I ¦¦¦'»' ¦
n

AN EPITOME

BAMPTON LECTURES

REY. DR. HAMPDEN.

LONDON:
JOSEPH MASTERS, ALDERSGATE STREET,
AND 78, NEW BOND STREET.
MDCCCXLVITI.

NOTICE.

This Epitome is drawn up, in the words of Dr. Hampden him
self, for the sake of those who have not, and cannot obtain, his
Lectures, and are anxious to form an opinion for themselves.
The sense of each Lecture is here faithfully brought before the
reader, in the Author's own phraseology, without note or com
ment, so that justice may be done to the drift of the whole
course.

The Subjects of the Lectures.
Lecture I. On the Origin of the Scholastic Theology.
II. On the Formation of its Aristotelic, in place of a
Platonic, character.
III. On the Controversies respecting the Trinity.
IV. On the Controversies respecting Predestination and
Grace.
V. On the Controversies respecting Original Sin, Jus
tification, and Atonement.
VI. On the Controversies respecting Morals and Moral
Theology.
VII. On the Controversies respecting the Sacraments.
VIII. On the Controversies respecting Dogmatic Theo
logy in general.

EPITOME OF THE BAMPTON LECTURES.

LECTURE I.
[The figures down the sides of the pages refer to the Edition of 1833.]
The force of Vice, and the force of Theory, both have
played a considerable part in the drama of Religion. 5
My purpose is, to present to your notice the force of
Theory. I do not indeed propose to enter into the whole 6
of so large an inquiry. It is to the effect of the Scholas
tic Philosophy that I have directed my attention. 7
Christianity had to struggle in its infancy against the
theology of the School of Alexandria. The accommodation
which took place between the theories of that philosophy
and the doctrines of the faith, proved a snare to members
of the Church. The faith itself was at stake in the en- 10
deavour to disentangle it from the theories of Platonizing
Christians. It has not been so with regard to the Aristotelic philoso- 11
phy. No compromise took place between its disciples and
the members of the Church. But the logic of Aristotle .
continued from time to time to supply the heretic with arms. 12
The Church learned the arts of its impugners. Aristotle's
philosophy has thus been more silently insinuated into
and spread over the whole system of the Christian doctrine.
The Origin of the Scholastic philosophy carries back
our inquiry to the causes of the ascendancy of the Latin
Clergy over the Greek. The Latins have not that splendid 14
array of philosophical writings which the catalogue of the
Greek Fathers exhibits : they had sagacious political
leaders ; popular advocates of the sacred cause, men of
extensive knowledge of the world. The practical character 16
shows itself in them as the prominent feature. Further ;
the state of society in the Western Empire was such as
practically to promote the influence of the Latin Clergy. — 22
Jerome indeed failed to introduce a Roman philosophical
literature. The state of the Latin portion of the Roman
Empire did not admit of it. A practical theology was wanted. 2 7
I refer to the ascendancy of the Latin Church, and
its practical character, because the account of this influ
ence of the Latins is the true view of the origin of the
Scholastic philosophy historically. We may discover in it

two principles in action; the maintenance of an internal
principle of Liberty; and the foundation of a spiritual
Authority. I must point out how the scholastic philosophy
resulted out of that state of things in the Latin Church. 30
After the first half of the fifth century, the management
of the people constituted the chief employment of the Latin
Clergy. They succeeded, in the course of a hundred and
fifty years, in converting all the schools of learning estab
lished by the emperors into Ecclesiastical societies ; and all
literature and science into Theology; so that at the opening
of the eighth century, the monotony of Religious rule per
vaded all things. Theology alone had the secret on which 31
the vitality of Power depended. The great number of
schools, instituted or revived by Charlemagne, are evidences
of the ascendancy of the theological Power. 33
The Predestinarian dispute of the ninth century gives us
a lively picture of the conflict between the liberty of private
Reason and the spiritual ascendancy of the Church. From 35
this period we may notice a continued struggle in the Latin
Church between the advocates of Reason and the advocates
of Authority. Obedience was become another word for Re- 36
ligion. The schools of philosophy were entirely in the hands
of the Ecclesiastical Power. 38
Throughout the whole period when the Scholastic philo
sophy may be said to have been growing, we meet with
constant disclaimers, on the part of the Church leaders, of
the system itself, — a constant appeal to the authority of
Scripture and the holy Fathers against the rationalist
spirit of the times. — Bernard, and other doctors, declaimed 40
against the importunateness of the speculations of their
times. The same effect had taken place in the second and
third centuries. The philosophizing divines were continually
objected to . . . still the philosophical theology proceeded. 42
The work of P. Lombard was exactly such as we might
have expected from that conflict between Reason and
Authority. The work was probably written in imitation 43
of a treatise of a great Father of the eighth century, John
Damascenus, who sets out with the profession that he states
"nothing of his own, but only what the holy and wise have
taught \" In Lombard, however, there is little of the logical
precision by which Damascenus is characterized. 44
No sooner was the principle of such a work recognized,
than other works, answering to the same requisitions of
human reason appeared. The suspicion of originality was
fatal to the reputation of the scholastic divine. — " If any 46
man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God I" 47
Why this philosophy assumed the particular form which
it actually exhibits ; by what means Aristotle became the
great oracle of the system, superseding the more theological

philosophy of Plato ; and the general character imparted to
the theology of the Western Church from that circum
stance ; will be the subjects of consideration in my next
Lecture. 47
LECTURE II.
We are now tracing to its Origin that speculative, logical
Christianity, which survives among us at this day; and
which has been in all ages, as I conceive, the principal
obstacle to the union and peace of the Church of Christ. 53
To logical science, in fact, simply considered as an art of
defence, as a discipline of disputation applicable to the ser
vice of orthodoxy, there never was any indisposition on the
part of the Church authorities. As defenders of the sacred
truth, they would justify themselves by an appeal to the
manner and precept of the Scriptures. The Epistles, it
would be observed, were for the most part works of con
troversy. S. Paul is particularly represented as " disputing
and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of 58
God." — Again, in the conversation of our Saviour Himself,
traces would be found of the argumentative method of the
ancient schools : such is the dilemma respecting "the Bap
tism of John ;" and the mode in which Christ sometimes
evades a particular question, by putting a question in return.
To the same purpose would be interpreted the description of
Him in the midst of the Jewish doctors, " hearing them,
and asking them questions." — Still more the word " Logos"
has been singled out for especial remark. 59
It would appear, therefore, that the authorities of the
Church objected only to the employment of Logic in dis
cussing questions of religion, when it was found a vexatious
instrument in the hands of the heretic. 60
Aristotle had been the great authority of some of the
heretics. The speculations on the Trinity introduced by
Artemon and Theodotus in the second century, were im
puted to their study of Aristotle, amongst others. — So far,
indeed, as philosophy was owned by the Church, the Pla
tonism of Alexandria was the ascendant system. But whilst CI
the Church authorities so jealously watched the progress of
logical speculation, the writings themselves of Aristotle lay
under a ban of exclusion. This ignorance, and the fear
resulting from it, were the result of that state of things in
which we find the Latin Church after the division of the
empire. Reduced to an unfrequent intercourse with Greece,
the Latins lost not only the knowledge but the language 6;*
itself of philosophy. — Philosophy afterwards raised a com
plex system, which combined the logic and metaphysics of
Aristotle with the fundamental theories of Plato,

In the thirteenth century a marked improvement is dis- 68
cernible. — The question debated between the Nominalists
and Realists ... is of great importance. The triumph of 69
Realism is particularly to be noticed. 70
This theory made the whole of our knowledge deducible
from abstract ideas. Men were thus taught to distrust
their senses. — Nominalism led the way' to the testimony of
the senses and the conclusions of experience. The triumph 71
of Realism is coincident with the ascendancy of the Scholas
tic philosophy. ' *
The tendency of the whole system was to erect Theology
into a perfect Science. 77
When Theology was exalted into the rank of the queen-
science, and viewed as containing in it the primary Truths
of all knowledge, it was conceived to be the science of neces
sary principles on which the mind reposed with the fullest
confidence ! To the Christian speculator these principles
would of course be sought nowhere but in the Divine Being. 78
But where was the evidence or criterion of the Truth of 79
those principles ? — The nature of God as He is in Himself
is incomprehensible by the human faculties. 80
The principle of Faith answered the purpose of solving
this speculative difficulty. . . . If we believe the Scripture,
we may proceed to the exercise of understanding : the au
thority of Revelation being conceded, reason has its ground
on which it may build its airy edifice of Speculation. 81
The mystical and the practical character originally be
longing to the Latin theology still continued, when it
assumed the definite form of Scholasticism. . . . We bow 83
in awe before the mystic forms of a piety and spirituality
which cast their solemn shadows over the scene of disputa
tion ! But Logical philosophy will be concerned in finding 84
out what may be unanswerably affirmed, rather than what is
the fact and truth of things. 85
It may further illustrate the character of a Theology so
constructed, to observe the analogy which it bears to the
personifications of heathen mythology. 87
If we regard the Scriptures, in the way of the schoolmen,
as having God for their proper subject . . . our business
is to collect into one theory every scattered intimation of
the Divine Being and Attributes. 89
If on the contrary we take the nature and condition of
man under Divine Providence as the great subject of our
sacred books, . . . hence results an historical theology, a
register as it were of the religious conduct of man. 90
The schoolmen had a high veneration for the text of
Scripture — not inferior I should say to that of the most
zealous Protestant : but it was an improperly directed
veneration — a reception of the Scripture (not simply as the

living Word of God, but) as containing the sacred proposi
tions of inspired wisdom. The ethical nature of the Scrip- 91
tures had been insufficiently attended to by the schools,
eager to erect their Theology into a philosophy of the Divine
Being. 93
Happily for the ethical system of the schools, the chief
human authority followed was that of Aristotle. — The
sound sense of this philosopher was a correction to the
extravagancies into which their religious enthusiasm, or their
speculative refinement separately might have carried them. 94

LECTURE III.
The consideration of the Trinitarian controversies natur
ally takes the lead in the present inquiry. These are the
least peculiar to the Scholastic theology in point of fact. . . .
They could not fail to attract the attention of the Greeks
at an earlier period. 99
Adequately to conceive the interest of theological ques
tions at the period when they were most keenly agitated,
we must view them under apolitical aspect. — The abstract
curiosity of the question itself, and the habits of disputa
tion, contributed to give an eagerness and a relish to con
troversies on the Trinity. But these are not sufficient to
account for the origin and extent of the interest excited. 100
What rendered these disputes more complex was, that
they were agitated whilst, as yet, an active intercourse ex
isted between the Greek and Latin Churches. The Latins
were unable to reach the precision and compass of the
Greek phraseology. — So great indeed was the impediment 103
arising from the varied use of terms, (when the whole
discussion was fundamentally dialectical,) that the measure
of accommodation between those who really agreed with
each other would probably have failed in any other hands
than those of Athanasius : . . . . that intrepid advocate
of orthodoxy, during his second exile, with the sagacity of
a Themistocles, studied the language of the party on whose
protection he had thrown himself. He secured a standard
of orthodoxy for future ages of disputation. But though
Athanasius was the author of that theoretic agreement which
established the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity; the
maintenance and diffusion of it were owing principally to
the active zeal of the Latin Clergy. 104
The living disputants who gave the mould to these con
troversies had long passed away, when, with the rise of
intellectual activity in Europe, the quarrels of other days
were resuscitated in the schools. — In the volumes of the 106
Scholastic Divines we contemplate the phantoms of the

departed acting over in solemn representation the pastimes
of their real life.
When the philosopher is also a theologian, and carries
up his speculation from the human mind to the Divine, the
theory of material nature resolves itself into the pure ex
istence of the Divine Being, in Whose intellect are the
immutable first principles of all existing things. According 108
to the schoolmen, all power, or wisdom, or goodness in the
Universe were actual derivations of qualities intrinsically
residing in God ! . . . So again, the relations of human life,
as that of Father and Son, were founded on their arche
types in God ! 109
A philosophy of this kind led them to seek their defini
tions of the Being and attributes of God, in the phenomena
of the material world. Such was their construction of the
Apostle's words " the invisible things of God are clearly
seen — being understood by the things that are made — even
His Eternal Power and Godhead :" words perhaps in
themselves borrowed from the Platonic Philosophy. Ill
The Being of God, considered abstractedly from the
works of His Creation, presented to the philosopher that
ultimate abstraction of which he was in quest. 112
In the human mind there were two distinct classes of
facts observed — the intellectual principles and the moral :
the intellectual principle was prior in order to the moral.
Thus far the speculation was merely human : the transition
was easy from the human to the divine. These principles
accordingly were the true analogies corresponding to the
Scripture designation of the great Divine Cause of all
things, under the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit. 115
In this speculation there is certainly a great deal of the
language of Platonism. (In the Tiniaeus, we find the
term " Only Begotten.") — But though there is a Platonic
under-current of thought in the scholastic theory, the ap
plication of the theory is Aristotelic. — The schoolmen con- 117
sidered the Being of God, as the principle of efficiency —
the Cause from which all effects proceeded. The orthodox
theory of the Trinity, accordingly consisted of an exact
view of the principle of Causation. The Sabellian Union
viewed the cause in the act of transition into effect. It sup
posed the Divine Being to be a vast tide of efflux and
reflux — Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The Arian re
garded the Son as an effect produced by the Father, and
the Holy Ghost by the Son. The heterodox failed in
speculation concerning the principle of Causation. They
did not contemplate It in the ultimate evanescent state. 118
Origen indeed attributes the rise of all heresies to the
anxiety of inquisitive men to understand the doctrines of

e>

9
Christianity. — The reputed orthodox, and reputed heretic 119
were gradually forced into conclusions at which they
might at first have revolted. The Arian assumed a dis- 120
tinctness between the Father and the Son analogous to
that between an effect, and its antecedent cause. This in- 121
volved the admission that the Son was not coeternal with
the Father. It might naturally be said that the Sabellian
made no real distinction between the Father, Son and
Holy Spirit. He would more and more establish the
idea that the Trinitarian distinctions, according to his doc
trine, rested only on definitions. — Notions of materialism 122
were mixed up with these theories ; even in what was con
sidered the orthodox view. Such texts as " I came forth
from the Father," "I proceeded from the Father,"
were argued from as proofs that the Son was " of the same
substance " with the Father ! 123
The manner in which the Unity of God was maintained
in the different speculations of the Orthodox, the Sabellian,
and the Arian, is extremely worthy of observation. —
It was an Unity both physical and logical which the
Orthodox held.
The Sabellian taught only a physical Unity.
The Arian only a logical. 125
The Orthodox asserted the entire presence of the God
head in each Person. " I am in the Father, and the
Father in Me "; and the mutual Love of the Father to
the Son was the Holy Spirit proceeding from both. —
They delighted to speak of the whole Trinity as Con-
substantial (homoousion) . The word Substance, by the
ambiguity of its meaning, answered the purpose of the
Orthodox Latin in asserting at once a physical and logical
Unity. The Sabellian, in his application of the term " one sub
stance, " maintained an actual solitude of the Divine
Being, a sameness that left only a distinction of names. 126
The Arian Unity was logical and not physical. He
asserted an unity of thought, will, and action. The term
God might be applied to each Person as equivalent to
Divine nature. 128
Dialectical science furnished the expedients, and esta
blished that peculiar phraseology which we now use :
" Three Persons and One God." 130
The attributes of God exist substantially. The Trinita
rian distinctions exist relatively : the terms Father, Son,
and Spirit denoting intrinsic relations in the Divine
Being. — To speak of the Divine power or justice in the
plural number would be to assert three Beings or Sub
stances in God : but there was no impropriety in asserting
three relations. 131

10
The Greek, on the principles of his dialectical science,
rested the Trinitarian distinctions on the word Hypostasis.
The Latin had no other word that sufficed to represent this
but Persona. 132
The discussions on the Incarnation were in like manner
partly physical, partly logical. It was attempted to be
explained in what way the Son might be said to be gene
rated of the Father; whether out of the Substance of
God ? or out of a common Divinity of which each partici
pates ? or by division of the Paternal Substance ? whether,
further, He is the Son of God by nature, or necessity, or
will, or predestination, or adoption ?
The confusion of principles of different sciences in these
promiscuous inquiries is sufficiently apparent. But it was
by such a philosophy that the orthodox language was set
tled, declaring the Son " begotten before all worlds, of one
substance with the Father !" 137
The account of the Incarnation itself was more peculiarly
logical. The notion was, that the animating principle was
infused into the human body.- — That souls were consub-
stantial with the Deity was an ancient Pythagorean notion
that survived in the Church. The opinion attributed to
Apollinarius was, that the Divinity was the animating
principle of Christ. 138
The peculiarly logical part of the inquiry appears in the
controversy between the Orthodox and the Nestorians and
Eutychians. — The disputes at the same time were in many
points merely verbal : the controversialists reasoning about
words which they took in different senses. 139
The controversies respecting the Holy Spirit became
more dialectical in their progress. At first the Latins were
content to speak of the Holy Spirit as the mutual Love
of the Father and Son. — The heresy of Macedonius was
only a form of Arianism. 141
Aquinas attributes to the Nestorians as a novel article,
that the Spirit does not proceed from the Son. The
words Filioque were sanctioned by the third Synod of Toledo
towards the close of the sixth century. The words were 143
confessedly an addition to the Nicene Creed. 144
The principal, if not the only, difficulties on the doctrine
of the Trinity, arise from metaphysical considerations. —
Perplexities from the nature of number, time, and being ....
are our stumbling-block.— We are apt to conceive that the
Unity must be understood numerically. But is this a just
notion of the Unity of God ? Surely when Moses said,
" Hear, 0 Israel, the Lord our God is One Lord," it was
not meant to convey to Israel any speculative notion of the
Oneness of the Deity ; but practically to influence their
minds in regard to the superstitions from which they had

11
been brought out. It was no other than the command,
" Thou shalt have no other gods but Me." 145
We should acknowledge that it is quite irrelevant to our
scheme of religion either to demonstrate or to refute any
conclusion, from the nature of Unity, concerning any
further revelation of the Divine Being. 147
All the theories proposed on the subject are Trinitarian
in principle. They set out with a Trinitarian hypothesis :
(Arians, Sabellians, and Orthodox). One fact is clear
through all this labyrinth, that there is some extraordinary
communication concerning the Divine Being in those
Scriptural notices of God which have called forth the
curiosity of thinking men in all ages. — To me it matters
httle, what opinion on this subject has been prior, has
been advocated by the shrewdest wit or deepest learning,
has been most popular, most extensive in its reception. —
The only ancient, only Catholic truth is the Scriptural
fact. 149
I firmly and devoutly believe that Word which has de
clared the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost ; but who can pretend to that exactness
of thought on the subject on which our technical language
is based ? 150

LECTURE IV.
We now enter on the ground which is more peculiarly
that of Scholasticism, where the whole moulding and ulti
mate complexion of the doctrines professed are the work of
the African Churches under the management of Augustine. 155
The anarchy of social life in the West might naturally
represent itself to the religionist, as well as to the profane,
as the dethroning of Providence. At this crisis Pelagianism 156
began to make advances in the world, and opinions were
disseminated which were regarded as infringements on the
great truths of Providence and Grace. 157
The nature and decision of these controversies on Divine
and Human agency bespeak entirely the practical theology
of the Western Divine. They were of leading importance
in relation to the government of the Church. Opinions
adverse to a belief in the supremacy of Providence might
also seduce the hearts of the people from their loyalty to
the sacerdotal ministrations ! Hence, the known purity of
the character of Pelagius could not preserve him from the
charge of teaching a doctrine of rebellion against God.
Practical men took their measures against consequences ;
regarding the matter not as a point of disputation, but as
a measure of government. 159

12
It was, also, to hearts which had so lashed themselves to
the helm of the Christian vessel, a question of piety or
impiety. They exulted in an opportunity of vindicating
the "cause of God." 160
We may perceive in the origin of these controversies a
confusion of rhetorical and logical argumentation. The
Latins had not the acumen and the expertness of the
Greeks. — On the Pelagian question, we seek in vain in the 162
writings of Augustine any positive dogmatic language by
which an exact theory of Divine and Human agency may
be enunciated. — He is more the practical reasoner than the 163
accurate theorist. It is a striking fact that Trinitarians
are now all agreed among themselves, whilst in regard to
the Pelagian controversies there subsists the greatest variety
of opinion. 165
In the ninth century, an attempt was made by Erigena
to introduce the language of philosophy into the subject;
to prove against the unfortunate Gotteschalc that it was
impossible for the doctrine of Reprobation to be true ; on
the grounds that death, and sin, and evil in general, were
nonentities, mere negations, that had no proper being, and
therefore could not pre-exist in the mind of God. This,
however, was objected to, as a corrupting of the simplicity
of the truth by refinements of reasoning. It yet re- 166
mained therefore for the doctrines on these points to be
moulded into a system, in connexion with the principles
of the Divine Being already laid down as the basis of all
truth. The ground of the speculation on the Trinity was the
notion of God, as the principle of Causation. The specu
lations on the Pelagian question were an application of this
principle to a particular class of facts, those produced by
moral and intellectual beings. — A theory of Providence was 168
to be drawn out as to its connexion with human nature.
The schoolmen inquired, how the will of God fulfilled
itself consistently with the free will of man ?
It was a maxim of their philosophy that mere intelligence
" moves nothing." Hence they referred the speculation to
the Will rather than to the intelligence of God. In explor
ing the principle of actions, we exclude from the induction
whatever belongs to the simple intellectual view of their
nature ; we look only to the Motive principle, the principle
of Activity, the Will. The doctrine of predestination ac
cordingly is a reference of actions to their primary Motive,
the great principle of all activity, the Will of God. 169
Had the views of the schoolmen been confined strictly to
this, a simple solution would have been given of the effects of
subordinate agents, by deducing them from the Divine will,
and contemplating them as His agency, "in Whom is no

13
variableness nor shadow of turning." But it was forgotten
in the course of inquiry, that the speculation was concern
ing the principle of change, — that it is an endeavour to
ascertain some limit to the variable results of the human
will, by viewing them in their original Cause, the will of
God. Thus when any event or effect is regarded in refer
ence to the will of God, the assertion which it becomes us
to make respecting it is, that its accomplishment could not
be resisted or frustrated. The wills of all subordinate
agents must work together with that Sovereign will. — But 171
take also the Divine intellect into the account, and regard
any effect as the simple object of Divine knowledge, and
we must say that the effect could not be otherwise. What
ever is known must be fixed and immutable : a conclusion
which brings us immediately to a doctrine of Necessity. — 173
Now the schoolmen admitted the uncertainty of human
conduct in its dependence on the will of man, but felt
bound to reconcile this with the fixedness of those ideal
principles from which human actions primarily originated. —
They effected the reconciliation thus : Time they regarded
as the measure of Motion ; Eternity as the measure of per
manent Being. Events viewed in connection with the
capacities of finite beings develope themselves successively,
and are uncertain; but viewed in their preessentiality before
God, Whose eternity admits no succession or change, they
are fixed and immutable. — The necessity imputed to the 1 74
objects of Divine knowledge is a consequence from the
notion of immutability : the contingency imputed to the
facts of human life is the simple evidence of experience.
The terms " necessary " and " contingent " express nothing
more than laws of thought. The necessity, fixedness, and
eternity of the Divine Being, the scholastics attempted to
apply to the facts of human experience. 1 75
The only proper difficulty in the subject of the Divine
agency is the fact observable in the world of apparent resist
ance to the will of God, by the deep and wide prevalence
of evil. This difficulty is aggravated by the speculative opti
mism which seems a fundamental prejudice or instinct of
our minds. — The theory of Predestination will illustrate 176
this. 177
To understand however the theoretic nature of Predesti
nation we must enter more fully into the ethical speculation. 178
According to the ancient philosophy, the notion of "good"
was essentially attached to an object of the wiU. Whatever
was desired was represented to be a good, either real or
apparent. Now transfer this theory to the Divine Being,
and the scholastic view of predestination will be obtained.
All exertions of the will of God could be no other than for
good. Nothing evil therefore could be referable to God,

14
because what was evil was no object of will at all, much less
of the perfect Divine will. It was wrong therefore accord
ing to the scholastics to speak of the predestination of evil :
God could not be said to will the evil action of the sinner.
Such evil action is not excluded from the Divine cognizance
and control; hence He might permit it ; but it could never
be an object of Volition. Reprobation had no place in this
theology. Whether it becomes us to theorize at all on the
subject is another question. But this is their theory of
Predestination. Election, according to them, is an analysis
of Predestination considered as a moral act. 179
I think however that the dogmatic assertion of Predestina
tion is primarily to be understood as, in opposition to Mani-
cheism, maintaining a theory of Divine goodness. Augustine
naturally felt a strong antipathy to Manicheism. We see
this in his manner of treating the questions raised by Pela
gius. The antipathies of Augustine descended to the
schoolmen. The scholastic doctrine of Providence, and of
predestination as a part of Providence, is opposed to philo
sophical notions current in the early ages. 182
It has been often observed of our seventeenth article,
that it is reserved on the subject of Reprobation. It coin
cides with the theory of Divine agency developed in the
Scholastic theology. 185
In the Scholastic writers, Grace is set forth as the effect
of predestination. I will call attention then first to the
word Grace. We hear of Grace operating and co-operating,
Grace preventing and following ; Grace of congruity ; Grace
of condignity. The conception produced in the mind by
these modes of speaking is erroneous. We are said in
Scripture to be " saved by Grace," we are desired to pray
for Grace, and Grace is said to be " given us." These in
stances convey a dogmatic impression ; but when we consider
them more strictly, they resolve themselves into concise
modes of speaking. The subdivisions of Grace to which
I have referred, are expressly taken from the scholastic
theology. Grace is treated of, in this system, as something infused
into the soul. It is first infused as the seed of a "new birth,"
— regenerating the soul. This produces a Motion towards
Gop. The progress of the soul must be sustained; the
desire of holiness and hatred of sin are implanted. Then
the soul is said to be endued with the Grace of perseverance :
still Grace is needed, that the soul may obtain remission of
sins; and finally "by Grace" it is glorified in the presence of
God !
In examining this account of the nature of Grace, while 189
we fully acknowledge the general truth that all our salvation
is of the "free gift of God," we may clearly perceive that the

15
mode of thinking is founded on the principles of ancient
physical philosophy.
Thus, first; the doctrine of Transmutation was a vital
principle of Aristotle. One object might be transmuted
into another. This will illustrate the notion of the Christian
state under the influence of Grace. We must " be trans
formed." " The old things must pass away, all things
must become new." We must cease to be what we were,
and be " new creatures." On this principle the presence
of the Grace of God is indispensably necessary to render us
" meet for the inheritance of the saints \" It comes and
displaces that previous form of unrighteousness which
once was our nature. " Except ye be converted and be
come as little children ye cannot inherit the kingdom of
heaven:" we must "bear the image of the heavenly."
Christ must " be formed in us." 191
But the proper and full solution of the language of the
school divines on the doctrines of Grace, is to be found in
the refined materialism of the ancient theological philo
sophy of Nature. Nature was considered an instinctive
principle of motion and rest. The Divinity, in the language 192
of Aristotle, is the First Mover, itself unmoved. Hence
we find the schoolmen speak of the Deity as pure Act,
pure Energy, Power. 194
This was a system of Theism which trembled on the
verge of Pantheism. Its ready transition into fatalism is
apparent. The distinctness of the Divine agent, and the
human recipient was indeed maintained ; but the notion of
God, as an energy or moving power, entered into all their
explanations of the Divine influence on the soul.
So far they were strictly Aristotelic; but with this excep
tion, the Platonic notion of a real participation of Deity
pervaded their speculations. This notion more easily fell
into the expressions of Scripture. — The Pantheistic notion 196
then of a " participation " of Deity is the fundamental idea
of the operation of Grace; and the Aristotelic idea of Motion
is the law by which it is explained ! Expressions of Scrip
ture also coincided with this ; such as " going on to per
fection," " growing in grace," " being unmoveable," and
" abounding in the work of the Lord." In fact, this
system, made up of Platonic and Aristotelic views, was re
garded as sanctioned by the Apostle in his application of
that text of philosophy : " In Him we live and move, and
have our being." 197
Now the importance of the consideration of this theory
of the Divine predestination may be seen in the fact that it
is not at all concerned with explaining the origin of evil ; it is
only a theory of God's mercy in Christ. Our article on
Predestination exactly accords with the true scholastic no-

16
tion, but J am not prepared to vindicate its statements, as
the proper way in which the Divine predestination and
grace should be apprehended. 199
To Scholasticism we trace the origin of such idle ques
tions as, whether predestination is certain, whether there is
assurance of salvation, whether the number of the elect is
fixed. This shows the evil of any speculation on the sub
ject. The dominion of a logical theology is particularly to
be dreaded. 200
The desire to establish the name of God as first in the
thoughts, involves men in paradox on every subordinate
subject. 202
Could we read the language of the Apostle Paul without
prejudice, I feel persuaded that we should draw no speculative
doctrines of Predestination and Grace. It is the Charity
that never faileth, which he is inculcating, where many have
erroneously thought that he was proclaiming the "wonders
of Divine knowledge." Banish then the scientific notion of
Predestination and Grace. 204

LECTURE V.
I now come to those views of Human agency which are
contained in the doctrines of Original Sin, Faith, Merit,
Repentance, Atonement.
In order to the systematic perfection of the scholastic
Theology, it was necessary to adjust the speculative views of
the truths of Human agency to the previous theories of the
Divine. — All that we call human agency is, in the expres- 209
sion of Scholasticism, the Highest Cause acting by secondary
causes. But the theology of the schools was the subtle in
strument of a theocratic Power ; its ambition was to place
the first link of the golden chain, from which the heavens
and the earth were hung, in the intellectual grasp of the
ruler of the Church. 212
All those doctrines which concern the agency of man
may be classed under the general head of Justification.
Justification is the general law by which the Divine energy
developes itself in the human agent. — In the analysis of 213
Justification we must explore the principles of human
agency. — The difficulty which meets the speculator in the 215
first instance, is to account for the principle of resistance
to the will of God. The root of the difficulty was that it
seemed impossible to conceive any will whatever as inclined
to evil. It was essential to the very nature of will, that its
object should be good and, according to the theological
philosophy, that this object should be exclusively the Divine
goodness. 216

17
The Scriptures gave a history of the first transgression
and declared its perpetuity and universality in the world.
They asserted that man came perfect from the hands of
the Creator, being formed in the Divine Image, and that
his iniquity was a subsequent, acquired, condition of beiDg.
The schoolmen set themselves to explain this. 218
The "perfect man," according to Aristotle's theory, be
came in the scholastic systeri man as originally created,
rightly ordered toward the Supreme good.
" Corruption " is a term of ancient philosophy, denoting
the dissolution of the internal nature of a thing. It is op
posed to generation or production, signifying that man,
as he is evil, is as it were unmade. 219
" Original sin " accordingly is described in negative terms
as a want of original justice, or, as in our Ninth Article, a
" fault and depravation of nature." This theory involved
other theories. Not content with referring to the Redeemer's
love as the simple earnest, in the case of an infant, of the
blessedness of the little innocent, the theorists sought to
bring it under the theory of original sin. Hence the term
" propagation." If corruption descended by propagation,
then it would exist even in the guileless infant ! The theory,
as thus stated, would be the logical correspondent to the
doctrine of Grace. If on the one hand all were " under
grace," on the other all would be " concluded under sin !" 221
The Pelagians were not satisfied with this account of the
matter ; they denied the transmission of evil. Pelagius
believed as fully as his opponents, that mankind were in a
worse state in consequence of the first sin, but contended
that the first sin was hurtful not by propagation but by
example. The Pelagians were right, so long as they at
tempted to give a moral account of the fact, and their
opponents were wrong, so far as they attempted to give a
physical or material account of it. Their theory of human
sinfulness sufficiently accounted for the actual sins of men,
but it left unexplained the tendency to sin existing in
human nature. It had been well if the orthodox had con
tented themselves with the name of original sin, without
analyzing by language the thing denoted by it. 222
Augustine declares the transmission of the material ele
ment of corruption from Adam. The expressions of S.
Paul, conveying his ideas of the actual depravity of man, in
terms of the established philosophy of human nature, were
easily laid hold of as confirming this theory of the seat of
human frailty. The " flesh lusting against the spirit," and
the " spirit against the flesh," corresponds with the struggle
conceived by the philosopher between the antagonist prin
ciples of our nature. 225
By Original Sin our nature even propagated sinners !

18
The evil indeed was not a substance, it was a vitiation of
the original " flesh." It was remitted in Baptism, but in
itself it still remained in the material nature derived from
Adam. It was called "concupiscence."— Our Church's Ian- 227
guage on the subject bears the impress of the scholastic
theories. The schoolmen speak of the subject in terms of material
ism. The identity of the sinful principle was thus strictly
maintained by them in the sense of an original invariable
matter, reproduced under the infinite variety of individual
forms. The poison wears not out, the tyrant never dies ;
it bears a charmed existence ; amidst the fluctuations and
revolutions of generations, it preserves its sullen stability
and vigour ! 228
It is probable that Pelagius and Celestius only intended
to oppose this material theory. 230
To form a right conception of the doctrine of Original
Sin, we should view it together with the doctrine of the
Incarnation. Both in the benefits of the Incarnation and
in the evils of the Fall, all men were regarded collectively.
Realism represented each Christian as having a physical
identity in the unregenerate state with Adam, in the re
generate with Christ. This view exactly accords with the
theory of Grace. It was the will of God to bring those
whom He had "chosen in Christ" to Himself : this blessed
effect took place by the process of justification, incorpo
rating the sinner into the Body of Christ ! 231
The disputes between the Pelagians and orthodox, when
traced to their origin, were disputes as to the force and pro
priety of the terms, Nature, and Person. The Pelagians
did not deny that grace was necessary to the Christian life.
At what time the Divine operation assumed the name of
Grace, was the question. The disputations turn on the
point whether sin is a quality of nature or an accident of
persons. The orthodox clung to the term "nature" as indis
pensable to the theory of Grace : hence the distinction of
sin into "original and actual." Hence also the scholastic ex
planation of the reason why the first sin only, transmitted
its effects to posterity : It deprived our nature of its ori
ginal justice : not so however the subsequent sins of Adam,
or of others. These were merely personal ; did not alter
the general nature once corrupted. 232
It was a consequence of this notion of original sin that
the elements of the Christian life should be " a renewal."
We must be " born again." All were " corrupted " by
Adam's transgression, and must be " quickened " by
Christ's righteousness. 335
The state of man under original sin being that of a
privation, the evil must be remedied by the presence of

19
some effectual antidote. Scripture fully revealed that an
tidote in the perfect righteousness of the Son of God.
How to apply this to the individual sinner was the question.
Scripture answers, "by grace ye are saved through faith."
Faith must first come from above, and turn the soul to
God. This is the physical notion of faith as an infused
principle, the origin of " a new life." 236
There is one passage of Scripture in which a logical
account of faith is given. It is described as "the sub
stance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not
seen." Here the Apostle is speaking in the terms of a logi
cal philosophy. Yet it is practical, not speculative truth
that he is really enforcing. What strivings and heart
burnings would have been saved to the Christian world
had the proper negative notion of faith been strictly guarded!
In this sense, justification by "faith only" is the sum of
Christianity. To add to the assertion of it the necessity
of conditions, is to counteract the proper efficacy of Jesus
Christ. 237
The school divines explicitly assert that the infection of
evil " remains in the regenerate." Being " born of God "
we still need to proceed from our state as " babes in
Christ," to tbe " measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ." By this procedure we become " stronger in the
Lord." 239
Our condition antecedently to these influences is one of
slavery : we are " sold under sin," — could " not do what we
would." This is the scholastic notion of Free will : it means
the libertyfrom compulsion, and not from necessity. Thus we
had no power without the " grace of God preventing us that
we may have a will and working with us when we have it." 240
Our Article on free will is framed with the same view : — ¦
to declare that our proper responsibility as Christians com
mences at the time of our receiving Divine assistance. We are
apt to suppose that free will consists in the circumstance of
originating our own purposes. This is not the accurate
theological sense of the term. The principle throughout
Scripture is that our thoughts, actions, works, are dues
that we owe to God ; that we are not properly our own.
Judaism had taught mankind to regard God as a Governor
dispensing rewards and punishments " according to the
works " performed in His service. A principle of obligation
was adopted in the Gospel scheme, analogous to that of the
Jewish. The Israelite was never suffered to forget that
Jehovah was a just God, the "Judge of the earth." He
was taught also to examine himself whether he had " done
justly," whether he had incurred Divine displeasure by de
fect of duty, or might hope reward fox obedience. The Lord
reasons with him " whether His ways are not equal," and
r o

20
the ways of His people unequal, and "whether the Judge of
all the earth would not do right."— Agreeably to this, Christ 242
is " the Lord our righteousness " or justice, and the Apostle
speaks of God having shown " His justice" in the act of jus
tifying sinners through Christ. We trace the same idea
in such terms as Mediator, Advocate, Intercessor, Justifi
cation, Remission, Pardon, terms evidently drawn from
legal or equitable proceedings. The introduction of the
notions of merit or demerit is to be explained on this prin
ciple. The guiltiness of nature involved in it the demerit 243
of persons, even in those who had not sinned personally
" after the similitude of Adam's transgression." Even the
Christian in the most advanced state was regarded as per
sonally (sic !) sinful and unholy. His being essentially in
Christ, entirely constitutes his meritoriousness. A per
sonal merit does not result to him from his union with
Christ, though a personal demerit does from his being in
Adam! . 244
According to the ancient philosophy the notion of Justice
was fundamentally political. It was the rule by which the
respective claims of individuals of the same community
might be adjusted. Now the first application of the term
Merit to Christian philosophy, appears to be exactly of this
nature. The great Christian society was viewed by the
speculator in its relation to God, as its Governor and
Judge. From the comparison of what man now is, with
what he once was, when perfect from the hands of his
Maker, would result the conclusion, that man could have no
" merit;" he had only merited punishment by his intrinsic
delinquency, but in the righteousness of Christ a title to
reward was found. — The expressions, "merit of condignity," 245
" merit of congruity," thus resolve themselves into less ex
ceptionable modes of speaking. Their theoretic truth is to
be seen in their consistency with the philosophical notion
of merit as the "measure of political justice," and the theolo
gical description of it as the effect of " co-operating grace." 247
The doctrine of Repentance also takes its expression from
Aristotle's theory of justice. Aquinas places it under the
head of commutative justice. It is the poena, satisfaction,
or requital, voluntarily taken on himself by the offender,
as distinct from the infliction of it by a judge. Thus Re
pentance is passed over as a doctrine, with slight notice ;
but as a ritual of punishment it obtains a full consideration.
We may perceive the effect of this mode of treating the
subject in our Articles — there being none expressly on the
doctrine of Repentance. 248
The application of the term "punishment" to the
sacrifice of our Saviour belongs to the same philosophy.
Hence the use of also the word " Satisfaction." The suffer-

21
ings of Christ are said to be the voluntary payments on
His part of what was otherwise not owing from Him to
the Divine justice. Hence too would arise the notion that
self-mortification would recommend us to the favour of
God. 250
We may see in all this how strongly the inefficacy of Re
pentance is felt by the sinner. God, no doubt, is abun
dantly placable, merciful, and forgiving. The Gospel says,
" Thy sins be forgiven thee : go and sin no more "; but
the heart seeks for reparation and " satisfaction." Hence the
congeniality to its feelings of the notion of Atonement.
Speculation prompts the rejection of it : and furnishes
reasons from the Divine attributes for discarding it as a
chimera of our fears. Turn over the records of human
crime. All concur in showing that whilst God is gracious
and merciful, the human heart is inexorable against itself !
It may hope, tremblingly hope, that God may forgive it,
but it cannot forgive itself.
Christ thus is said to be our "Atonement:" not that
we may attribute to God any change of purpose towards
man, but that " we may know that we have passed from death
unto life," that "our oivn hearts may not condemn us." 251
The bane of this philosophy of Expiation was that it de
pressed the power of man too low. The ecclesiastical
power stood between the heart and heaven : Atonement
was converted into a theory of commutation, degrading to
the holiness of God. — The Reformation, by the blessing of 253
God, has cleared away much of the mischief of these
speculations. We still however feel the effects of them. — 256
For what is all that accuracy and positiveness with which
some persons state their views of Justification, but the point
and precision of theory ? What is all that profession of
rational religion, with which some maintain the natural
efficacy of Repentance, but a dogmatism founded on theory?
We may learn from these extremes, that the more indistinct
our language is on this sacred subject, the more closely do
we imbibe the true principle of " Protestantism !" 257
LECTURE VI.
The intellectual and moral instincts of man were regarded
by the school divines as the materials on which Divine
truth was to act. There was to be an identification of the
Divine things with the purer and nobler principles of our
Nature. The truths of revelation were to be steeped into
the heart. The " life of God in the soul of man " is all that
is presented to our notice. 263
This connection of theological and moral truth has been
of serious injury to both departments of human knowledge.

22
Theology and Ethics are entirely distinct in their nature.
In theology, human nature is regarded under a single
point of view — that of its relation to the Author of its
existence. — Moral philosophy, on the other hand, is en- 264
gaged with examining the world within us. 266
The close connection of these in their application, is the
fallacy that misleads many persons. Paley, for example,
has endeavoured to combine the separate principles of Ethics
and Theology. The whole of Morality, according to his
view, resolves itself ultimately into Religion. — The source 267
of this confusion is to be traced back to the origin itself of
Moral truth, resting as it does, in the first instance, on
authority. Their mode of reception imparted to Moral truths
a religious character. Especially as found in the Penta
teuch, and in the extant polities of early legislators or
philosophers, men would be induced to regard Morality as
a matter of ordinance, rather than as the internal discipline
of their affections. 269
According to the Platonic doctrine, Morality was based
on immutable speculative principles. Religion and Mo
rality coincided in the maxim, that the business of man was
the "imitation of God." Thus began the confusion of ethical
and theological truth. Augustine speaks of Plato's system
of Morals as the only one compatible with Christianity. 271
The same tone of thought runs through the Greek Fathers.
The noble and seductive language of Plato respecting the
Chief Good was too strong a temptation to be resisted by
the philosophical Christian.
The state of literature in the Western Church, after the
period of Augustine, to the close of the eighth century, was
such as to confirm the connection between theology and
ethics. — But what contributed more than anything else to 272
this conclusion was the spiritual power of the Church over the
consciences of men. The exigencies of a complex and subtle
government demanded its own particular code of spiritual
legislation. The assumption by the clergy of a power which
held the soul in its grasp made them the dupes of their own
pretension. As they mistook the subtilty of speculative dis
tinctions for theology, so they now mistook casuistry for
morals. The monastic institutions, an effect of this confu
sion of theology and morality, also tended to foster it, and
cement the two ideas of Virtue and Holiness. — The school- 275
men gave a speculative harmony to this system. 277
Professed works of Ethics were composed by some of
them ; but the proper character of their system is seen in the
devotional work of Thomas a Kempis on the "Imitation"
of Christ. Its great popularity marks both the general
taste and the intrinsic defects of the times. It was the
ethics of religion that men wanted. 278

23
The schools united the precision of Aristotle once more
with the fundamental doctrines of Plato. They took Plato's
theological account of the Chief Good. To the Christian mo
ralist, this chief good could be no other than God. " "Whom
have I in heaven but Thee, there is none upon earth / desire
beside Thee ;" and, " there is none good but one, that is,
God." To this notion of God as the chief good was added
the physical theory of Aristotle, which described the motive
principle in nature as Energy, intrinsic activity, "pure act." 279
From this complex notion of the chief good, both as the
Deity- Himself, and as essentially Energy, we may trace
those gradations of moral excellence which the ethical dis
cipline of the Church has established. 281
Happiness was placed out of the confines of the present
world ; it could only be sought by abstraction, self-denial,
and devotedness to the Supreme Good ! The body was an
incumbrance : the Deity is the real object of attainment !
Under such a theorv we Deed not wonder at the rise of
mysticism, or any of the extravagancies of fantastic piety.
The " love of God" becomes the principle of action : not as it
is, the " bond of peace and of all virtues," but as it is in
itself, the most intense expression of the soul's effort, the
condensation of all the affections and desires into one Divine
ardour ! 282
Again, we may observe the influence of Aristotle's notion
of Energy, in the speculations by which, the Latin Clergy
established tbe superiority of that mode of life to which they
were themselves devoted. — -Happiness was Energy : peifect 283
happiness however consisted at once in leisure and a-jtivity,
or that state of life which comprised both. And the theo
logian must command the admiration and respect of man
kind, as approximating to the sublime purity, of which the
full attainment was reserved, indeed, for a higher state of
being, when the body shah no longer cloy and weigh down
the soul ! 234
Hereupon was established, the doctrine of Perfection.
The Christian, by co-operating with the infused principle
of Grace would advance towards the chief good, the Deity :
The more he lived in theory, the more would the Theory of
human perfection be realized in him. To support this
theory of perfection many of our Lord's expressions were
adduced; such as, " If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell all
that thou hast." "Be ye perfect, as your Father in
heaven is perfect." "I have many things to tell you, but ye
cannot bear them now." 285
Two different tracts of life were thus pointed out to
the pursuit of men by the moral theology of the schools.
The perfect life was that which conformed to the loftier
principles of the Divine counsels ; whilst the imperfect was

24
ordered by the Divine precepts. — Do we not recognize here 287
the double morality of heathen philosophy ? the strict right,
the " wise man " of the Stoics, in the perfect Christian ?
the proprieties or offices, as they were called, in the imperfect
services of the ordinary Christian? The outline of this
artificial and enthusiastic distinction may be traced in the
ethical system of Aristotle bimself. 288
The distinction of sins into venial and mortal is deduced
from the same notion of the Chief good. Whatever tended
to withdraw the soul from its direction towards God was
"mortal sin." Venial" sins, on the contrary, were such as
were committed in the inferior path of Christian discipline
through Original sin. The degrees of extenuation or indul-
gence'to different offences in the " venial " class are ascer
tained by the principles of Aristotle. — The rule in itself is 291
a just and sound one ; its sphere is in the intercourse of
thought between man and man to regulate the judgment
which each passes on another. Indulgence becomes the
strict law of right : a sense of our own infirmity, and a
genuine fellow-feeling, are the principles which must guide
our moral decisions.
To the same principle may be traced the divisions of vir
tues into " theological" and "moral," "infused" and "ac
quired." Theological virtues are, — faith, hope, and charity :
the moral, — prudence, justice, fortitude, temperance. Ac
quired virtue was the simple result of our natural instincts : 292
infused virtue was the same moral qualities perfected in us
by Divine influence. As the former fitted men for human
affairs, the latter qualified them to be " citizens of saints
and domestics of God." The soul proceeded in the Divine
life as in the Moral, as (according to Aristotle) it advances
in its natural conquest over the passions. 293
In the further development of their ethical system the
schoolmen closely followed the method of Aristotle's ethics.
Aquinas in particular has illustrated the application of Aris
totle's principles to Christian Morality with an admirable
comprehension of the subject, and sometimes with a know
ledge of human nature scarcely surpassed by modern philo
sophy. — Deeply are we indebted to the scholastic philosophy 295
for its transfusion of the valuable theories of Aristotle into
this department of science.
The question of the nature of moral obligation, and the
very use of the term Obligation are derived from this
source. Philosophers have been anxious to solve tbe
question, why man is obliged to tbe performance of right.
Religionists have drawn down unnecessary force from the
" law of God," considered as the rewarder and punisher in
a future state. The irreligious have had unholy recourse
to the arm of social power. The simple fact is, that Virtue

25
is a perfect law in itself. The truth is, that the term
Obligation is a religious one introduced into Morality by
that peculiar connection established between religion and
morals. 296
To the technical language of the school ethics we may
attribute the extravagance of those moderns who have re
duced all actions to necessity. Actions have been analyzed
mentally into motives and ends. This mental distinction
has been converted into forces and effects. 298
The influence of the scholastic blending of theology and
ethics is evidenced in the very general confusion of thought
still observable on this point. There are two extreme opi
nions : one ascribing too much to theology, the other too
much to morality. Morality, it should be observed, is the
science of our own internal nature ; its office throughout is
one of discovery. But is it a whole in itself ? or is there some
thing beyond it, in which it originated, and to which it
tends ? Revelation answers ; by giving us an account of
the origin of these principles in the dispensations of Provi
dence, and the ultimate effect in a future life.
We are apt to speak of Religion as supplying fresh motives
of conduct, but, in fact, the principles of our moral nature
are the only motives to action. The truths of Christianity
are presented as objects towards which they should tend.
A confusion of results with motives takes place whenever
the religious principle is substituted as the spring of action ;
as when it is argued that no action can have any moral
value, except it be done immediately and exclusively on a
motive of " glory to God." The glory of God supplies,
indeed, the great religious centre of our actions : they are
incomplete and irreligious if they terminate in worldly ob
jects; but they must be performed according to the laws of
our nature, they must originate within us, they must be
morally right in themselves. 299
Christianity, in fact, leaves ethical science precisely where
it found it. . 301
Were we to find embodied in the language of a Revelation
much false ethical philosophy, it would be nothing strange
or objectionable. In consequence rather of making theo
logy a science, the notion arose that nothing could be true
in any science repugnans veritati hujus sciential. The ad
mission of false ethical philosophy into the sacred volume
is not more objectionable than descriptions involving false
theories of natural philosophy ! Nothing is more wanted
in these days than an accurate acquaintance with the truths
of Ethics to disperse the clouds which the prejudices of theo
logical theory spread over human nature.

2G

LECTURE VII.
The preceding views of the scholastic system have pre
sented the action of a subtle system of materialism, com
mencing with the " Divine Grace infused into the soul."
An entire distinctness was assumed for the Soul, as the
" living and thinking principle " infused into the body. This
was a modification of the Platonic theory. 309
This notion has so incorporated itself with Christian
Philosophy, that I may incur the appearance of impugning
a vital truth of Religion, in viewing it as a remnant of Scho
lasticism — I feel assured that the truth of the Resurrection 310
does not depend on such an assumption as this.
Grace, according to the Latin theologians, " repaired the
natural defects of the soul." The theory of the Sacra
ments proceeds on this view. The Incarnation of Christ
was regarded as the primary efficient cause of health to the
soul. The doctrines of Original sin, and of the Incarnation,
represented mankind as one with Adam, in sin — one with
Christ, in righteousness. — The Sacraments brought the 311
two extremes into connexion; marking the several stages of
transition from " corruption " to " glory." They were
treated as " effusions of the virtue of Christ." 3 1 2
The word " Sacrament" corresponds with the " Mystery"
of the Greeks. The definition, in the Catechism of the
Church of England, is exactly what the scholastic theory
suggests. 312
Rightly to understand the doctrine of the Sacraments
we must look to the theory of secret influences on which it
is based ; — the mysterious power conceived to belong to
certain things, or actions, or persons. True, they were
only subordinate causes ; Christ was the sole primary cause
of grace. In Mis respect the mystical philosophy of secret 314
agents in nature was Christianized : still, the instrumental
power was asserted in the strongest manner. The general
belief in magic in the early ages may sufficiently account
for the ready reception of such a theory.
In fact, there was an adaptation of the popular belief res
pecting the power of incantations and charms to the subject
of religion.— Our Saviour's "word" or "touch" was
sought for ! " Say in a word only," said the centurion, "and
my servant shall be healed ! " A woman who forced her way
through the crowd fully trusted that she should be made
whole, " if she could touch but the hem of the garment"
of Jesus. Our Saviour's condescension was shown to
this prejudice. He is described as having " perceived that
some one had touched Him," by the fact that " virtue had
gone out of Him ! " — a mode of speaking characteristic

27
of the prevalent idea ! The philosophy of the schools was
favourable to this doctrine. 316
The popular and orthodox view was, that the Sacramen
tal influence was a power of Causation. The Eucharist (as
the most complex subject of disquisition) was the point of
the general question to which attention was particularly
directed. Disputation being the pastime of theologians,
the notion was opposed, " that this Sacrament was a sign
only, and not the actual presence of the crucified body of
Christ." The collision forced the schools into precision
of language, as to this particular. The nature of Christ's
presence in Baptism, indeed, "was left open to opinion ;
whilst respecting the Eucharist the path of orthodoxy was
rigidly marked out. 319
The orthodox charged their adversaries with holding the
Sacraments to be only " signs." — This may account for
the expression in our article, " The Lord's Supper is not
only a sign, &c." It had become necessary for our re
formers to guard against the thought of evacuating the
Sacrament altogether of its holy burden of grace. — It may 320
well be asked, why this sacred rite should stand so pre
eminent ? I do not say that it ought not to hold a princi
pal station amongst the observances of a holy life : but why
it obtained this superiority, " we may learn in the scholas
tic theory."
By that theory, the whole virtue of Christ's priesthood
was mystically represented and conveyed in the Eucharist.
It was the appointed channel through which the expiatory
virtue descends, in vital efflux, from the person of the
Saviour ! — The Priest officiating in the Sacrament ap- 321
peared in the person of the Church. Whatever arose from
the mere person of the Priest, as an individual man, could
not vitiate the rite.
The Church of England admits indeed that the vice of
the Minister does not impede the effect of the Sacrament. —
The faith of the receiver however is the true consecrating
principle : so indeed there was no need of an express article
on the subject, when it was fully understood on Protestant
grounds. 323
But the point itself was important. — It was an admi
rable expedient of Ecclesiastical policy thus to rest the
power of the Church on the purity and indefectibility of an
abstraction. Religious imagination was sustained on the
picture of the Church, as the great Mother of the faithful,
cherishing her beloved children in her pure bosom : whilst
her many-handed agents in the world were securing their
hold on the consciences of men, by that prerogative of
veneration which they enjoyed in her person ! 324
Baptism, Confirmation, and Orders, were distinguished

28
from the rest of the Sacraments as impressing a "character,"
or indelible mark on the soul, consecrating it to the Service
of God. We may perceive a trace of this scholastic doc
trine of "impressed character" in the scrupulous care shown
by our Church to ascertain whether Baptism has been
"rightly performed;" and in the provision (itself a scholastic
one) of conditional Baptism, in cases where doubt may
exist of its previous due administration. 327
The indispensable necessity of Baptism had been estab
lished before the period of scholasticism. The infant dying
unbaptized could not escape the punishment due to Original
sin ! — Humanity may shrink at the recital of such a tenet.
The Eucharist (though not regarded as of the same absolute
necessity as Baptism) was a rite which could be omitted
with safety by none who were capable of desiring it. 3.28
The controversies of the ninth and eleventh centuries ex
hibit the theory of the Sacraments in what may be called an
unfinished state. The point in controversy was, in what sense
the words " really" and " truly," were affirmed of the
presence of Christ in the Eucharist ? 329
The Latins of the ninth century were infants in philoso
phy compared with their predecessors of the fourth. They
understood accordingly by " substance " chiefly the gross
idea which we attach to the term, when we mean the principal
or most important part of a thing. The metaphysical idea
of« substance as the support, or basis, of accidents was not
recognized at that time. The like observation is to be
made with regard to the word " species." The species of
bread and wiue (that is) were not the abstract natures of
bread and wine, but the compound things themselves.
It remained then for later discussion, for the restless
penetrating spirit of scholasticism, to analyze the operation
of grace in the Sacrament. The subtle speculations about
matter, and form, substance, and accident, were accordingly
introduced. 331
Thus a Sacrament has been described as consisting of
matter and form : the matter being the water, or the bread
and wine, .... the form, the particular words of conse
cration. Hence too the use of the word " element," the
bread and wine being viewed (like the imagined elements of
the material world,) as the bases of the sacred nature into
which they were transformed. 335
But it had to be shown, how the substance of Christ
was brought down into the consecrated elements. The
term " substance " now came therefore to be viewed as the
support of accidents. 336
If substance and accident were parts of things, they
might be conceived separate : — indeed it might be conceived
that the substance of one thing might be changed for the

29
substance of another ; whilst the accidents remained. The
accidents of bread and wine were not supposed to be in
Christ as in their subject. They are represented however
(in the mystical phraseology of Platonism,) as outward veils
under which the real spiritual substance of Christ is
latent. 337
In no point is the prodigious influence of the scholastic
philosophy more apparent than in this ; that a doctrine so
abstruse, so remote from religion when viewed in its source,
not appealing to any sentiment of the heart, not captivating
the judgment by the sublimity of its conception, should
have become a corner stone of faith to a large proportion of
the Christian world ! — The doctrine that the substance of 338
Christ was present — the proper doctrine of the Real
Presence — was a logical unity, an " ens unum in multis,"
an idea beyond the reach of the unscientific intellect. 340
The history of the Sacraments in the scholastic system
is " God working by the instrumentality of man." The
theory is, of the Divine causation ; the practical power is
the sacerdotal. 341
Thanks to the Christian resolution of our reformers, they
broke that charm which the mystical number of the Sacra
ments carried with it : and dispelled the Theiirgic system
which it supported. But we still require watchfulness
against the temptation to refine on this subject ; lest we
enslave ourselves to a kind of priestcraft in our own minds.
In regard, indeed to both the Sacraments, singleness of
heart is the only human means that we possess of appre
hending their true import. 343
LECTURE VIII.
The discussion upon which I am now entering is, an
arbitration of the point, where Divine truth ends — and
human truth commences; or, where the certainty of Divine
fact ceases, and the probability of opinion takes its rise. —
Both dogmas and facts of religion have been rested on the
same footing ; hence the disputes, as to what points are
"necessary to be believed," and what may be variously held 350
without "danger to salvation," — disputes which are rem
nants of the Scholastic spirit. 352
When we have once separated matters of Religion into
simple facts, and theories founded on them, there can be
no question of relative importance. 353
According to Vincent of Lerins, the test of orthodoxy is, 354
that a doctrine should have been believed " in all places, and
in all times, and by all men." The principle is a relic of
that philosophy which sought for a speculative certainty to
moral facts.

30
The eternity and immutability, attributed to the theorems
of science, were thus conceived to belong to that wis
dom " which descended from above," which (in the theory
of the schools,) was a demonstrative science, established on
primary truths concerning God. An assumption of the
nature of theology so erroneous, naturally led to the assump
tion of a test of its truth, founded on this fundamental mis
conception. The universality and ubiquity of belief were
applied to theological doctrine, as equivalents to the eternity
and immutability of the principles of scientific demonstra
tion. — But it is only an assumption to say, that universality 354
and ubiquity are the tests. It is a mere prejudice of vene
ration for antiquity, which makes us regard that as truth
which comes so recommended to us.
If we go back to the primitive age of Apostles and Evan
gelists, no doubt the principle holds. To doubt it would be
to raise a question, whether there has been inspiration ?
or, to what extent it is a ground of authority ? Assuming
however that there is a clear case of inspiration established
in regard to our sacred books, it follows, that nothing in
dependent of them can possess the same authority. For
this is Divine truth ; whatever is distinct from it is human.
In the history of doctrines, when we look to their scrip
tural source, we may affirm that whatever is first is true,
whatever is of a subsequent period is corrupt. — Take in- 356
deed the very period when the Apostles themselves were 358
teaching : the most wild theories were incorporated with
Christianity. The hearer of an Apostle sought to obtain
from him, by money, the power of the Spirit !
But to come to the Apostolic Fathers : — As authorities
decisive of what is true, or false, in theological statements,
they are, in reality, less valuable than the writings of a
subsequent age. The remark may be extended to the
Fathers of the third, fourth, and fifth centuries, in com
parison with each other. — There is one excellence which the 361
earlier Fathers possess, in contrast to the later ; greater
piety and Christian spirit. Their errors are loose, and in
definite, on the surface of their Christian system : — the
Fathers of the fourth century incorporated theirs with the
Gospel itself. 362
The principle then is at least a very doubtful one, which
would ascribe any peculiar authority to the declarations of
the primitive writers. But have the advocates of this prin
ciple adhered to it ? Let us examine their other principle :
viz., that whatever is logically deducible in the way of con
sequence from any Divine truth must also be true. 363
The theologian who is influenced by this, will be ever
solicitous against exposing his doctrine to the captious
objector. — The simple facts of revelation must by their 365

31
nature be open to objections, and (it may be said) unan
swerable objections. We can never arrive, in this state of
our being, at a proper knowledge of the general laws of
such facts. — The case, however, of a metaphysical theo
logy, demands their solution. The fact will therefore be
accommodated to the theory. 367
The principle of " consequences" was indeed the life and
soul of the scholastic system. This was necessarily pro
gressive. — Doctrines grew under the hands of disputants.
The most sacred articles, of the Trinity and the Incarnation,
only gradually reached their perfect dogmatic expression. — 369
In the endeavour to maintain at once an authoritative and
an argumentative theology, the truth of fact was confounded
with truth of opinion. It is the nature of the truth of fact
to admit no additional certainty from the progress of dis
cussion. But the truth of opinion is of a nature to be
modified and improved and established, by the course of
time, by the progress of civilization, and arts, and know
ledge, by accessions of experience, by the conflicts of
judgments. 370
A fact of the Gospel is such, that were an Angel from
heaven to preach anything different from it, our ears must
be stopped to the sound ; we must reject it as untrue.
The method of theology founded in speculation, was the
triumph of ratiocination : logic domineering over theology. 372
The conclusions which I now wish to submit to your
consideration, are the following : The doctrinal statements
of religious truth have their origin in the human intellect.
Strictly to speak, in the Scripture itself there are no doc
trines. If any part of Scripture contains doctrinal state
ments, it will be supposed to be the Epistles ; but they
clearly imply that the work of salvation is done. Let every
one decide for himself whether the practical or theoretical
view of the Epistles is a correct one. For my part, I can
not doubt that the decision must be in favour of the prac
tical character of them. By adducing text after text, it
may be contended, that some " truth," theory or system,
is asserted ; but " what is the chaff to the wheat ?" /
appeal from Paul philosophising to Paul preaching. And
I further request it may be considered, whether it was not
by such a mode of inference from the Scripture language
as would convert the Epistles into authorities on
points op controversy, that the very system of the
scholastic theology was erected ? 373
The proper truth of Dogmatic Theology, then, consists in
its being a collection of negations ; of negations, I mean, of
all ideas imported into religion beyond the express sanction
of Revelation. . . . The Nicene and Athanasian Creeds do
not impress their notions on the faith of the Christian, as

32
matters of affirmative belief: they were admitted into the
Church of England before the period when the genius of
Bacon exposed the emptiness of the system which the schools
had palmed upon the world. 377
Here it may be asked, how, on these grounds, Creeds
and Articles are retained, when the original occasion for
them has ceased? — The unsoundness of a metaphysical 379
and logical theology being once fully admitted, the cum
brous machinery might be removed, and the sacred truth
allowed to stand forth to view in its own attractive simpli
city. Such a result seems rather to be wished and prayed
for, by a sanguine piety, than reckoned on in the humbling
calculations of human experience. In the mean time it
were well to retain, amidst all its confessed imperfections,
a system by which we are guarded in some measure from
the exorbitance of theoretic enthusiasm.
I have now completed the inquiry which I proposed. — 380
But let it not be supposed that the speculative theology I
have been examining is a thing of another day ; a mere
matter of curiosity. Its dominion has endured ; but
though its sorceries have been dispelled where the light of
the Reformation has been received, its technical language
has survived. Among our own theologians it is not un
common to find one doctrine insisted on as necessary, in
order to the reception of another : " original sin," for in
stance, as necessary, in order to the reception of the truth
of the " atonement." The spirit of scholasticism still lives
among us ; we yet feel its influence. Even the common
practice of " preaching from texts " is a remnant of scholas
ticism. It will ill become me to dogmatize on a subject, in which
I am directly engaged in illustrating the injurious effects
of dogmatism ; but I would submit to your reflection,
whether the " Force of Theory," in the modification of our
theological language, has been sufficiently allowed for ?
If there are any whose anxiety for the Sacred cause has
been awakened by any observations in the course of the
present lectures, I exhort them to proceed, fearless of any
ultimate shock, to the real truth of Christianity, by the
most afearching investigation. The revealed facts are really
and in themselves independent of theories. 384

J. MABTKRS, PRINTER, ALDERSGATB STREET.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03720 7868