Page images
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

crédulité aggravent leur condamnation. Comp. Specimen Animadversionum in Exercitationes de Gratia Universali, Salmır, 1784, 4.—Concerning the further

progress of this controversy see Walch, Biblioth. Theol. sel., vol. ii., pp. 1023 ss. On Amyraut in particular, see Schweizer, Moses Amyraldus, Versuch einer Synthese des Universalismus und des Particularismus (in Zeller's Jahrb., 1852—chiefly against Ebrard's representations) : “ Amyraldism has been designated, hypothetical universalism. But this is liable to be misunderstood, and to favor a mistaken representation of the system, as if it broke through the bounds of Calvinistic particularism, and as Ebrard thinks, retained this characteristic only in seeming; while the fact is, that Amyraut was earnest in its favor, and even made it more sharp, whenever possible.Yet still there is in Amyraldism an important mitigation of the dogma in this point of view, that " he appended an ideal universalism to the particularising world-plan."

· Tessard, Daillé, Blondel, Claude, Du Bose, Le Faucheur, Mestrezat, Tronchin. [On Daillé and Blondel, see above, $ 225, a, Notes 8 and 9. Comp. A. Vinet, Histoire de la Predication parmi les Réformés de France au 17e siècle, Paris, 1860. He reckons Du Bose next to Claude in ability.] In opposition was Du Moulin (Molinæus of Sédan), and especially Friedr. Spanheim in his Exercitationes de Gratia Universali, Lugd. Batav., 1646, to which Amyraut replied in his Exercitatio de Gratia Universali, Salm., 1647. See Schweizer, p. 61. [Comp. 8 225, a: Vinet, ubi supra. Du Moulin published 10 decades of sermons, and 60 controversial treatises : his Anatomie of Arminianism, transl. Lond., 1635.]

* The views of Pajon were especially contested from the Reformed side, by Claude and Jurieu : Traité de la Nature et de la Grace, ou de Concours général de la Providence, et du Concours particulier de Grace efficace, contre les nouvelles hypothèses de Mr. P. Cajon] et de ses disciples, Utrecht, 1687 : also by Leydecker and Spanheim: from the Lutheran side by Val. Ernest Löscher (Exercitatio Theol. de Claudii Pajonii ejusque Sectatoribus quos Pajonistas vocant Doctrina et Fatis, Lips. 1692). On the relation between his individual opinion and the general dogmatic system of the Reformed Church, and on its significance in the Reformed Theology, see Al. Schweizer, in the treatise referred to, $ 225, Note 3 (in Zeller's Theol. Jahrb., 1852, 1853, and in Herzog's Realencyclop.]

. He was a native of Burgdorf, in the Canton Berne, in Switzerland, but was compelled to leave his country on account of his opinions. After he had joined the Lutheran Church, he became first a pastor in the neighborhood of Tübingen, and afterwards a professor in the University of Wittenburg. His assertion that God from eternity elected all men to salvation (without respect to their future faith) gave offense to the Lutherans. He was opposed by Polycarp Lyser and Ægidius Hunnius (1593), whom he in his turn charged with Calvinism. For the particulars of the controversy, and the explanations of Huber, see Schröckh, iv. p. 661, and Andr. Schmidii Dissert. de Sam. Huberi Vita, Fatis et Doctrina, Helmst., 1708, 4. Jul. Niggers, Beiträge zur Lebensgesch Sam. Hubers, in Illgen's Zeitschrift, 1844. Trechsel, in the Berner Taschenbuch, 1844. Schweizer, Centraldogmen, i. 501 sq.

• The old controversy between the Thomists and Scotists (Dominicans



and Franciscans) was revived in the age of the Reformation. While the Council of Trent was still assembled, a controversy broke out between Michael Bajus (de Bay, born 1513, died 1589), and his colleagues, who were followers of Scotus. Pope Pius V. issued a bull (A. D. 1567) in which he condemned 76 propositions of Bajus (several of which were literally taken from Augustine's writings); but this was done only in a certain sense. Gregory XIII. confirmed this sentence A, D, 1579. But when the Jesuits, Leonard Less and John Hamel, propounded the Pelagian System too boldly, the professors in the University of Louvain raised their voices against 34 propositions taken from their lectures, and publicly condemned them. For further details see the works on ecclesiastical history. Baji Opp. Col., 1696, 4. [Comp. Kuhn, Dogmatik, i. 490 sq. The doctrine of Less was condemned by the faculty of Douay, 1588, Estius being the leader, while Mayence, Treves and Ingolstadt declared for the Jesuits. The Spanish Dominican, Bannez, was the ablest Thomist and Augustinian; against him, Prudentius de Monte-Mayor defended the scientia media, 1581. The same view was espoused by Petrus de Fonseca, in 1566, and defended by Suarez in Coimbra, Vasques in Compluta, Gregory of Valentia in Ingolstadt.-as well as by Molina, see next note.]

' He was also a Jesuit, born 1540, and died 1600 (as a professor of theology in the University of Evora in Portugal). He wrote: Liberi arbitrii cum gratiæ donis, divina præscientia, prædestinatione et reprobatione concordia. He endeavoured to bring about the said reconciliation by distinguishing between præscientia and prædeterminatio; he called the former scientia media.

They were drawn up A. D. 1597 by order of Pope Clement VIII, and issued 1607 by Pope Paul V. The Pope imposed (1611) silence upon both parties.--Comp. Aug. Le Blanc (Serry), Historia Congreg. de Auxiliis Gratiæ, Antw. 1700, fol.

• See the general history of doctrines. Pope Urban VIII, condemned the “ Augustinus” of Jansen in the bull In Eminenti. (Bullar, M. Tom. V.), and Pope Innocent X, condemned (1653) five propositions in particular. For further details see the works on ecclesiastical history. Concerning the principles of the Jansenists, see Reuchlin, Port-Royal. (Compare also 8 228.)

** [See above, $ 225, 6, Notes 2, 6, 8, 15, 16, etc. The 17th of the XXXIX articles is of Predestination and Election : Predestination to life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he bath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honor. Wherefore they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God be called according to God's purpose by his spirit working in die season; they through God's grace obey the calling; they be justified freely; they be made sons of God by adoption ; they be made like the image of his only begotten son Jesus Christ; they walk religiously in good works; and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.—Then follow cautions about the use of the doctrine—“ for curious and carnal persons,


lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall,” etc. The Nine Lambeth Articles (see § 225 6, Note 8) taught reprobation. On the controversy as to the doctrinal position of the church of England, see the works of Laurence, Tomline, Goode, Scott, etc., referred to in note 2 of 225 b. Abp. William King (of Dublin), Divine Predestination and Foreknowledge, Lond. 1710; Ed. Copleston, Bp. of Llandaff, Enquiry into the Doctrines of Necessity and Predestination, Lond., 1821. Westminster Confession of Faith, chapter iii, 3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. 5. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, bath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory; out of his mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace. 6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he by the eternal and most free purpose

of his will, fore-ordained all the means thereunto, etc. 7. The rest are passed by and ordained to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice. 8. The doctrine of this high mystery is to be bandled with special prudence and care, etc.]

[ocr errors]

$ 251.


Möhler, Symbolik, p. 134 88. Baur, p. 215 ss.

Roman Catholics and Protestants agreed in ascribing to God the justification of the sinner, but differed in this, that the former confounded the act of justification with that of sanctification, so as to represent both as the one act of making just,' while the Protestants separated the one from the other, asserting that the justification of the sinner before God (which is described as a forensic act on the part of God), is antecedent to his sanctification, which is physical (that is affecting the nature) and therapeutical).' Both Roman Catholics and Protestants ascribed to faith a justifying power, in the case of the sinner : but there was this great difference between them, that the former maintained that, in addition to faith, good works are a necessary condition of salvation, and ascribed to them a certain degree of meritoriousness,' while the latter adhered rigidly to the proposition “sola fides justificat." Some opposing sects, however, "

' which had their origin in Protestantism, formed here again an exception. While Arminians and Socinians agreed with other Protestants in restricting justification in the first instance, to the act of


granting pardon,' the Mennonites and Quakers regarded it as a therapeutical act.' Respecting the relation between faith and works, the Arminians and Socinians, as well as the Mennonites, adopted views more closely allied to those of the Roman Catholics, but with this important difference,' that they denied the meritoriousness of works, though holding them to be necessary. [Many theologians of the Anglican Church occupied an intermediate position."]

· Conc. Trid., Sess. VI, cap. 7: Justificatio non est sola peccatoram remissio, sed et sanctificatio et renovatio interioris hominis


voluntariam susceptionem gratiæ et donorum, unde homo ex injusto fit justus et ex inimico amicus, ut sit hæres secundum spem vitæ æternæ, etc. Comp. Can. 11, and Bellarmine, De Justif., ii. 2:.... Sicut aër, cum illustratur a sole per idem lumen, quod recipit, desinit esse tenebrosus et incipit esse lucidus, sic etiam homo per eandem justitiam sibi a sole justitiæ donatam atque infusam desinit esse injustus, delente videlicet lumine gratiæ tenebras peccatorum, etc.

'Apol. Augustanæ Conf. p. 125: Justificare hoc loco (Rom. v. 1), forensi consuetudine significat reum absolvere et pronuntiare justum, sed propter alienam justitiam, videlicet Christi, quæ aliena justitia communicatur nobis per fidem. Comp. p. 73; p. 109. Form. Conc., p. 785. Helv. II, c. 15 : Justificare significat Apostolo in disputatione de justificatione: peccata remittere, a culpa et pæna absolvere, in gratiam recipere et justum pronuntiare.

According to the Roman Catholic doctrine, Christ, by the act of justification, is really embodied in the believer, so that the latter becomes a living reflection of the prototype ; according to the Protestant doctrine, he casts only his shadow upon the believer, which so shelters him, that God does not see his sinfulness." Möhler, Symbolik, p. 134. On the other side see Baur p. 229 ss. and the passage quoted by Möhler p. 136, from Calvin's Antidot. in Conc. Trid., p. 702 : Neque tamen negandum est, quin perpetuo conjunctæ sint ac cohæreant duæ ista res, sanctificatio et justificatio. Protestants do not deny that justification and sanctification are closely connected, but they do deny that they are one and the same thing; when the Formula Conc. (Solida Declar. iii. p. 695) says: Totam justitiam nostram extra nos quærendam, it explains this immediately after by adding: extra omnium homie num merita, opera, etc. [In the doctrine of justification by faith, the whole antagonism between Romanism and Protestantism is most clearly seen. Protestants make the subjective and individual reception of salvation to be, on the one hand, the inmost experienoe of the individual, while, on the other hand, it represents it as mediated as slightly as possible by the agency of the person himself. Catholicism not only lets the individual participate in it, but also introduces a whole series of intermediate acts between God and man, in which is brought out the externalizing tendency of its whole system. Baur, p. 331.]

• Conc. Trid. Sess. vi. C. 6–c. 8: Per fidem ideo justificari dicimur, quia fides est humanæ salutis initium, fundamentum et radix omnie justificationis. -On the other hand, c. 9 : Si quis dixerit, sola fide impium justificari, ita ut intelligat nihil aliud requiri, quod ad justificationis gratiam consequendam

cooperetur. . . . . . anathema sit. Comp. c. 12. This is allied with the moral and external (historical) idea of faith. Cat. Rom. I. i., 1: Nos de ea fide loquimur, cujus vi omnino assentimur iis, quæ tradita sunt divinitus. Faith taken in this sense (as submission to the authority of the church) may be said to be meritorious. The meritoriousness of works consists in this, that the justitia is increased by the performance of good works. Comp. Concil. Trident. Sess. vi. (quoted by Winer, p. 104); Catech. Rom. ii. 5, 71. Bellarmine, Justific. v. 1, iv. 7. Nevertheless (according to Bellarmine), the merits of men will not throw the merits of Christ into the shade ; they are rather themselves the effect of the merits of Christ, and serve to manifest his glory among men. Bellarmine, v. 5 (quoted by Winer,

p. 105.)



• Confessio Augustana, Art. 4: Docent, quod homines non possunt justificari coram Deo propriis viribus, meritis aut operibus, sed gratis justificentur propter Christum per fidem, cum credunt se in gratiam recipi, et peccata remitti propter Christum, qui sua morte pro nostris peccatis satisfecit. Hanc fidem imputat Deus pro justitia coram ipso.—But Protestants did not understand by faith mere historical faith (as did Roman Catholics), * see Art. 20 (p. 18): Admonentur etiam homines, quod hic nomen fidei non significet tantum historiæ notitiam, qualis est in impiis et diabolo, sed significet fidem, quæ credit non tantum historiam, sed etiam effectum historiæ, videlicet hunc articulum, remissionem peccatorum, quod videlicet per Christum habeamus gratiam, justitiam et remissionem peccatorum. Comp. Apologia, p. 68.Concerning good works, and the relation in which they stand to faith, Luther, at first set a high value upon the genuine works of mercy, distinguishing these from the dead works of the law and of ceremonies; but he also denied the meritoriousness of the best works, and regarded them with suspicion, whenever they did not proceed from faith ; comp. Schenkel, ii. 193, 89.—The Confess. August, says, Art. 20, p. 16 : Falso accusantur nostri, quod bona opera prohibeant. ... Docent nostri, quod necesse sit bona opera facere, non ut confidamus per ea gratiam mereri, sed propter voluntatem Dei. -Apol. p. 81 : Nos quoque dicimus, quod delectio fidem sequi debeat. Neque tamen ideo sentiendum est, quod fiducia hujus dilectionis aut propter hanc dilectionem accipiamus remissionem peccatorum et reconciliationem.

# The contending parties were well acquainted with the different meanings attached to the term "faith.” See Bellarmine, De Justific. $ 4. They were not engaged in any mere logomachy. Only this is to be lamented, that the Protestants (even Luther) did not hold fast to the internal and dynamic idea of faith, but frequently confouuded it (like the Catholics) with the fides historica. This gave rise to a faith-righteousness, worse even than righteousness by works, since it cost no effort, and gave occasion to pride and harshness towards those who held different views; see Schenkel, ii. 200 sq. Zwingle, on the other hand, urged the moral nature of faith; ibid., 299. Melancthon and Calvin tried to barmonize the dogmatical and ethical elements of the idea; ibid., 322 sq. [The difference between the Reformed and Lutheran system is strikingly seen in their doctrine respecting faith. In the Calvinistic scheme, faith is one of the elements in the series of absolute predestination; the Lutheran system tries on this point to set aside the absolute decree, but in a fluctuating way, making faith on the one hand to be a gift of God, and yet on the other hand, not daring to take the Pelagian ground, that a prævisa fides conditioned the election. Baur, p. 334.]

« PreviousContinue »