consequence of the change which he alleges has taken place in the views of Protestants in regard to assurance, that "the Protestant symbol (Fides sola justificat,-Faith alone justifies'), though now eviscerated of its real import, and now only manifesting an unimportant difference of expression, is still supposed to mark the discrimination of the two religious denominations. For both agree that the three heavenly virtues must all concur to salvation, and they only differ, whether faith, as a word, does or does not involve hope and charity." This would be the most dangerous of all Sir William's misrepresentations, were it not rendered innocuous by its extravagance. Even if the deviation from the views of the Reformers, and the return to popish notions upon the subject of assurance, had been as great as Sir William represents it, this would not have affected the differences between Protestants and Romanists upon anything really involved in the doctrine of justification. Sir William's statement, though applied only to the doctrine that faith alone justifies, seems fitted and intended to convey the impression, that the whole Protestant doctrine of justification has been exploded and abandoned; and, therefore, the first remark we have to make upon it is this,—that there are some important differences between Protestants and Romanists on the subject of justification which are not directly touched even by the position, that faith alone justifies. We refer, of course, to the vitally important questions, 1st, as to the meaning and import, and, 2d, as to the cause, or ground, or foundation, of justification. Even though the doctrine that faith alone justifies were "eviscerated," Protestants might and should maintain their whole controversy with Romanists upon these fundamental points. We remark, in the second place, that all that is important in the Protestant doctrine, as comprehended under the head that faith alone justifies, is untouched by any change that has taken, or could, take place, in regard to assurance. The two main questions usually discussed between Protestants and Romanists under this head are these: 1st, Is there anything else in men themselves which stands in the same relation to justification as faith does?-Protestants answering this question in the negative, and Papists contending that there are six other virtues, as they call them, including, of course, hope and charity, which stand in the very same relation to justification. Protestants admitted that all these virtues do and must exist in justified men, and might thus, in a sense, be said, to use Sir Wil

liam's phrase, "to concur to salvation;" but they wholly denied. that they have any such bearing as faith has upon the justification of a sinner. 2d, In what capacity or respect is it that faith justifies? Is it as an instrument, or as a condition, or as a meritorious cause? Surely it is quite plain, that, even if a man had come to believe all that is taught by the Council of Trent upon the subject of assurance, he might still, without any inconsistency, maintain all the doctrines of the Reformers upon these important points.

Sir William adverts to the fact, that the deviation from the views of the Reformers upon the subject of assurance, which he represents as an abandonment of "the fundamental principle of all the Reformed churches," is embodied in the Westminster Confession; and yet there can be no doubt that the whole doctrine of the Reformers upon the subject of justification is set forth with most admirable fulness and precision in the 11th chapter of that document, while no ingenuity, however great, could devise even a plausible pretence for alleging that there is any inconsistency in this.

We have some apprehension that the controversial spirit is rising and swelling in our breast, and therefore we abstain from making any reflections upon the extraordinary inaccuracies which we have considered it our duty to unfold. But we would like to attempt something in the way of expounding and inculcating the great truth taught in Scripture, and set forth in the Westminster Confession, upon the subject of assurance. That it is practicable, obligatory, and expedient, that believers should be assured of their justification and salvation, was, not certainly, "the fundamental principle of all the Reformed churches," but the fundamental principle of the teaching of the Reformed churches on the subject of assurance. It is fully and clearly declared in the Westminster Confession. It has been held professedly by the whole body of Calvinistic divines, both before and since the variation which Sir William has signalised. And yet we fear it has at all times been too much neglected, both theoretically and practically, viewed both as declaring a truth and enforcing a duty. We believe that the prevailing practical disregard of the privilege and the duty of having assurance, is, to no inconsiderable extent, at once the cause and the effect of the low state of vital religion amongst us-one main reason why there is so little of real com

148 REFORMERS AND DOCTRINE OF ASSURANCE. [ESSAY III.

munion with God as our reconciled Father, and so little of real, hearty devotedness to His cause and service. Some sense of the sin and danger of neglecting this subject occasionally arises in men's minds, and is, from time to time, pressed upon the notice of the church, but in many cases such attempts have only led to controversial discussions, and have failed in producing any beneficial practical results. It is not easy to keep the exact high road of truth; and men, filled with some one important idea or object, are very apt to run into exaggerations and extremes. Upon no subject has this been more conspicuously the case than on that of assurance; partly, perhaps, because of the influence of Luther, Calvin, and their associates. It has happened repeatedly in the history of the church, that pious and zealous men, impressed with the importance of getting a larger share of attention to the subject of assurance, have been led into the adoption of untenable and erroneous positions concerning it. Then the champions of orthodoxy have buckled on their armour, and have demonstrated by irrefragable logic, that these positions are characterised by, it may be, confusion, inconsistency, and error; and then men, satisfied upon this point, settle down again upon their lees, and think no more of the importance of coming to a decisive adjustment upon the question as to what is their present relation to God, and what are their future prospects. This is the abuse, not the use of controversy. The uses of theological controversy are, to expose error, and to produce and diffuse clear and correct opinions upon all points of doctrine. It is the church's imperative duty to aim at these objects, and controversy seems to be as indispensable with a view to the second as to the first of them. But it is an evil and an abuse, when the exposure of error is made to serve as a substitute for the realization and application of what is admitted to be true. This has repeatedly, in the history of the church, taken place in regard to the subject of assurance; and this result, again, has, we are persuaded, been productive of injurious consequences to the interests of true religion, and tended to keep the church at a low point in the scale of devotedness and efficiency.

MELANCTHON

AND THE

THEOLOGY OF THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.*

THESE are two great works, of permanent value, and must be regarded as most important accessions to the theological literature of the present age. They are, indeed, almost wholly republications of books which have been in existence for nearly three centuries. But many of the books of which they are composed were so scarce as to be practically inaccessible, and they are now brought within the reach of all, and provided fully with every necessary literary apparatus. Bretschneider of Gotha started the idea of editing and publishing a complete Corpus Reformatorum, and began with putting forth, in 1834, the first volume of the whole writings of Melancthon. The work proceeded very slowly, one volume only being usually published annually. Bretschneider died during its progress, and the work has very recently been brought to a close under the superintendence of Bindseil, who is professor of philosophy and librarian at Halle. The last volume, the twenty-eighth, was just ready in time to admit of its being deposited in the foundation-stone of the pedestal of a brazen statute of Melancthon, erected at Wittemberg, on the 19th of April last, the tricentenary anniversary of his death. We do not know whether the works of any more of the Reformers are to be brought out in the same style,

British and Foreign Evangelical

Review, Jan. 1861.

PHILIPPI MELANTHONIS OPERA QUÆ 1834-1860.

SUPERSUNT OMNIA.

THE WORKS OF THE PARKER SOCIETY. 1841-1855.

and with similar completeness and apparatus. It would certainly be an inestimable service to theological literature to produce such an edition of the whole works of the other leading Reformers. But the length of time that has been occupied with the publication of Melancthon is somewhat discouraging. It is a great boon, however, to have given us such an edition of the whole works of the "Preceptor of Germany."

The Parker Society was instituted in 1840, "for the publication of the works of the fathers and early writers of the Reformed English Church;" and in the course of fourteen years gave to the world fifty-five volumes of most interesting and valuable matter, including a most important collection of Letters not before published, which had been written by the English Reformers to their continental correspondents, and have been preserved in different libraries, but especially in that of Zurich. The Parker Society was instituted, and its proceedings were conducted, under the influence of decidedly anti-Tractarian views. It was intended to bring out the predominance of the doctrinal and evangelical element, as opposed to the sacramental, the hierarchic, and the ritualistic, among the founders of the Church of England,-the thoroughly anti-popish character of the whole position they assumed, their full sympathy in spirit and feeling, and their substantial identity in opinion, with the continental Reformers; in short, to make it palpable that the Church of England, as settled in the time of Edward and Elizabeth, was very different, in the most important respects, from what it was made by Charles and Laud, and from what the Tractarians have again attempted to make it. The works of the Parker Society contain a great storehouse of matter of the highest value and importance, viewed both historically and theologically. As a whole, they thoroughly establish the true historical position of the Church of England, as settled by its fathers and founders; and, at the same time, furnish materials amply sufficient to prove, that the great leading antiPopish, anti-Tractarian, evangelical features of its constitution, in so far as they agreed with those of the continental Reformed churches, are truly scriptural and primitive.

A similar work was attempted, and to a considerable extent executed, in the early part of this century, by the Rev. Leigh Richmond, whose pastoral labours and popular writings were so largely blessed. When it was attempted to put down the piety