their sin, but also for the glory, or glorifying, of his sovereign power over his creatures, and to the praise of his glorious justice. Following Calvin, while they referred the decree of salvation wholly to grace, they thus referred the decree of reprobation wholly to justice and to an inscrutable sovereignty: they justified such reprobation on the ground of law and equity, even while affirming that the persons thus reprobated were from all eternity chosen and set apart for such a fate. It is not strange that man}' who read such statements, have said with Calvin himself: It is an awful decree. It is not strange that the milder conception of GOD AS CREATOR. 195 pretention should gradually be substituted, even in the minds of tiie most loyal adherents to the Symbols, for the more positive conception of an eternally foreordained reprobation. Nor is it strange that the question should so often be raised whether there be not some method of softening the severity, if we might not rather say the heartlessness, of these statements, — whether they might not even be eliminated from the Confession, or at least radically modified, without impairing any principle essential either to a just and wise Calvinism or to spiritual Christianity. Inasmuch as the symbolic teaching of Westminster respecting the decrees of God will again present itself in connection with the specific plan of salvation, in the two aspects of election and reprobation, 7' Creation: false theories .... ^ L. excluded: God the Creator, we may with these suggestions respect- Fatnerhood in creation> ing the doctrine, now pass on to the consideration of the subject of Creation as brought before us in the Symbols, (Ch. IV), noting successively the creative act, the divine method in creation, the extent of the creation, its quality, and the end of God in creation. False theories of creation, whether existing in the seventeenth or in the eighteenth or nineteenth century, are met at the outset by the simple affirmation, so abundantly justified by Scripture: It pleased God to create. That the earth on which we dwell with all its creatures and contents, and the vast universe of worlds and systems of which the earth seems indeed an inconspicuous portion, can have come into existence without any adequate cause, by some species of fortuitous accident or fate, is a conclusion not merely alto- gether unphilosophic, but in many aspects monstrous — a hypoth- esis both intellectually and ethically inadmissible. An eminent scientist has recently affirmed as a conclusion certainly established, that no fortuitous concourse of atoms, with all eternity for them to clash and combine in, could compass the fact of the formation of the first optically organic compound: and the same authority concludes that such a result is possible only through the agency of some directive force, intelligent in character. That all this boundless result has issued from the action or interaction of cer- tain physical causes or energies at work in nature — the final product of a congeries of processes and evolutions and causal changes, of whose origination man can know or affirm nothing, is equally a conclusion in which no mind, truly apprehending the nature of the problem, can contentedly rest. If any such mind should set aside as unsatisfactory the teachings of revelation as to 196 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. the origin of things, it must still ask itself the underlying ques- tion, Whence came these causes, forces, regulative principles; — where and how did this series of processes, evolutions, develop- ments begin ? It is to be granted that some who hold such theo- ries of creation, while denying the possibility of answering these questions from scientific data, still find the answer as a matter of faith in the scriptural teaching : It pleased God to create. If it be true, as is claimed by some advocates of the hypothesis that all the existing forms of vegetable and animal life have been pro- duced through the process of successive birth and generation from original vital germs, — if it be true that this hypothesis may be held in entire harmony with the Scriptures, still these vital germs must be accounted for, and the only possible ground for their existence must be found ultimately in a creative and fontal Spirit such as God is seen to be. We may justly maintain that a wise, deep, reverent philosophy may and ought to go beyond such recognition of whatever is confessedly secondary in the case. We may justly hold that these secondary causes and forces point directly to one primal cause, some directive force intelligent in character, as their only possible antecedent, — that these vast and sublime movements and processes indicate irresistibly the action in and upon them of conscious and competent Mind, — that the only hypothesis which science itself can accept as meeting prop- erly all the conditions of the stupendous problem, is the hypoth- esis of one supreme, glorious and perfect Person from whom creation has immediately come. To say that this is the explan- ation of Scripture, and that the affirmation is to be received not only as a truth of faith or of sentiment, but as a fact that can be scientifically apprehended, as well as maintained on biblical au- thority, is to affirm precisely what the divines of Westminster taught. To their clear statement the two centuries since have added nothing: against it all the speculations, doubts, hypoth- eses of man, even in our own age of questioning and conflict, have brought no effectual refutation. The work of creation is referred in this chapter to the Holy Trinity — Father, Son and Holy Ghost. In the comprehensive sense of the term, God, as including equally the three divine per- sonalities, is the alone fountain of all being — of whom, through whom, and to whom are all things. The Second Helvetic Con- fession (Cap. VII) declares that the good and omnipotent God created all things, visible and invisible, through (or by) his co- eternal Word, and preserves them through his co-eternal Spirit. TheBelgic Confession (Art. VII ) teaches that the Father by the CREATION, AN ACT OF FATHERHOOD. 197 Word — that is, by his Son — created of nothing the heaven, the earth and all creatures, giving unto every creature its being, shape, form and several offices to serve its Creator. The Symbols, as we have seen, bring the entire Deity into view as engaged alike in the creative act. In the list of biblical references quoted in this chapter, certain passages (eliminated in the recent revision of proof texts) are introduced as referring to the Holy Spirit as the special agent in creation, where clearly it is God viewed as Spirit, or the spiritual God without regard to the separate personalities, who is contemplated by the inspired writers as Creator. The work of the Holy Ghost, so far as described elsewhere in the Symbols, is wholly a work of grace; and it may justly be questioned whether there is any clear confessional or biblical description of the Spirit as concerned primarily with either creation or providence. That the Spirit is the executive of the Godhead in creation and prov- idence, or that he is in any natural sense the omnium viventium anima, as Cyprian styles him, is nowhere affirmed. Other pass- ages in this list refer to the Son as an instrumental medium or agent in creation — all things being made both by him and for him; yet these texts are always set in such connection with the scheme of salvation in which the Son is central and chief, as to lead us to view him as the mediate or the final rather than the originating and efficient cause in the primal act of producing the universe. Else- where, and much more frequently, that primal act is referred in the Bible to the Father, as first among the three personalities, and to him as a special act or manifestation of his fatherhood. Group- ing together, in its totality, the teaching of Scripture on this point, we must not only affirm with our own Confession that it pleased God, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to create, but also say with the Nicene symbol: We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. It is in this act of creation, that the divine fatherhood has its primal manifestation, so far at least as it refers to man. It is the Father who creates and who also governs, as it is the Son who redeems, and the Spirit who regenerates and sanctifies. Pear- son on the Creed: Crawford, Fatherhood of God. Laying proper emphasis on the word pleased, as an imperial term, and associating with it the teaching of the Catechisms that God executeth his decree in this work of creation, and calling to mind at the same time the biblical conception of God as will, holy and supreme and resistless, we discover at once how sublime as well as simple is the doctrine of the Symbols at this point. While indeed creation is as to its purpose referred to the goodness of God, 198 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. it is his eternal power and wisdom — the superb majesty of his decree and his volition, on which the thought of the Assembly was chiefly fixed. It could say nothing simpler, nothing grander, than the familiar statement: It pleased Him. When we meditate on what is implied in the idea of such pleasure, pervading the divine mind, flowing as a vast river through the divine heart, and finally expressing itself in the sublime edict which at a word called into existence a universe such as this, with all the vast and enduring interests involved in such an exercise of the divine voli- tion, we begin to apprehend in some feeble degree the joyous love, the immeasurable happiness, the moral felicity in the breast of Deity, out of which the universe sprang. Such a description was in beautiful conformity with the delineation of God in his nature and character and relations, which had preceded it in the Confession, and it sets before us in its true majesty this strange, wondrous, exalted Creative Act. Neither the Confession of Augs- burg, nor any other among the earlier creeds of the Reformation, contains any extended reference to the divine work in creation: they seem to have rested simply in the declarations, terse and sim- ple, of the apostolic and Nicene symbols. Even the Heidelberg Catechism contains only what may be regarded as an incidental reference to the Eternal Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, (26) who of nothing made heaven and earth, with all that in them is. In the Thirty-Nine Articles we find only the simple allusion to God as the Maker and Preserver of all things, both visible and invisible. Statements somewhat more extended, but of the same quality, are found in the French and Belgic Confessions. The fullest account appears in the Irish Articles, where it is said (18) that in the beginning of time, when no creature had any being, God by his word alone, in the space of six days, created all things. It was left to the Assembly of Westminster to set forth the doc- trine of creation in a form which both fully incorporates the teaching of the divine Word, and most effectually meets, even down to our own time, the queries and the oppositions of human unbelief. We are confronted at this point by various antagonistic theories as to the origin of things. Those who set aside the authority of Scripture respecting such origin, may simply affirm that it is im- possible for man to solve the problem of creation, and that his wisest course is to turn away from that problem as altogether inscrutable. Creation, they say, is in itself a palpable and tre- mendous reality; but whence it came, ahd whither it is tending, and where or how it will reach its consummation, it is not given METHOD OF CREATION. 199 to man to know. Those who cannot rest in this discouraging proposition may affirm either that matter is eternal, (Mill ) in such sense as to exclude altogether the theory of a creation of matter by some power or agent higher than itself; or that matter, (Huxley) is in some way endowed with an inherent vitality or energy, in virtue of which it has gradually evolved itself into the forms which we see it assuming on the earth and in the starry heav- ens above the earth. The solution of the problem, in other words, is sought in nature rather than in any spiritual agency higher than nature, by which such vitality is imparted to nature, or through whose potency matter has been evolved into its present multiform and marvelous developments. Related to this is the pantheistic theory of creation as the spontaneous outflow or emanation of an unconscious deity — an expansion of his infinite substance into space and time by a process involving neither intelligence nor volition, but is constitutional and inevitable. It is impracticable here to enter upon a specific explanation or refutation of the numerous solutions of the great question respecting the origin of things, which are included in these general descriptions. The best refutation of them all may be found in the biblical reference of creation to the efficient fiat of an absolute, free, wise and holy Spirit, resident in a sphere infinitely above nature, who simply spake and it was done — who simply commanded and, in the strong phrase of David, it stood fast, and is still standing fast through all its changes as the abiding witness to his existence, to his supreme power, and to his perpetual presence and domination in anej through the universe which he has made. Thus recognizing God in his supreme personality as the ultimate source of all created things, we may turn to consider the methods or processes of creation, as here de- ., , . „, , , jr , r , • 8. Method of Creation: scribed m the phrase, by the word of his Jhe WQrd flf pQwer . Jhe ^ power. As God himself is no panthe- Days. istic spirit, pervading all nature, insep- arable from nature, and unconscious in his manifestations in and through nature, so the universe is not a mere emanation from his substance, a mere objective exudation from his interior essence, or an involuntary evolution of forces contained within his nature and working themselves out through their own efficiency. The word which creates is not the dreamy utterance of an abstract deity asleep among the stars: it is the omnific voice of a personal, conscious, .sovereign God. It is also a word of pozcer — a power which is in the highest sense causal, and which is centered and embodied in the divine will. The power of God here referred to 200 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. is not the pressure of strong winds, the force of swollen rivers hasting over cataracts to the sea, the sweep of planets through the sky; — these are only its external indications and measures. It is the power that dwells in spirit, — a power apparent even in the imperfect volitions of men, seen in the activities of the flying hosts of angels, but resident supremely in the divine personality alone. It is this power, dependent on no conditions and capable of producing in itself all actual or conceivable results, which is here recognized as the true originating cause and fount of all things. From this all secondary varieties of potency flow: toward this, they all immediately and always point as both their true ori- gin and their final end. The term, poiver, does not stand in this connection for a single attribute: wisdom and goodness are associated with it as represent- ing the entire perfection and glory of God as exhibited in the work of creation. In the general view of sovereignty presented in the Symbols, it is probably true that mere power, especially in the form of sovereign control, is too prominently, if not exclu- sively, pressed forward to the comparative retirement of other, even more attractive qualities in the divine character. Yet it is easy to see that potency by itself, however irresistible — however closely resembling a resistless fate, is not the highest or in any sense the controlling attribute in God. Such potency commands rev- erence, as distinguished from dread or terror, only as it is seen to be controlled by perfect wisdom, directing it by right channels toward righteous and adequate ends. The term, goodness, proba- bly refers in this connection less to beneficence — to the exhibition of tender and gracious fatherhood in God in the act of crea- tion, than to moral excellence in general, — that goodness, or holi- ness, which is the crown and summation of the divine perfections. Hence the act of creation is one in which all the moral as well as the natural attributes of Deity are said to find suitable expres- sion: the whole of God, if we except those peculiar manifesta- tions which accompany salvation, is made manifest here. It may be questioned whether a more definite intermingling of what is indicated in the term, fatherhood, might not have saved the doc- trine from that aspect of severity or arbitrariness or mere will, which in some degree characterizes it as presented in the Confes- sion. At least, the word glory, which is the keynote of the whole, tends to lead our minds toward the conception of sovereignty rather than to the antithetic truth: it is the glory of the King rather than the glory of the Father, by which we are awed into silence as we meditate upon the sublime creative act. CREATION EX JS1HII.O. 201 The expression, of nothing, found in both Confession and Cate- chisms has a deep significance, especially in the presence of the multiplied theories of spontaneous development, evolution, cyclical growth, so current in our time. Not only is creation declared to be the issue of supreme will and wisdom: it is described as a making, and a making from nothing, by an omnipotent word. While under this statement a theory of progressive stages in creation, wdth manifest increase of energy and higher exhibitions of intelligence at each stage, ma)' possibly stand, no hypothesis of external matter evolving itself into shape, of primordial germs existing independently at first and then molded into forms of life and beauty by the divine hand, or of laws and processes working out in some mysterious way their own results, while God merely interposes at certain points in the vast, blind, natural develop- ment,— no such hypothesis can by any possibility be harmonized with the phrase, of nothing. As has already been intimated, the conception of matter as something existing eternally, and inde- pendently of God, with capabilities and functions inherent in itself, is decisively excluded by such a statement. Given the existence of a personal, free, primordial Spirit, and the existence and activities of matter may be explained; but not otherwise, however earnest or however confident may be the efforts to find such explanation elsewhere. In the beginning to which the Con- fession refers, — that beginning which is antecedent to all organ- ized existence outside of God, and even to all matter, though it were as minute or ethereal as the fabled dust of the stars, God personally commenced this work of creation. He had no material to work with or to work upon; he could utilize no principle or force or law objective to himself; he made all these, and all that afterwards came into being through their tributary activities; he made the world and all things therein, whether visible or invisible, of nothing — of nothing. Such is clearly the biblical as well as the confessional teaching. Whatever meaning may be attached to such words as created or made in the original record in Genesis, there can be no question that the Bible in its totality teaches the doctrine of an absolute origination of all things by God at a period when, in the language of the Irish Articles, no creature had any being. If it be said that such a statement is difficult or even incomprehensible, it must be admitted also that the antithetic hypothesis of matter, principles, laws, forces, systems of things existing independently of God, and having in some sense creative energy of their own, is far more difficult — far less conceivable. 202 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. The declaration as to the time occupied in this work of creation is simply an index of theological opinion in an age when geologic investigations were in their infancy. Members of the Assembly were doubtless acquainted with the suggestion of more extended periods, found in theological writings even as far back as the age of Augustine, who declared (Civ. Dei XI : 6) that it is difficult or perhaps impossible for us to say or even to conceive what kind of days the six creative days actually were. But the language of the Confession, in the space of six days, must be interpreted literally, because this was the exact view pronounced by the Assembly. Yet there are comparatively few who now adhere to the literal interpretation of the inspired record in Genesis: a very large pro- portion at least so far modify that interpretation as to regard creation as produced through six prolonged periods, and by a pro- gressive exercise of divine energy, — each of these periods recording itself by incontestible evidences in the forming world, and each directly tributary to the more complex and matured period of development that succeeded it. Nor is it inconsistent with true loj^alty to the Symbols to hold such modified views as to the time spent in the process of creation. Presbyterian theologians in later days do not affirm such inconsistency, nor do those who adhere to the literal interpretation, regard such as differ on this point as com- promising the Symbols thereby. One important branch of the Presbyterian family officially declares that full liberty of opinion is allowed on such points in the Standards, not entering into the sub- stance of the faith, as the interpretation of the six days in the Mosaic account of the creation; — the church guarding against the abuse of this liberty to the injury of its unity and peace: United Presbyterian Church of Scotland, Declaratory Act. The Articles (III) of the English Presbyterian Synod in like manner describe God as fashioning and ordering this world and giving life to every creature through progressive stages. It should however be main- tained that nothing in such broader interpretations is to be regarded as detracting at any point from the absoluteness or the immediateness, or the active wisdom or true glory of the creative act. Whether in six days or in six geologic epochs, God made the zvorld and all things therein, and made them of nothing. Turning to consider this work of creation as to its extent, we are confronted first with the question whether the entire material universe is included in the confessional 9. Extent of the Creation : , ,, ., , ,. ,, . ., .. - . . phrase; the ivorhl and all things therein; Creation of men and angels. A ' s ' whether visible or invisible. The lan- guage of the Nicene creed, referring to God the Father Almighty EXTENT OF THE CREATION. 203 as Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible — language which is quoted in some of the earlier Protestant creeds with small variations — may properly be regarded as explanatory of this sentence. The expression, heaven and earth, might be supposed to include our own planetary system, or the visible firmament only, were there not other allusions, especially in the chapters on God and his Decree and Providence, which clearly suggest to our thought the whole universe, material and moral, as constituting in its entirety the one creative work. The Scriptures tell us not only of the sun and moon, including our entire planetary system, as fashioned by the divine hand; but also of the stars which God has made and counted and holds in his supreme grasp, — of the ordinances of heaven which he has established, and of a sovereign control which reaches to the utmost verge of the material universe. Of the magnitude of that universe it is impossible for us to frame any conception. The planetary system of which our earth is a part, is itself but one, and possibly an inferior one, in the multitude of such systems which the telescope has already revealed. But beyond what can thus be discovered, who can tell what other and vaster systems may exist, including millions on millions of stars within their measureless domain ! And who would venture to say that this sublime material uni- verse, created throughout by the will of God, is all unoccupied and void of life, — that it is not inhabited by myriads on myriads of animate existences, and perhaps by rational and moral beings innumerable, who dwell together with man under the care and the dominion of the infinite Being who created them ? Under this view the broader conception of six vast periods, however unrecognized by the Assembly, assumes special signi- ficance. While omnipotence could have produced the entire uni- verse, both material and moral, in six actual days, or in a single instant, yet the sublime spectacle of God more slowly and elabo- rately working out even through long ages his one mighty and eternal plan, is one which more deeply stirs our feeling, and more strongly constrains us to wonder and adore. If the record in Genesis be viewed as limiting itself to this terrestrial system, as the more literal interpretation would require, still it is a wondrous truth that the same Almighty Hand, which in that brief period fashioned the world and all things therein, its hidden and unknown as well as its visible structures, has been at work for measure- less ages elsewhere, bringing into existence system after system, and gradually giving form and unity and glory to what we call the universe. Compared with the grandeur of that scriptural 204 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. conception, how narrow and how trivial seem the guesses and hypotheses, the loftiest constructions or conclusions of that type of scientific research, which seeks to account for that immeasur- able universe without such a conception . To meet the criticism that the chapter on Creation is limited in its affirmation to this particular world and all things therein, and therefore contains no doctrine of creation in its broader, universal aspects, and also the further criticism that according to its affirmations, if interpreted more broadly, the entire universe material and spiritual, must be regarded as having been made in the space of six days, it was proposed in the recent Revision to modify the section as follows: It pleased God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost for the manifes- tation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom and goodness, in the beginning, to create of nothing all things, visible and invisible, and all very good: the heaven and the earth and all that in them is, being made by him in six days. Without referring here specifically to the moral constitution of man as created, we may yet follow the Confession in laying special stress on this particular exhibition of the divine energy and wisdom in creation: After God had made all other creatures, he created man. Have we here simply a chronologic succession, or is there a further suggestion of the dignity of man, and of his place at the head of earthly creatures? If we take the latter view, as the subse- quent gift of dominion over the creatures would suggest, we must bear in mind the creation of angels, which in the L,arger Cate- chism (16-17) is said to have occurred before the creation of man — as an antecedent step in the grand originating and formative process. Man was created, according to the Scriptures, not only after but a little lower than the angels, so far as inherent endow- ments go: a being of inferior mold, he yet was made, as the Bible teaches, to be king on the earth, and destined finally to be asso- ciated with angels and archangels around the throne of God. The suggestion that there are two records in Scripture, the first referring to the evolution of the bodily organism of man from some inferior variety of organic life, or possibly from some crude protoplasmic germ; the second, referring to the enduing of the animal man with rational and spiritual powers, and the gift of immortality, is altogether unknown to either Catechism or Confes- sion. God, it is said, (I«. C. 17) formed the body of the man of the dust of the ground, and the woman of the rib of the man, — by the same creative process, it is clearly implied. He at the same time and by the same act endowed them with living, reasonable and im- mortal souls. Both of these simultaneous processes are expressed CREATION OF MEN AND ANGELS. 205 alike in the comprehensive phrase, He created man, male and female ; the distinction of sex being indexed not more clearly in their bodily than in their mental and moral organization. And so far as the formation of this earth was concerned, the making of man was clearly the crowning as well as the final step. In him, with his finer physical organism, with his nobler mental and moral powers, with his inherent capacity for control, and with his vested sovereignty over the earth and all its contents, under a supreme accountability to God as his Maker and King, the work of creation became finished and complete. — The question whether the human race as thus created is single or plural in origin, and the kindred question respecting the relative antiquity of the race, will be considered in another connection. That the creation of the angels was antecedent to that of man is affirmed in the phrase already quoted: After God had made all other creatures, he created man. In the chapter on the Decree, not only is the fact of the creation of angels presented as a part of the one divine plan: their number is said to be very great, and to be so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or dimin- ished; and their destinies, whether to everlasting life or to ever- lasting death, are affirmed (L,. C. 13) to be fixed in this creative decree. It is said (L. C. 16) that as thus created they were spir- its, immortal, holy, excellent in knowledge, mighty in power, in order to execute the commands of God, and to praise his name, — yet, like man, subject to moral change. It is further said (19) that God in his providence has permitted some of these angels to fall wilfully and irrecoverably into sin and damnation, yet limit- ing and ordering such fall and all their sins as fallen to his own glory ; and on the other hand that he has established the rest in holiness and happiness, employing them all at his pleasure in the administration of his power, mercy and justice. Among the sins forbidden in the first Commandment is the worshiping of angels, however excellent in character or beneficent in their ministries to men. The employments of the holy angels are indicated as chiefly the adoration of the Deity, and his service in whatever sphere. The sins of the fallen angels are said (V: iv) to be not only wisely and powerfully bounded in their influence but also, like the sin of man, ordered and governed by God in such ways as shall make these sins, in which the temptation of our first parents must be specially included, tributary to his own holy ends. In the chapter on the Fall of Man (VI) that fall is said to have been caused by the subtlety and temptation of one of these angels, who must first have fallen himself from his original estate of ex- 206 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. alted capacity and spiritual holiness. In the chapter on the L,ast Judgment (XXXIII) some of these fallen angels are included with mankind in the solemn adjudication there described, and in the damnation visited upon the reprobate. Other incidental allusions in the Symbols illustrate this part of the creative work; exhibiting not only the plan of God in the production of these orders of intelli- gences,but also his authority over and his use of them, and the final disposition which he will make of them, as well as the intermediate race of man. It is a fact worthy of mention in this connection that those theorists who are attempting to account for the exis- tence of the moral sentiments and aspirations of man by regard- ing them as developments from the altruistic instincts common to men and other animals, can have no possible way of accounting for either the existence or the character of the inhabitants of the angelic world. The ancient Gnostic might suppose them to be evolutions from the bosom of Deity: the modern theorist cannot fancy them to be evolutions from the bosom of nature. The Second Helvetic Conf. represents the general doctrine of primitive Protestantism in its statement (VII) that angels stand together with men at the head of all creatures; that some of them, having continued in obedience, have been deputed to the faithful service of God and man; and that others having fallen by their own choice, have been precipitated into their own destruction; and become the enemies of the faithful and of all good. It is a fact to be noted here that the entire doctrine respecting angels, both holy and evil, had greater prominence in Protestant theology, and also in the theology of Rome during the era of the Reformation, than it has retained in later times. Such prominence may be illustrated by the strong affirmation of the Belgic Conf. (XII) that devils and evil spirits are so depraved that they are enemies of God and every good thing to the utmost of their power — as murderers ever watch- ing to ruin the church and every member thereof, and by their wicked stratagems to destroy all. This Conf. expressly con- demns the Sadducean opinion that there are no spirits or angels, and the Manichean heresy that evil spirits have their origin not in God but in themselves, and are wicked of their own nature, with- out being corrupted through any external agency. The fact that the general doctrine on both sides of it, is now less emphasized, may be in part a revulsion from the marked tendency of the seven- teenth and eighteenth century to an unwarrantable amount of spec- ulation respecting the nature of angels, their powers, their occu- pations, and especially their relations to the natural and moral life of man. We see this revulsion especial!)' in the relative CURRENT BEUEF OF CHRISTEXDOiM. 20*3 retirement of the conception of Satan as the head of that kingdom of darkness, concerning which our Lord and his apostles often spoke in such explicit terms. Such retirement is not without some undesirable results, and is in part at least to be deplored. The fact that there is such a confederacy of evil now as in the age of Christ, and that a vast number of demoniac angels are associated in it, and that in some significant sense this kingdom of sin is ruled over and controlled by principalities and powers, headed by one who is its chief prince and leader, and who is now as of old arraying his forces against Christ and his religion on the earth, is an enduring fact which the thoughtful student of the Scriptures cannot fail to recognize. The act of creation as here defined, should be regarded as inclusive of the entire universe, both material and moral. And the declaration of the Symbols thus lifts us clearly above all those erratic and unbiblical notions of the origin of the universe which, in forms more or less philosophic, are so widely circulated in our time. This declaration decisively separates the Creator from his work, and sets him above his work, in all the sublimity and the awfulness of his personal being and power. It shows us God as he is by showing us so grandly what he has done ; and on the basis of this primary view it affords us abundant foundation alike for wonder and for praise. It is not out of place to associate with this statement of the doctrine of creation — the most full, adequate and impressive to be found in Protestant symbolism — the kindred statement of the Vatican Council, 1870; rejoicing meanwhile in the fact that at this fundamental point Romanist and Protestant are so essentially one in faith : The Holy Catholic, Apostolic Roman Church believes and confesses that there is one true and living God, Creator and Lord of heaven and earth . . . really and essentially distinct from the world, . . . and ineffably exalted above all things which exist, or are conceivable, except himself. This one only true God, of his own goodness and almighty power, not for the increase or acquirement of his own happiness, but to manifest his perfection by the blessings he bestows on his creatures, and with absolute freedom of counsel, created out of nothing, from the very first beginning of time, both the spiritual and the phys- ical creation, the angelic and the mundane, and finally the human creature, sharing the qualities of both, consisting of both spirit and body. The symbols of the Greek Church contain descrip- tions hardly less significant : See Conf. of Mogilas, XXII ; and the Dosithean Conf. IV. In respect to the quality of this vast product as estimated by 208 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. the divine mind, we have the teaching of the Confession in the simple and strong phrase quoted from 10. Quality of the Crea- Scripture : And all very good. The tion: Existence of evil, nat- ,. . , ,,. , . , „, _ t ural and moral. repetition of this phrase in both Cate- chisms shows the firm confidence of the Assembly in the doctrine it expresses. No like declaration is found in the three British creeds or indeed, except by incidental suggestion, in the continental formularies. It is probable that the language quoted did not slip into the Confession without special reason: it originated, it may be, in the consciousness that the excellence of the universe, assumed in antecedent symbolism, was in fact subject to serious question, — especially among those who more or less openly were assailing the entire Calvinistic scheme. Arminian critics had explained the existence and rav- ages of sin to their own satisfaction, without impugning the character of God, by referring it wholly to the perversities of the human will, breaking in disastrously upon an existing order of things. It was necessary therefore, while maintaining the full foresight and predetermination of God with respect to sin and his complete sovereignty in its permission, still to declare that the universe with all its vast possibilities and perils was very good, as God looked upon it in that memorable evening when he ended his work which he had made. The Assembly was not dis- posed to admit even by remote implication or by omission, that the divine character was unfavorably affected by such a wonderful demonstration of sovereignty as the creation of the universe, even though that universe should be marred and tainted forever by the malignities of sin. So far as the material universe is concerned, the question whether it is very good can receive but a single answer. Whether it be the best possible, is a purely speculative problem which the human mind is not competent even to state intelligibly, and is clearly incompetent to solve. We must rest in the simple fact that God has made it, and pronounced it very good: it is the best, since he deemed it best. What sudden breaks occur in its com- plex movement, — what agitations, convulsions, apparent disasters are sometimes seen in it, — what pains and sorrows it inflicts on man, and what tragic bereavements it sometimes strews in his path, are explicable only in the light of the moral nature and position of man himself, viewed as a creature under discipline. In other words, it is in the character of man as sinful, and in the exigencies of a moral administration over man, and in the char- acter of God as a moral Sovereign and Judge, that such facts in THE CREATION — ITS QUALITY. 209 the material universe must find their explanation. The subject will be more fully apprehended in conjunction with the doctrine of providence, and still further in its connections with the deeper problem of sin and salvation. It is a profound doctrine of Paul, worthy of remembrance here, that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth together in pain through its relationship to human sin, and is waiting for its participation in that deliverance from sin which man is yet to enjoy. To the deeper problem thus suggested, what fitting answer shall be given ? If God creates a free moral being, angel or man, does he of necessity consent to the possible abuse of the capacities thus given, making such being constitutionally subject to change, as the Confession declares both men and angels to be, — and still go forward to the decisive act of creation, even when he knows that such abuse of freedom will occur, and that his own act will to this extent make the sin of the creature a dreadful certainty ? On the same principle more broadly stated, does God determine in his creative act to introduce on earth a moral system in which his individual creatures, with all their endowments and liabilities shall form a part; — being limited to the sad alternative either of making no such creatures and organizing no such system, or of allowing all the possible and all the certain consequences of his act, in the assaults of sin on his holy supremacy, and in the dis- obedience and guilt of myriads of his subjects, even forever? In a word, is the necessity in the case a natural necessity, in either of these varieties, — and if God were thus shut in to such an alter- native, could he pause over his finished work in the final hour, and as he gazed upon it in its immensity and its terrific capabilities, pronounce it very good ? Turning in another direction for light, may we say that God permits this present tainting and marring of his universe for the sake of securing in the end a higher, grander good, — that sin is the natural and perhaps the necessary means or condition to the right development of human character, — that in fact such char- acter is in numberless cases evolved immediately from the discipline and the culture which sin has occasioned ? May we go still farther, and point to the Gospel as a foreseen and predestinated remedy, to all the blessings involved in a redemptive system, to Christ himself as a Savior whose coming and mission are mack- possible only through sin as antecedent, and in whose salvation even the worst ravages of sin seem to be more than counter balanced ? Or must we confess the incompleteness, of all such explanations, however helpful the}- may in certain aspects appear; '210 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. and simply rest in the general conclusion of the Assembly that God, having chosen for inscrutable reasons to admit sin, hath joined with such permission a most wise and powerful bounding, and otherwise ordering and governing of this evil, in a manifold dispensation, so as to secure through it his own holy ends? In the Irish Articles (28) the doctrine is stated in these terms: God is not the author of sin: howbeit, he doth not only permit it, but also by his providence govern and order the same, guiding it in such sort by his infinite wisdom as it turneth to the manifestation of his own glory, and to the good of his elect. This is clearly the historic norm of the Westminster statement. The Symbols are careful to affirm (V : iv) that God himself neither is nor can be the author or approver of sin: they are careful to refer sin immediately to the freedom and pozver to do that which is good, originally given to man as a moral creature. Yet they declare the divine relation to the result to be one of sovereign decree and purpose; abating nothing from the full sweep of the statement, that God hath from all eternity freely and unchangeably ordained whatsoever comes to pass, the sins of men and angels included. In the same chapter they teach that such sins are all in some way contained in his comprehending scheme; and that not only his almighty power and unsearchable wisdom, but also his infinite righteousness and goodness, are manifested in the ways in which by a manifold dispensation he so orders them as to secure through them his own holy ends. He is said to be a God who hates sin, and who will by no means clear the guilty: he is described (II : ii) as most holy in all his cotmsels, hi all his works, and in all his commands. And on the basis of this view of what God is in himself and in his administration, so far as his ways are known to us, what can we better say than that the same glory which is clearly seen in creation, in providence and in redemption, will finally make itself manifest even in the admission into the moral universe of such a destructive agent as sin ? The subject will recur to view in a more specific form in conjunction with the doctrine of the Symbols respecting the nature of man, his original righteousness, his moral constitution as free, and his voluntary fall into an estate of sin and spiritual death. It will also make its appearance practically in connection both with the providen- tial and moral administration of God over the race, and with the Gospel viewed as a gracious scheme for the spiritual restoration of sinful and perishing man. It is enough here if we are enabled to see that God was not unjust in creating such a race of beings, and fashioning for them such a material and moral sphere. END OF GOD IN CREATION. 211 Viewing the fact of creation in general, apart from the more specific question just noted, we may readily recognize the glory of God as the great end in view within , n. . °. , . 7* , • • , 11. End of God in crea- the divine Mind in the devising and ^ His Glory supreme, execution of his creative work. It is incumbent upon us at this point to bear in mind four fundamental facts: first, that the design of God in such a work as creation must from the nature of the case be immeasurably beyond our capacity for apprehension, — including doubtless specific ends which are altogether above our present knowledge, and which it will be one of the special privileges of eternity to study and comprehend: second, that as is true of the divine activity in other spheres, this design must be multiform and complex in such specific purposes and objects as we are now capable of discerning: third, that all particular ends secured in creation, such as the happiness or the moral development of men, must converge ulti- mately and reach their consummation in God himself rather than in man: and fourth, that the divine glory — the manifestation of the infinite excellence and perfection of the Deity in and through creation — is an end so high and vast, so sublime and pure, as not only to justify the creative work, but to illuminate it throughout with an indescribable and imperishable splendor. Hence the Symbols justly say: It pleased God (IV : i) for the manifestation of the glory of his eternal power, wisdom and goodness, in the beginning to create. The exhibition of the constitutional and moral endowments of the Godhead, not merely in but also to the universe so far as intelligent beings are included, is presented in these words as the supreme object divinely sought in the creation. Similar references to the manifesting or declaring of the divine glory as a final end are found in the chapters on Decrees, on Providence, on the Fall, and on the Judgment, — the same supreme end being indicated as regulating the divine activity in each of these specific spheres of action. None of the other Protestant symbols is so full and emphatic on this point. Surely this peculiar emphasizing of the glory of God as the end of all things may be regarded as one of the distinguishing qualities, if not one of the chief excellencies also, of the Symbolism of Westminster. Much of the disputation around this doctrine might be avoided by careful consideration of the terms and modes in which the doctrine is presented. What is the glory which is here to be made apparent ? It is not a certain impenetrable blaze of awful sove- reignty : it is not some abstract effulgence emanating as from the essence of the Deity, prostrating the creature irresistibly in the 212 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. dust before a present Creator. It is the glory of the divine attri- butes and character — of the power and wisdom, justice and love of God, as these are respectively made manifest in the creative work. There is no real conflict between this view and that which represents the happiness of the creatures, and especially of moral creatures, as the object divinely sought in the creative work. When God manifests the glory of his goodness in his numberless provisions for the happiness or welfare of his creatures, he rightly contemplates such happiness or welfare as an immediate and a worthy end. He loves to accumulate joy upon joy for them, and to crown their life with mercies, in order that in and through all these manifestations they may the more clearly and cordially learn that he himself is intrinsically and absolutely good. Nor is there any conflict between this view and that which points to the moral culture, the holiness and perfection of his creatures, as an end sought in creation. For in instituting his moral government to be the expression of his sense of justice, and to train his children into conformity of heart and life to what he knows to be right, God is obviously seeking to make more glorious that equity on which his own throne is set, and in which his own inherent glory so largely lies. The antitheses or antagonisms often supposed to exist at these points, and at others like them, are certainly not warranted by any proper conception of the phrase — the manifest- ation or declaration of his personal and eternal glory. That the happiness and the holiness of the creature are real and invaluable ends, and were so regarded by God in the scheme of creation, cannot be questioned. Nor on the other hand can it be questioned that the ultimate end of God must be found in himself rather than in the creation viewed as a product. Still this supreme end is to be realized only in and by the creation regarded as an expression of his intrinsic glory, — the happiness and the moral excellence of his creatures being at once the issues of and the witnesses to the excellence and the perfection of the Being who created all unto himself. May not God thus equitably find the end of all his actions in himself, and in the disclosure of his glory to his rational creatures ? May he not take holy delight in thus making manifest to his moral universe what he himself is, as to his attributes, purposes, feelings, desires, character? May we not with Edwards accept the dis- tinction between secondary and consequential ends, and that end which is original, independent, supreme, and which can be dis- cerned only in what God is and what in creation he reveals himself to be ? May we not recognize here an end which is single and DIVINE GLORY IN CREATION. 213 sufficient — which has and can have no other end beyond it or behind it as a condition of its existence ? May we not say that the highest happiness and the moral perfection of the rational universe can be secured only in and through its subordinate rela- tions to this ultimate and final good ? As the holiness of man is infinitely above his happiness, and as his true happiness is con- ditioned upon the possession of true holiness, may we not presume that both the holiness and the happiness of man are secondary to and conditioned upon his apprehension of that transcendent holi- ness in God, which it is the divine purpose in creation to make forever manifest, forever glorious, through all the moral universe ? How far removed from all conceptions of selfishness such a dispo- sition must be in him is easily seen, since the highest welfare, the completed excellence, the final flower and consummation of all created life, can be secured only through such manifestation. If Cod had not thus been pleased to show forth the glory of his power and wisdom and goodness, there could have been no created exist- ence : if it should please him at any instant to pause in this declaratory process, all such existence would instantly cease to be. From this effulgence our being, our happiness, our excellence, are forever flowing : within its celestial radiance it will be our supreme bliss and destiny to be forever glorified. Edwards (End of God in Creation), eloquently compares this manifested glory of God to the effulgence or emanation of light from a luminary such as the sun. Light, he says, is the external expression, exhibition and manifestation of the excellency of the luminary. It is the abundant, extensive emanation and communication of the fullness of the sun to innumerable beings that partake of it. It is by this that the sun itself is seen, and his glory beheld, and all other things are discovered : it is by a participation of this com- munication from the sun, that surrounding objects receive all their luster, beauty and brightness. It is by this that all nature is quickened, and receives life, comfort and joy. . . . Here, he adds, is both an emanation and remanation. The refulgence shines upon and into the creature, and is reflected back to the luminary. The beams of glory come from God, and are something of God, and are refunded back again to their original ; so that the whole is of God, and in God, and through God. Such in brief was the doctrine of Creation, as to its personal cause and source, as to the nature and extent of the creative pro- cedure, and as to the worth of the creation as a product and to its final purpose — as enunciated by the divines of Westminster. In 214 GOD IN HIS ACTIVITIES. passing from the contemplation of this great theme to the closely related doctrine of Providence, as presented in the succeeding chapter (V) in the Confession, we shall 1 2. Providence : definition find the same Hnes of thought recurring of: Preserving- and govern- . , , - ... ing- described. to vlew> and the same