Page images
PDF
EPUB

Religion.

OUGHT STANDARDS OF FAITH TO BE IRREVISABLE?

AFFIRMATIVE ARTICLE.-I.

"To 'cide this title is impannelèd

A quest of thoughts, all tenants to the heart,
And by their verdict 'tis determined."-Shakspere.

THE question refers, of course, solely to religious faith, or belief; and by standards of faith" we are to understand certain precise and well-defined dogmas, or doctrines, relating to the existence, nature, and attributes of Deity; the existence of spirits, good and evil, their aims and offices; the origin, present condition, and future prospects of man; and to the beginning and end of all earthly things, and the establishment, existence, and rules for the government of the Christian society. Such are the chief subjects which form the basis of the religious faith of those who profess any religious faith at all. And it will be seen at once that such subjects are of the highest importance in their relation to man's moral and intellectual nature. The question then is, first, ought there to be any standard of faith at all on such subjects? and if so, if that standard ought to be irrevisable? Now it will appear, I think, upon a primâ facie view of the case, that such standard ought to be irrevisable; and that, par conséquence, there ought to be a standard of faith. For it is manifest that the subjects of faith refer to infinite and immutable qualities; and that as the essences are themselves unchangeable, so what is delivered concerning them ought also to be unchangeable; and this is shown further, from considering that whatever has been delivered concerning these divine essences, and on subjects relating to them, must of necessity have come from the Divine Being himself or His immediate messengers, and so deriving its origin from perfection itself, or from infallible inspiration, ought consequently to be received as infallible, and no idea of subsequent alteration be admitted.

But leaving this part of the argument, the remaining part of the paper must be devoted to a consideration of what has been the practice of those to whom we are accustomed in such controversies to look up as our teachers and guides. Our idea of what is fit for the present, and what for the future, can only be obtained by analogy drawn from the past. There are many, it is true, who tell us that the world has hitherto been in its dotage, and that the beliefs of past ages were nothing but superstitions. The world, it may be, is growing wiser, so far as regards a knowledge of nature

and her laws; but from the primâ facie view, as stated above, it appears that this cannot be the case with articles of religious belief, which are, for reasons given above, unchangeable. For, considering the evidence of the past, it must be assumed that the records of the Old and New Testaments are substantially true: to attempt to defend the truth of these would raise a separate and lengthy discussion ; besides, the very fact that a question has been raised as to the fitness or otherwise of revising standards of faith, shows that standards of faith founded upon assumed facts have been a long time in existence. These are merely preliminary statements, and may to some have appeared tedious and unnecessary; but they have been entered upon for the purpose of showing what appears to me to be the only ground on which this question can be fairly and successfully discussed, and so of showing by what course of argument I intend to defend my present position.

With the Bible then as our guide, let us see how the question stands as to the advisability of revising our standards of faith. And first, as to the Old Testament. That the law given to the Jews was precise and rigid in the minutest details none can deny; and that it was intended to remain so may be seen from the injunction, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God" (Deut. iv. 2). And this is not invalidated by saying that the Jewish dispensation has been abolished. To abolish is very different from to revise; and the Mosaic economy is in no way opposed to the Christian, the law being merely a shadow of the good things to come (Heb. x. 1); and we know (John viii. 56; Deut. viii. 15) that the patriarchs looked forward to the inauguration of the Christian dispensation, and were fully aware that the Light would then arise which was to lighten the Gentiles, and to be the glory of the people of Israel (Isa. ix. 1, 2; Luke i. 72; ii. 32). When the Messiah did appear, we know that a regular system of instruction was delivered to, and definite doctrine inculcated on, all who became disciples of the despised Nazarene. The keeping of these words (τοὺς λόγους, John xiv. 23; xv. 10, 14) is the test of discipleship; and at the final interview with the eleven (Matt. xxviii. 19), all who had first become members of Christ by baptism were to be taught to observe all those things previously commanded to the twelve. That the apostles carried out this command as soon as the Christian church was established at the day of Pentecost, is evident from the fact that all continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine (didaɣn, Acts ii. 42); and that on the first question as to doctrine, the general council at Jerusalem, guided by the Holy Spirit (Acts xv. 28), examined and decided upon the point at issue. In the Pauline and other epistles the Christian congregations, to whom these letters are addressed, are continually referred to the doctrines laid down by the founders of these churches, and exhorted to frame their belief and conduct in accordance therewith. The Corinthians

(1 Ep. i. 10) were exhorted all to speak the same thing, and to be built up in one mind, and in the selfsame opinion (v ry aurÿ yvwpy). The Ephesians are exhorted to unity, and told that there is "

faith.'

one

St. Jude, writing to the sanctified in God the Father, exhorts them to contend earnestly for that faith delivered once (ǎπαž), and therefore not needing supplementing or revision, and they were to ground and build themselves upon this most holy faith (ver. 3, 20). And even the beloved disciple, whose great object it was to enforce obedience to the new commandment of love, deems it expedient to insert in the few sentences of his second epistle, just after discoursing of love, a warning against unbelievers, and solemnly declares that he walking not in the doctrine (didaxn) of Christ, hath not God; while he that remaineth in this doctrine hath both Father and Son. If any came, not having this doctrine, he was not to be received into the house nor bid God speed, lest the entertainer be made a partaker of his transgressions. Strange and solemn utterances from the venerable survivor of the chosen band, who, looking in his old age upon his converts as little children," should, from the exceeding love he had to them, deem it necessary to warn them against partaking in other men's errors; a venial offence in the present day, and considered by many a mark of Christian charity.

66

That the body of Christian doctrine was definite and precise upon all points, we gather from the numerous warnings scattered up and down the epistles against those who had swerved from the faith, as well as from the direct inculcation of divers precepts and doctrines, as from the mention of particular heresies (1. John iv. 2) which had crept in, and would hereafter creep in, to annoy the church. In the particular epistles this point is brought out with remarkable force. In the first to Timothy, i. 3, no other doctrine is to be taught; and in ver. 18 the youthful bishop is exhorted to observe a certain commandment.

From chap. iv. 1, we also gather that there was a standard of faith, or none could be said to depart from it; and we may gather from the following verses, which show what unlawful things would be introduced, what the creed of the Christian church was, as it was opposed to these things. In chap. vi. 14, Timothy is charged to keep a certain commandment, irreproachable and without spot, until the day of the manifestation of Jesus Christ. Hooker ("Eccl. Pol.," iii., c. 2) remarks on the force of the article in this place (Tηv Evroλny) as pointing to some special commandment, and refers it to that given to Peter (John xxi. 15), and by Paul (Acts xxv. 28), and again to Timothy (2 Ep. iv. 1); and in ver. 20 of this chapter Timothy is again exhorted to guard the pledge committed to his keeping.

In the 2nd Epistle, i. 13, the same person is requested to have ready a copy, or rather the authenticated copy from which others might be copied (vπòruπíoσiv), of the sound words which he had

In

heard from the great apostle of the Gentiles. And this is plainly identical with the rny kaλny Tapadneny of the following verse. chap. ii. we find provision made for the delivery of these truths pure and uncorrupted to succeeding generations of Christians. Intrust those things which thou hast heard of Me to faithful men, that they may teach others, ver. 3 (comp. Deut. vi. 7). Again and again is Timothy urged to follow after and preserve the apostles' doctrine, and warned that a season would come when men would not bear with sound doctrine, but would choose teachers according to their own desires. Titus also is exhorted to speak the things which become the sound teaching (Ty vylaivovon didaokaλía); and bishops are required to hold the word of faith according to the doctrine (didaxn) already established.

Thus it is abundantly manifest that in apostolic times there was a settled standard or code of faith, which standard was not to be altered, and those who departed from it brought upon themselves the sin of rending the Lord's body. The closing words of the Revelation (chap. xxii. 19) warn us of the danger of adding to, or subtracting from, the utterances of the divine seer; so that we are brought to the close of the first century of the Christian era.

I am not sufficiently well acquainted with the writings of the earlier or later fathers to illustrate and confirm my position by quotations from their works; but it must be evident to even the most cursory reader of the early history of the Christian church, that there was still a standard of Christian doctrine. For if not, why was anything deemed heresy? or why were so many councils and synods called to suppress first one and then another heresy? or why were bishops continually cautioning each other against giving the right hand of fellowship to certain persons who kept not the doctrines of the church as handed down by the apostles?

That error has, in the course of centuries, been engrafted on this body of Christian doctrine, so as to obscure and, in some cases, almost to nullify it, is not denied; but while this may be a valid plea for a reformation which shall prune away such errors as are contrary to Scripture and the custom of the primitive church, it is none for revising and altering those articles of faith which are the basis of Christianity, and to remove which would therefore bring about the destruction of the superstructure. Yet in these days we are asked to remove the old landmarks, to do away with the childish restraint of creeds and formularies, and to seek for the moral renovation of human nature by contemplating the good, the beautiful, and the true. Such persons, however, are rather at a loss to account for the fact that human nature, as seen in the mass of men, is averse to any such thing, and the life of the few who do so is a constant struggle against natural inclination. In short, all discourse on the good is absurd, unless we have something to imitate which is itself the perfection of goodness; and this of course forces us back to the old gospel history of Jesus, "as a sacrifice for sin, and also an ensample of godly life."

It remains for the writers on the negative side of this question to show why standards of faith should be revised. I have given, as far as my ability serves, reasons to show why-looking at the subject in itself, and to the practice of antiquity regarding it,why standards of faith should be irrevisable; and in conclusion, would ask, what good end will be served by having them revisable? Once begin, and where will you stop? The end would be utter confusion, with no real belief existing anywhere. And what has occurred since to call for any alteration in our standards of faith? Is it because science and revelation occasionally come into collision, and seem to be contradictory of each other? This would be to yield unjustly to science, and either to declare that the two books of Nature and of Revelation, both the work of a Being of infinite wisdom, teach opposite lessons,—a thing absurd in itself; or to say that science shows that the commonly received theology is erroneous; in other words, that science leads to scepticism,-a proposition which is to receive full discussion in the pages of this magazine, and from the perusal of which readers may decide for themselves on this part of the question.

We do not intend to affirm that rites and ceremonies should be irrevisable, though the less they are altered the better, believing that every particular or national church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith, so that nothing be ordained contrary to God's written word.

Finally, in the words of Bacon, "If the points fundamental and of substance in religion were truly discerned and distinguished from points not merely of faith but of opinion, order, or good intention, there would be less heresy and schism than there is, though unity must not be made on the false peace grounded upon ignorance-for all colours will agree in the dark-nor upon that pieced upon a direct admission of contraries in fundamental points: for truth and falsehood in such things are like the iron and clay in the toes of Nebuchadnezzar's image-they may cleave, but they will not incorporate."

"Were it not sinful then, striving to mend,
To mar the subject that before was well?"

R. S.

NEGATIVE ARTICLE.-I.

46 'Reckoning Time-whose millioned incidents Creep in 'twixt vows, change the decrees of kings,

Tan sacred beauty, blunt the sharp'st intents

Divert strong minds to the course of altering things."—Shakspere.

THIS subject has received for some time much public thought and attention. There seems to be an idea entertained by parties of different sects, who hold different standards of religious faith, that the creeds are insufficient for the age, and that therefore a revision is necessary to put them into proper shape for the time in

« PreviousContinue »