373
Vindication of the German Reformer, in reply to the charges of the historian Hallam and the Scottish philosopher Sir William Hamilton, and the Puseyites.
Vindication of the German Reformer, in reply to the charges of the historian Hallam and the Scottish philosopher Sir William Hamilton, and the Puseyites.
Pleiderer - Development of Theology in Germany since Kant
Although this principle is not
wholly devoid of truth, there is reason to object to it,s that a
rule of certainty which is based neither on the reason nor on
proofs from fact, but on the simple power of the will to hold
something to be true, possesses no value, and may easily be
come as fruitful a source of superstition as of faith. In fact,
the subjective character of this purely emotional certainty
is acknowledged by Newman himself in the very remarkable
"
words :
The from in the matter of argument probability,
religion, became an argument from personality, which, in fact, is one form of the argument from authority. " It will be diffi cult to avoid this conclusion, if it is once granted that religious certainty rests merely upon emotional motives without rational
grounds ; in that case it of course, only subjective cer
See ante,
Apologia,
See Tulloch, in the Edinburgh Review, Oct. , 1870, and his Movements
Religious Thought,
103.
317. 19.
In
? matism, and has expounded it in the two books, An Essay on the Development ofChristian Doctrine (1845), and An Essay
in Aid of a Grammar of Assent (1870). In the latter he works out a principle which he had learnt from Keble,2 namely, that religious conviction does not rest on intellectual but emotional grounds, which cannot be theoretically proved,
? ? 821
p. p. p.
of
is,
a
? 364 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
tainty that cannot rest upon itself, but to render it secure stands in need of the support of the greatest possible number of other subjects, that of external authority.
Newman's work on the Development Christian Doctrine takes as its starting-point the incontestable principle, that Christianity, like every historical institution, has passed through process of development, of growth, in doctrine and custom, and was not given to the world at the beginning in perfect form. He offers number of instances going to show that orthodox Protestantism under delusion, when
sup poses that all its doctrines and practices are taught in Scrip
ture and are prescribed therein, or are to be directly deduced therefrom. impossible to remain in the mere letter of Scripture, because the necessities of interpretation, for in stance, of such a phrase as " the Word became flesh," lead at once to a series of further questions. Other questions, such as the Canon of Scripture, its inspiration and authority, can not be answered from Scripture itself, because the Apostles had not then given any decision on them. As within the Biblical religion itself there " development through the Prophets to Jesus, so, again, in the apostolic teaching no historical point can be fixed at which the growth of doctrine ceased, and the rule of faith was once for all settled. " Finally, in Scripture itself the necessity of such a progressive develop ment distinctly indicated, for instance, the parables of the Leaven and the Mustard Seed. If in all this the author displays undoubtedly degree of sound historical sense, the reader immediately surprised by a very unhistorical and
? of the true principle! In order to guide the process of the development of Christianity, to distinguish correct developments from false, and to sanction them, there -- required an infallible authority outside the
genuinely dogmatic application
development namely, the Church. If Christianity as a whole, revelation, the results of its development must share the guarantee of its credentials. Revealed religion distin guished from Natural by the very fact that substitutes the voice of Law-giver --an objective authority, Apostle, Pope, or Church --for the voice of conscience. In Protestantism this authority the Bible but as can be proved that this authority insufficient, we must conclude that this required living and present source of revelation can only be the infal lible arbiter of all true doctrines -- the Church. Nor
per
? ? is
is,
it
is
is
a
it
a a
is
is
it
is
in
is
It is
a ;a
is,
is a
is
a
a
of
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 365
sonal judgment precluded by this infallible authority, but is only limited to its proper range and preserved from error. --We must allow that this defence (following in the footsteps of the German Catholic Theologian Mohler) of the principle of Catho
lic tradition and authority is conducted very cleverly. It rests,
all the same, upon a great fallacy. The fact is overlooked
that the alleged infallible authority is itself a product of the f general development, and that it participates in its changes,
and is therefore subject, like every historical phenomenon, to the law of relativity. Moreover, the false traditional idea of development is throughout taken for granted -- namely, that development consists solely in positive growth, in an extension and more complete definition of older truth ; we hear nothing of the great fact, that development has also a negative aspect, that new truth does not come merely as an addition to the old, but often abrogates the old, so that in reality there is accom plished in it the continuous criticism of mind in the process of its development. We readily grant that this process does not go on without obedience to an inner law of rationality ; but precisely because reason is realised in the process of historic development, it does not require a special infallible institution to guide which can only become an impediment to the living spirit.
In the same year in which Newman set on foot the reac tionary High Church movement, Thomas Arnold, the Head Master at Rugby, published his pamphlet on The Principles\l of Church Reform, which, though provoked at first storm of indignation on all sides, presented in its fundamental thoughts the ferment of a new progressive movement in the English Church in the next decades. Arnold had, like New man, been a pupil of Whately's at Oxford, and a friend of Keble's. But while in the case of Newman the influence of
the devout friend soon overcame the cool intellectual acute-
ness of the tutor, with Arnold was the reverse.
out his life Arnold continued to combine profoundly earnest piety with clearness of intellect, manly love of truth, and a restless desire for practical work indeed, not easy to say which of these aspects of the noble man's character was most marked. Arnold was at the beginning of the thirties not less alarmed than Newman and his Oxford friends at the political troubles and threatening tempest which appeared to
<<.
? Through
? ? _?
it ;
a
a is
it
it
a
it,
? 366 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
be gathering thick over the Church ; but while they sought salvation by the abandonment of the Reformation in a reform of dogma and the constitution and ritual of the Church, by which its boundaries would be narrowed and more sharply separated from the pulsating life of the nation, he demanded a reform in the opposite direction. In order to preserve to the nation the blessings of the State Church, he advocated the opening of its doors to the Dissenters, and the widening of its boundaries, so that all Englishmen who were, and wished to be Christians, should find a place in As the condition of membership, nothing more than an acceptance of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith, common to all parties both within and outside the Established Church, was to be required, differences in doctrine, constitution, and ritual being considered minor matters and permissible. The essential thing in Chris tianity practical godliness, based on the revelation of God in Scripture, and especially the person of Jesus, and mani festing itself in the moral purification and sanctification of personal and social life. the function of Church and
State equally, though from different point of view, to be in struments and organs of this ideal. There may not, therefore, be any separation between them, or jealousy and quarrel the State needs for its moral ends the religion of the Gospel, as the Church can exercise its educating influence over the nation only within the constituted forms and regulations of the Chris tian State. -- These are the main principles of Arnold's pam phlet on Church Reform, principles which have as their basis, not only an ideal view of the nature and ends of the State, but also broad view of the nature of Christianity a stand point exactly the same as that represented by Rothe his
? der Kirche and his Ethik} But this combination of Christian idealism and large-hearted humanity was then so new in England, that Arnold's proposed reforms were obnoxi ous to all parties alike to the High-churchmen they breathed heresy and revolution, and the Liberals considered them too conservative and narrow.
The storm of opposition from all sides did not shake Arnold's conviction of the truth and wisdom of his ideas. The force of his personal character the success of his work
Though Arnold differed from Rothe as to the source of the corruption of the true idea of the Church. See Arnold's Letter to Bunsen, Jan. 27, 1838.
Anfdngc
? ? 1
;
:
in
;
a
is
;
a It is
in
it.
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 367
in the school at Rugby, by which he initiated a reformation
in the entire system of public schools in England ; his power- . '/ ful sermons, in which he proclaimed the eternal truths of the Gospel with profound earnestness in simple undogmatic lan
and with constant reference to the various depart ments of moral life ; lastly, his work as a scholar in the field of classical literature and Roman history --all this combined in compelling his opponents even to respect the assailed and censured man, so that his sudden death (1842) was lamented on all sides as a national calamity.
It is Thomas Arnold, if any one, who must be regarded as the pioneer of free theology in England. It is true he wrote no considerable theological work--his vocation led him into the field of scholarship and history : and his views with regard to the interpretation of the Bible were neither quite new, nor do they meet completely the present require ments of historical criticism. But Arnold was the first to show to his countrymen the possibility and to make the demand, that the Bible should be read with honest human eyes without the spectacles of orthodox dogmatic presupposi tions, and that it can at the same time be revered with Christian piety and made truly productive in moral life. He was the first who dared to leave on one side the traditional phraseology of the High-Churchmen and the Evangelicals, and to look upon Christianity, not as a sacred treasure of the Churches and sects, but as a Divine beneficent power for every believer ; not as a dead heritage from the past, but as a living spiritual power for the moral advancement of indi viduals and nations in the present. If the universality of his interests and occupations was a hindrance to strictly scientific theological inquiry, it was really very favourable to his true
guage,
? mission : he showed how classical and general historical studies may be pursued in the light of the moral ideas of Christianity, and how, on the other hand, a free and clear way of looking at things may be obtained by means of wide historical knowledge, and then applied to the interpretation of the Bible and the solution of current ecclesiastical
ques tions. Thus he began to pull down the wall of separation
which had cut off the religious life of his fellow-countrymen,
with their sects and churches and rigid theological formulas
and usages, from the general life and pursuits of the nation.
It is also clear as day, that if longer life had been granted r
? ? ? 368 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [BIt IV.
to him, the result of the further prosecution of his historical studies, which had been made, in his last year, part of his vocation by his appointment to the chair of Modern History at Oxford, would have been further insight and courage to apply his historical and critical principles to the Bible. At all events, his work was subsequently further prosecuted in this direction by his friends and pupils.
Arnold was pre-eminently an independent character, both in his scientific and his political principles. For this reason he was prepared to learn from men of different schools.
him, and he confesses that he found in him what he had never
Samuel Taylor Coleridge exercised great influence upon
been able to find in any other English theologian : "
is at once rich and vigorous, and comprehensive and critical ; while the >>;0o? is so pure and so lively all the while. "1 From
Coleridge
His mind
? Arnold adopted the distinction between the reason and the understanding, and the determination of the relation of reason to faith as of two modes of perceiving religious truth, which are not antagonistic but supplementary. Of Coleridge's Letters on Inspiration? which he saw in manuscript, he expressed the opinion, 3 that they were " well fitted to break ground in the approaches to that momentous question which involves in it so great a shock to existing notions, . . . but which will end, in spite of the fears and clamours of the weak and bigoted, in the higher exalting and more sure establishing of Christian truth. " His friend ship with Bunsen, too, whose acquaintance he made in Rome in 1827, had an important influence on Arnold's mind ; it was through this scholar particularly that he kept himself in close relations with German literature, though principally only with its historical and Biblical exegetical works, but not with
German philosophy or systematic theology ; of Schleier- macher he read only his critical essay on 1 Timothy, the results of which appeared to him too bold.
The most direct and lasting influence on the mental development of Arnold was that of Whately, who had been in Oxford his tutor and adviser, and with whom, as Arch bishop of Dublin, he kept up a close friendship and constant
1 Letter No. 209, to Mr. Justice Coleridge, Sept. 25, 1839. 2 See ante, p. 311.
3 Letter No. 94, to Mr. Justice Coleridge, Jan. 24, 1835.
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 369
intercourse. Whately was a man of clear intellect, humour, and benevolent heart, but not a learned theologian. His best known book is his Logic, constructed upon Aris totelian principles, which was once largely used in English
and universities. He carried his sound common sense into theological questions also, and found that not a few orthodox dogmas have no foundation in the Scriptures. Thus the orthodox doctrine of election is not in harmony with Paul's teaching, for in the latter what is dealt with is not the unconditional predestination of individuals to salva tion or destruction, but only the appointment of the whole Church to salvation in Christ, which is elected from the rest of the Heathen, as previously the people of Israel had been elected from the other nations. The final destiny of indi viduals depends solely on whether they personally do or do not make use of the advantages offered to them, by partici
colleges
faith, too, must not be understood of an imputation of the merits of Christ, but of the forgiveness
of sins on the fulfilment of the moral conditions. The death of Christ as a sacrifice must be received on the authority of
but it cannot be shown to be necessary. It is the same with the Deity of Christ : it must be believed on the
of Christ's own declarations in the Gospels, but interpreted essentially in the sense of Christ being the perfect moral example. The object of Christ's coming was the foundation of the kingdom of God as a moral common wealth. The claim of an apostolical episcopal succession, with power to impart the Holy Spirit, cannot be proved from Scripture, and is wrecked on the historical improbability of a chain of tradition being kept unbroken through eighteen cen turies; the true succession is holding fast to apostolic principles, that the moral character of Christianity. This violated by the Tractarian doctrine of the sacraments, which substi tutes the opus operatum for the heart. The rigorous obser vance of the Sabbath, too, not in harmony with the New Testament, the law of the Sabbath having been abrogated for Christians with the rest of the Mosaic legislation Sunday voluntary institution of the Church for the good of men. Generally, the Bible does not claim to be a law book for the regulation of faith and practice, but contains system of practical truths, motives, and principles in popular
Scripture,
ground
G. T.
happy
? pation justification by
in the revelation of the Church. The doctrine of
? ? is a
it
Ba is B
a;
is
is,
? 370 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
form. 1 The unwearied diligence with which Whately devoted himself to his ecclesiastical duties, to promoting- the education of the lower classes, and unostentatiously assisting the poor, both Protestant and Catholic, of his diocese in Ireland, reflects favourably on his practical and rational theology, which was not either in philosophy or in history and criticism pro found. In the latter respect there is much affinity between it and the Rationalistic (Kantian) supernaturalism, as it was represented in Germany in the first decades of the century by not a few theologians deserving of all respect.
As contemporaries and men of a kindred spirit with Arnold and Whately, we may mention the Oxford theolo gians Hampden and Milman, and the Cambridge theologians Thirlwall and Julius Hare. The name of Hampden is associated with an episode of considerable moment in the Tractarian movement. When he was nominated in 1836 to the Regius Professorship of Divinity at Oxford, the dominant party there, with Newman and Pusey at its head, got up a protest against his appointment, and charged the learned
? theologian with heresy on the ground of his Bampton Lec tures of the year 1832, on The Scholastic Philosophy in its
\
unimpugned.
which had till then remained In his lectures he had shown how orthodox theology, as having risen in its Patristic and Scholastic form under the influence of the philosophy in vogue at the time, is not identical with the doctrine of the Scriptures, but is in many respects an adulterated reflex of the simple Christian
belief. This indisputably correct account of the origin of
orthodox dogmas gave naturally great offence to High- churchmen, whose fundamental principle was the identifica
tion of Christianity with Scholastic theology. Pusey 2 main tained that this distinction between uncertain Scholastic doc trines and certain facts of Scripture was but the beginning of scepticism and rationalism, as the example of Semler had shown. The defence of Christianity then in vogue, which
threw the stress entirely upon the practical side of our religion, he declared tended directly to unbelief, since every
1 These are the leading principles of Whately's theological works, Essays on the Difficulties in the Writings of St. Paul (1828), The Kingdom of Christ
(1841).
2 Hampden's Past and Present Statements.
relation to Christian
Theology,
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 37 1
thing that could not be brought under the rubric of practical applicability, would be forgotten, and in the end denied. Hampden himself, in his inaugural lecture, professed his full belief in all the doctrines of the orthodox faith in a way not
easy, it must be confessed, to reconcile with the expositions of his Bampton Lectures. Consistency seems rather to have been on the side of his assailants. But the manner of their attack upon him, their denunciation of detached propositions torn from their context, in order to convict him of heresy, aroused the fierce indignation not only of Whately and Arnold, but of wider circles, in which the reaction against the principles of the Oxford party began from this time to make itself felt. A pamphlet published at that time gives the following not complimentary picture of higher education at Oxford. In all higher branches of knowledge the aim is to put down free opinions. The endeavour is to give a safe direction to young minds, and to confine their movements within the narrowest limits possible. No inquiry which
might possibly lead to other results than those of the estab lished formularies is permitted. It is not easy to form any idea of the extent of moral terrorism with which this in tellectual tyranny is practised, with what jealousy the words, behaviour, reading of those is watched, who are under the suspicion of having diverged from the majority. This system is commended in and outside of Oxford as a thoroughly practical and wholesome method of training devoted servants of the Church, who shall be free from all doubt. But the evil fruits of it are a terrible distortion of sound intellect, widespread ignorance and hypocrisy. "The student who comes at every step upon the warning, Not too deep! " is discouraged and takes refuge in deliberate ignorance. He persuades himself that knowledge at best is a dangerous acquirement in his career. In the consciousness of his own inability to defend rationally a position he has taken, he regards all speculations that are foreign to his mode of thought with vague fear. The consequence is that theology is studied in Oxford to no purpose, however much is said about because studied apart from the simple object of discovering the truth, and merely with the object of finding proofs in support of dogmas which dispense with all further inquiry. Such was the view taken by an Englishman of the Oxford of those years. The less reason we have to
? ? ? it,
it is
? 372 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
doubt the truth of the picture, the more cheering is it to observe how great progress has been made there in the course of the last half century.
Even in those years bright exceptions were not wanting. Milman was connected with Whately, Arnold, and Hampden,
belonging like them to the pre-Puseyite generation. His History of the Jews, which appeared in 1829 (2nd ed. rewritten
1863), treated the narratives of the Old Testament in the same way as the historical traditions of any other ancient people, took up a critical attitude towards the chronological data of the Bible, explained not a few narratives as oriental poetry and allegory, and sought generally by its graphic style, catching the national and antique character of early
Hebrew times, to deliver Biblical history from the bonds of traditional sanctity, and bring it nearer to the mind and heart of the present day. It is the same freer attitude towards the
Bible which is seen in Arnold's method of interpretation, but Milman was as far as Arnold from holding the principles of scientific criticism now followed by Wellhausen or Robertson
Smith. He was rather an imaginative narrator than an acute investigator of history. Nevertheless, by his History of the Jews, and his later History of Latin Christianity,
Milman contributed his share towards making in the bulwarks of traditionalism breaches through which a freer spirit might enter when the time arrived.
The same is true of the Cambridge theologians Thirlwall and Julius Hare, who by their joint translation of Niebuhr's History of Rome, and by theological works, did good service
in spreading the knowledge of German historical science amongst their countrymen. Thirlwall published in 1825 a translation of Schleiermacher's book on the Gospel of Luke, with an introduction of some length, in which he accepted and defended the principles of Schleiermacher's Biblical criticism --a bold thing to do in those days, when the strict doctrine of inspiration was still in full force, and German theology was but little known in England, and on that very account was the more summarily condemned as heretical ! Next to Coleridge, whose way of thinking on philosophy he
? Hare was above all his English contempor aries the student best acquainted with German theological
science. As a youth he had felt on the Wartburg the breath of Luther's spirit, and subsequently wrote a thoroughly learned
adopted, Julius
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
373
Vindication of the German Reformer, in reply to the charges of the historian Hallam and the Scottish philosopher Sir William Hamilton, and the Puseyites. Against the latter he wrote the important polemical essay, The Contest with Rome, 1842, which had the greater influence as Hare's Christian devotedness had been placed beyond doubt by his earnest and thoughtful sermons. Speaking generally, it appears that Hare made a deeper impression on his contemporaries by his noble and amiable character than by his writings, which were comparatively few, and of which the best known is his volume of sermons, The Mission of the Comforter, dedicated to the memory of Coleridge, 1846, in which he maintained the principle of development of Christian doctrine. Amongst his closest friends were Thomas Arnold and Frederick Maurice. Maurice was Hare's pupil at Cambridge, and later his brother-in-law, and to this intimate relation owed the most powerful stimulus in his mental development.
Freder1ck Den1son Maur1Ce was one of the most impor tant English theologians of this century, with great individu ality of mind. To describe his mode of thought in theology in a brief sketch, such as this necessarily not easy, for his theology more complicated than that of any other theo logian, and on many points extremely vague. In his biography, published by his son two large volumes, there
presented the picture of a man of deep religious feeling and of decided speculative and dialectical power, but at the same time of man who failed to reduce his convictions into a consistent logical whole such as could fully satisfy himself, or make a dominating and prevailing impression upon his con temporaries, because his own thought lacked clearness and
steadiness, and his knowledge concentration and thoroughness. In reading his biography, the comparison of F. D. Maurice with the German theologian Dorner has again and again
forced itself upon me. In both the same high moral and re
ligious character compelling profound respect, the same mul tiformity of learned and moral interests, the same combination
of speculative theological thought with vivid concern for practical Church life, the same restless endeavour to mediate both practically and theoretically between opposing parties and modes of thought but in both also the same incapacity for taking a clear and logically consistent position on questions of principle, the same indefiniteness in dogmatic speculation, the
? ? ? ;
a
is
a
is is
in
is, is
? 374 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1S25. [Bk. IV.
same dislike of rational historical criticism, the same shrinking from the consequences of their own ideal principles, the same
hesitancy in estimating the real factors of life ; finally, as a result of all this, the same fatality of giving offence on all sides and the same waste of power on the endless frictions of the actual world.
Maurice's father was a Unitarian minister, but his mother and three sisters abandoned the faith of the father and joined various other religious communions. This division in the household made a profound impression upon the loving heart and thoughtful mind of the boy, and early led him to the conviction that every one's faith is true in what is positively asserted by and untrue what denies, in its negations, in charges against the opinions of others when they are not sufficiently understood. But this charitable view of religious differences did not prevent his own secession to the Estab lished Church, nor even his re-baptism, by which he accord ingly declared the Unitarian faith of his father un-Christian. At Oxford he became acquainted with the leaders of the Tractarian movement, which had just commenced and ap peared as zealous convert in his pamphlet, Subscription no
Bondage, in which he sought to prove that subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles (though few years previously he had left Cambridge without taking his degree rather than sign
? no infringement of liberty, but rather help in the of the studies of University. The Tractarians believed that they had found in him a hopeful ally for their cause, but they were soon disappointed, for he quickly turned his back upon them on account of Dr. Pusey's tract on Baptism, which he considered most dangerous, although, as
he thought, contained very important doctrine which was denied by the Dissenters, and was adapted to unite all Churches. Soon after this he published his first book, The Kingdom of Christ (1838), in which he seeks to show that the English Church the true incorporation of the spiritual universal fellowship of the kingdom of Christ, because
them) pursuit
alone teaches the full truth as to baptism, the apostolical succession, Scripture and tradition, and establish
ment, whilst Quakers, Lutherans, Calvinists,
and Roman Catholics respectively hold but part of it. But the optimistic champion of Anglicanism was later on com pelled to find by bitter experience that for the dogmatist
eucharist,
Philosophers,
? ? it
is
a
it
is
a
in
it
is
a
a
a
a
;
it,
it
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
375
but a short step from the position of the defensor fidei to that
of the condemned heretic. When Maurice taught in his
Theological Essays (1853) that the Biblical phrases "eternal life" and "eternal death" do not signify states of time of indefinitely long duration in the future, but spiritual states of communion and oneness with or separation from God, that divine punishments are instruments of God's love employed for our salvation, and that the Gospel of God's love for all men, and not the fear of eternal torments in hell, constitutes the object of faith, -- it was found that these doctrines are not by any means in harmony with the Creeds of the Anglican Church, and Maurice was removed from his theological pro fessorship at King's College, London. But though thus deprived, he continued to assert his attachment to the Thirty- Nine Articles, when properly understood, that according to his interpretation of them. And when Bishop Colenso, who had been on terms of intimate friendship with Maurice, and had defended him at the time of his removal from King's College, gave offence to the orthodox by his critic ism of the Pentateuch, our unaccountable theologian put himself on the side of the same denunciators against whom Colenso had been his advocate few years before in fact, he declared to his former friend that he expected from him
the resignation of his bishopric, to which he had no claim as an unbeliever, receiving from Colenso the cutting reply that there were many who were similarly of opinion, that the author of the " Theological Essays " had no right to retain his chaplaincy at Lincoln's Inn.
plain from all Maurice's letters to his friends and con nexions that through all these paradoxes he was absolutely sincere and in earnest that the various changes through which he passed were not owing to outward considerations that his want of consistency was due to the indefiniteness of the fundamental principles of his thinking, to the disharmony existing between his heart and his intellect, between the need he felt of adhering to an authoritative ecclesiastical
communion and his strong theological individualism. To his father (Feb. 12, 1832) he explains his secession to Anglicanism from the necessity of his heart to have God, the Invisible and Unsearchable, revealed in human form as a man such as can be understood, "a man conversing with us, living amongst us," who, order thus completely to reveal God, cannot be
? ? ? in
a
;
;
It is
a
;
is,
? 376 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
less than God. The greater simplicity of the Unitarian faith he considers is of no value if it does not satisfy wants which we feel, if it does not account for facts which we know. As regards the Athanasian Creed, his explanation to a friend of the supposed difficulties in the way of its accep tation is simply this : To know God is eternal life ; God is perfect Love, the Father dwelling with the Son in one Spirit is this perfect and eternal Love, which is the basis of all things, whereupon we base our hopes for ourselves and the world. (Certainly a very wide and free interpretation of this Creed, an interpretation which may be made to include both Arianism and Sabellianism as well as Athanasianism. ) Par ticularly characteristic of Maurice's theological thought is a letter to his mother (Dec. 9, 1833), in which he endeavours to comfort her in her doubts as to the evidences of her being in Christ. The truth is that every man is in Christ, created in him, who is the Head of every man ; the difference between the believer and the unbeliever is that the latter does not perceive or acknowledge the truth, that except he were joined to Christ he could not think, breathe, live a single hour. It is the devil's lie to imagine that we are something apart from
Christ, and have a separate, independent existence. To believe that we are in Christ does not require any special re ligious experience. We have the warrant for this faith in that we cannot do one living act, or obey one of God's command ments, or pray, or hope, or love, without him ; and yet God bids us do all these things. The state of independence, the fleshly Adam state, is no state at all, it is a life of our own vain imagination. The one thing therefore is to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Lord of our own spirit, that our spirit belongs to him and not to the flesh, that Christ is in us, and that we must let him do his will in us and through us. This is a Christology which is a long way removed from ortho doxy, and is to a certain extent speculative and philosophical ; very much like Dorner's. Christ is the ideal man, or the Divine idea of Humanity, which is as a principle in the whole race, but exists also, realiter, in one eternal Person, who by the Incarnation became the historical Saviour Jesus. If humanity is thus from the first essentially associated with Christ, a
saving revelation pervades human history from the beginning ; there is no need for the reconciliation of a world alienated from God, but the work of the historical Saviour can be no
? ? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
377
other than by his word and example to reveal and bring home to the consciousness of men what had always been the fact -- their being in the eternal Christ, and thereby in God. Con sequently Maurice reconstructed in this sense the orthodox doctrine of the atonement. In his book, The Doctrine of Saerifice (1854), he teaches that Christ so far partook of sin as to identify himself in sympathy with sinners. He did not bear as a substitute the punishment of sin, but by his loving
in the miseries of sin he delivered men from their sins, by teaching them to believe in the love of the Father towards them, for with this faith in the loving God the
from God is ended, which constitutes the essence of sin. It is a heathenish view of God to suppose that the punishment of sin had to be removed by a sacrifice presented to him. The Christian view is that God by the perfect self- sacrifice of his Son, who was in his sympathy one with sinners, made known his eternal love to the sinful world, and that on that ground peace has been offered which men could not of themselves have found. By this act of love on the part of Christ the one possible method of peace and harmony in the world generally is revealed. The principle of self-
sacrifice is revealed as the truth in which God displays his inmost character and which all creatures must obey by appro priating the mind of the loving Christ. Thus Christ, the
eternal Head of mankind, becomes the Head of a new moral
world, in which no longer selfish discord reigns, but lasting
and self-sacrificing love.
These ideas tend obviously in the direction of that idealistic
philosophy of Christianity which is represented in the specu lative theology of Germany and in the writings of such men as Caird and Green in Great Britain. But Maurice even more than the kindred German theologian Dorner failed to work them out consistently and thoroughly. The cardinal con tradiction of making the eternal idea of humanity at the same
time an historical individual of an absolutely supernatural nature
participation
separation
? involved everywhere the diversion of all ideal speculative effort of thought into traditional supernaturalism. And in the case of Maurice this supernaturalism was the more pronouncedly narrow, inasmuch as he found the spiritual community of humanity, founded by the revelation of Christ, embodied not in the universal kingdom of God, or the in visible community of the children of God, but in the Church
necessarily
? ? ? 378 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
of England. 1 Accordingly, while he teaches on the one hand that the entire human race is created and has its essential nature in Christ as its ideal Head, he seems to maintain on the other hand that it is only in the Church of England that the Kingdom of Christ has attained actual existence ! This is a contradiction that a German intellect finds it hard to comprehend, or can only explain by supposing that the strong national feeling of the Englishman had got the better of the intellect of the theologian.
The sources of the characteristic points of Maurice's
profession, had, by his own independent study of the Bible, arrived at the conviction that the orthodox representation of the Gospel did not properly represent its real and scriptural nature. 2 For the Gospel announces the forgiveness of sins not as a reward of faith any more than as a reward of works, but as the free unconditional gift of God, which was bestowed on mankind once for all in their representative Head, Christ, so that every man may appropriate Yet forgiveness
not itself salvation, but only the means of and salvation itself not a future good, but spiritual fellowship with God in the sanctification of the character by means of his holy love. The very purpose for which God offers his free unmerited love, as forgiving mercy to sinners, that they may thereby be encouraged and impelled to love him in return, and to grow themselves into the image of his holy love. Glad devotion to God, loving dependence on the Creator, the perfect condition of the creature, in which all the faculties
This, the fundamental thought of his book, The Kingdom of Christ,
stated in strong and emphatic language in letter of July 12, 1834 (Life,
p. 166).
The most interesting of Erskine's writings, which has been followed
the above account of his system, The Unconditional Freeness of the Gospel (1828); to must be added The Brazen Serpent, or Life coming through Death (1831) The Doctrine Election, and its Connection with the General Theory Christianity (1837) his first work, Remarks on the Internal Evidence for the Truth Revealed Religion (1820), of less importance.
are to be found in the idealistic philosophy of
teaching
Coleridge (whose metaphysical ideas, however, acquire in Maurice's system a Platonic modification), and in the doc trines of the Scottish theologians, Thomas Ersk1ne, of Linlathen, and John McLeod Campbell, at whom we must take a brief glance. The first of these men, an advocate by
? ? ? of
a
is
of
it
is
;
; of
is
21
in i- is
is
a
is is
is
it ;
it.
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
379
of the soul are kept in their proper order by that ruling principle. The Fall of man consisted in the rise of the spirit of independence, in that " each man became an independent individual, loving and desiring and approving things accord ing as they affected himself, without regard to the will of God or the sympathies of the universal family. " And this sin of man was also his misery, his hell. The punishment of sin did not consist in external evils, which might be re moved by arbitrary acts, but it consisted in the very fact that the man himself had revolted from saving fellowship with God, and had
the love of him for the love of self and the world. " Restoration to a condition of salvation cannot therefore be effected otherwise than by the restoration
of the love of God to its place as the paramount principle in the heart, resulting in the due subordination of self and the creature under it. Any remedy which falls below this re storation falls below man's need. No pardon which leaves this undone is of any value to him. He needs no infliction from without to make him miserable ; and it is not the re moval of any outward infliction that can give him happiness. He must know that God is better than happiness, and that sin is worse than sorrow. The love of God, not the desire of happiness, is the true keystone of the arch. " The means which God has provided for the attainment of this blessing is the Gospel. It shows us, in the appearance of Christ, the gracious character of God in relation to his rebellious creatures, in order thereby to draw back our hearts to him, which had been estranged through hatred, fear, or
indifference, and thus to restore love to God and to the whole divine human family to its true place in the heart. It is particularly the sufferings of Christ in which the holy love of God has been revealed ; but not in the sense that God had to be reconciled, that his love had to be purchased, by the sacrifice of his Son ; on the contrary, his holy love itself was the source of the mission and the self-sacrifice of Christ. Christ, by his patient endurance of all the misery that had
from the sin of the world, overcame sin itself by love and glorified God by his obedience. His glorifying of the Father, by obediently enduring suffering from love of his sinful brethren, was both the expiation and the putting away of sin ; and because it was the Head of mankind who accomplished this as representing all men, the sin of the entire race is once
sprung
exchanged
? ? ? ? 380 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
for all forgiven in Christ ; the resurrection of Christ was the seal of this forgiveness. The message of this forgiveness is proclaimed to all the world as the free gift of God offered for its acceptance, but only those who actually accept it are really justified and made part of the Church of Christ. The fear lest the Gospel of free, unconditional mercy should pro duce a false peace in a world dead in sins, and expose the
moral interests of Christianity to the dangers of antinomian- ism, rests, as Erskine is continually reiterating, upon a mis conception. For the pardon, which is the free gift of God in Christ, is of advantage to men only as they receive and with Christ himself, the revelation of the holy, loving character of God, into their hearts and thereby the principle of holy, self-sacrificing love made the dominant power and the root of personal holiness and salvation. Pardon therefore, really received only when evinces itself as the effective means of sanctification and accordingly of salvation.
not itself salvation, for salvation cannot be given to men
? without conditions consists in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit heaven holiness, and the forgiveness of sins blessing only in so far as produces holiness.
Holiness the ultimate object God has view with us, and the Gospel message serves only as means to this end.
These ideas of Erskine's were further worked out and established by his friend, the theologian, McLeod Camp bell, in his very suggestive book, The Nature the Atone
ment, and its Relation to Remission of Sins and Eternal Life (1856, 5th ed. , 1878). As believing Biblical theologian, Campbell does not deny that Christ presented an expiatory sacrifice for us, but he maintains that when this sacrifice not interpreted in accordance with preconceived opinions, but looked at as and as represented in the Scriptures, cannot be regarded as the suffering of the punishment due to man's sin his stead, but moral and spiritual meaning must be put upon it. Christ effected our salvation by becoming the mediator between God and man, and representing both -- God with man and man with God. This twofold relation of the atonement worked out with reference to its retrospective and its prospective action. In the first respect, Christ's work was to reveal the Father in humanity and for humanity, to be the witness of God's holy love, a love which hates sin and seeks to save the sinner by
gratuitously
? ? is
a
J. of
in
is it ;
is it
it
it
is,
a
is
;
it is
a
in it
it
is
it, is,
is is a
;
It is
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 381
him. Christ felt the pain on account of sin that filled the holy heart of God, and in a perfect, vicarious contrition acknowledged the righteousness of the divine condemnation of sin, as the representative of mankind before God. When he identified himself with his brethren in the flesh by his compassionate sympathy, he endured the deepest pangs, such as only the Holy One could feel, on account of the sins of men, both as guilt before God and as the source of human misery. This pain on account of sin, and this perfect repentance of offered to God in the name of man kind, constituted the true atonement for the sins of mankind,
sacrifice well-pleasing to God, such as no execution of punishment could have supplied. With this complete con demnation of the sinful past of mankind by its representative
Head, full satisfaction was offered to the holy will of God.
But this moral atonement of Christ had at the same time
prospective significance. must be conceived as effecting salvation, or eternal life, not merely as the indirect result of Christ's work, but as inwardly connected with as, in fact, already included in that work. This would not be the case on the supposition of an imputation of vicarious punitive suffering to sinners, which leaves their moral condition in relation to God unchanged, and makes salvation only a future state of happiness. The atonement must therefore be con ceived thus Christ in his person represents humanity as
converting
? to God, and animated solely by love to Him, and by means of his identification with his brethren Christ communicated his righteousness as new life to them. He thereby not only revealed the Divine Fatherhood to men,
but he also discovered the treasure of the Divine image in man, which had until then been veiled under their sin. The
holy, well-pleasing
putation.
of Christ was the revelation of the latent
righteousness
capacity in man for righteousness, which he possessed by virtue of the indwelling Son of God. Christ must not be conceived as so standing apart from humanity that his righteousness could not avail for otherwise than by im
He as the second Adam, the Head of humanity, so truly one with that his righteousness counts the sight of God as the righteousness of mankind generally, and that
can pass from Christ to all men. Christ himself had in his human consciousness the witness to the ability of man kind to be filled with the love of God. In his love to his
? ? it
a
is, it
in
it,
it
a
:
It
it,
? 382 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
brethren lay the prophetic hope that they also would open their hearts to the love of God, from which they had for a time been estranged. Accordingly, the atoning work of Christ did not consist in the deliverance of men from future punishment and the obtaining of future happiness ; but in
to them his knowledge and love of the Father, and making them thereby children of God, in the possession of eternal life and a righteousness well- pleasing to God. Everything that the Son accomplished, and that the Father accepted, had the prospective intention of being reproduced in us ; both his pain on account of sin, and his confiding and obedient love to the Father, were intended to be appropriated by us. Nothing of a mere external nature
that God could do with us or could give to us, which is not involved in the relation of our souls to God and in the re lation of our own hearts answering to his heart, can possibly
be our salvation.
This is manifestly the same reconstruction of the Christian
doctrine of salvation which was effected by Kant and Schleier- macher in Germany, whereby it is converted from forensic externality into ethical inwardness and a truth of direct religious experience. Erskine and Campbell appear, however, to have reached their convictions in entire independence of German theology, by their own absorbing study of the Bible ; and I regard their ideas as the best contribution to dogmatics which British theology has produced in the present century.
That the Scottish Church rejected and thrust out from its
midst, in the person of Campbell, this line of theological thought, was the heaviest blow that it could inflict upon itself;
thereby it arrested its healthy development for more than half a century. For it is only just now that Scotch theo
logians begin to start once more from Campbell, though, it must be confessed, with great timidity, as may be seen from the book of the Glasgow theologian, Alexander Bruce,
The Humiliation of Christ in its Physical, Ethical, and
Soteriological Aspects (1876). It is here taught (following rather Hofmann, of Erlangen, than Campbell) that the Son of God entered into the condition of humanity, as it lay under the wrath of God, in such a way that he felt in himself the effects of that wrath, though he was not himself in his per sonal relation to God the object of it. The value of the sacrifice of Christ, Bruce holds, was equal to his Divine
communicating
? ? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 383
dignity multiplied by his perfect obedience, multiplied by his boundless love, multiplied by his sufferings, which reached the utmost limits of what a sinless body could endure. As God took all this into account, and was thereby satisfied, we also must take it all into consideration, in order to say " Amen " to the Divine view of the sacrifice of Christ. This is an attempt to mediate between the old and the new, which does not approach in clearness of principle the thought of Erskine and
Campbell, although we must acknowledge that it is in the same direction which they took.
Though condemned in the land of their birth, the ideas of Erskine and Campbell were received in the soil of the
Liberal theology of England. The religious profundity of the Scotchmen admirably supplemented the thought of the Englishmen, which is characterised more by a practical breadth than religious and speculative depth. It is to them that Maurice's theology owes its best features. And from Maurice again Charles Kingsley received the dominant
direction of his theology, which gave fitting expression to the feelings of his heart in its warm sympathy for everything truly human, and supplied the theoretical rallying-point for his philanthropic aims. In the history of the Christian- socialist movements of the century, the names of Maurice and Kingsley occupy a foremost place. They showed by their deeds what was the fundamental thought of their theology -- that Christianity is the leaven which is destined to regenerate and to hallow the life of human society. Side by side with them stands the great preacher Freder1Ck W. Robertson, whom death too soon removed, who was equal to them in nobility of character and their superior in the wealth and depth of his mind. The biography of this man, so admirably executed by Stopford A. Brooke, reads like the life of a saint, but of a Protestant and modern saint, who does not escape out of the world, but, as a soldier of God, fights the great fight with all ungodliness, with the sins of the upper and the lower classes, with the unreality and falsehood of even religious parties, who at the same time keeps his own soul unspotted from the world, and who is compelled often and deeply to drain the bitter cup of suffering, which no
soldier of God can escape in this world of wickedness and folly. There is little in homiletical literature to compare
with the four series of Robertson's sermons, in
? respect
? ? ? 384 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1 825. [Bk.
wholly devoid of truth, there is reason to object to it,s that a
rule of certainty which is based neither on the reason nor on
proofs from fact, but on the simple power of the will to hold
something to be true, possesses no value, and may easily be
come as fruitful a source of superstition as of faith. In fact,
the subjective character of this purely emotional certainty
is acknowledged by Newman himself in the very remarkable
"
words :
The from in the matter of argument probability,
religion, became an argument from personality, which, in fact, is one form of the argument from authority. " It will be diffi cult to avoid this conclusion, if it is once granted that religious certainty rests merely upon emotional motives without rational
grounds ; in that case it of course, only subjective cer
See ante,
Apologia,
See Tulloch, in the Edinburgh Review, Oct. , 1870, and his Movements
Religious Thought,
103.
317. 19.
In
? matism, and has expounded it in the two books, An Essay on the Development ofChristian Doctrine (1845), and An Essay
in Aid of a Grammar of Assent (1870). In the latter he works out a principle which he had learnt from Keble,2 namely, that religious conviction does not rest on intellectual but emotional grounds, which cannot be theoretically proved,
? ? 821
p. p. p.
of
is,
a
? 364 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
tainty that cannot rest upon itself, but to render it secure stands in need of the support of the greatest possible number of other subjects, that of external authority.
Newman's work on the Development Christian Doctrine takes as its starting-point the incontestable principle, that Christianity, like every historical institution, has passed through process of development, of growth, in doctrine and custom, and was not given to the world at the beginning in perfect form. He offers number of instances going to show that orthodox Protestantism under delusion, when
sup poses that all its doctrines and practices are taught in Scrip
ture and are prescribed therein, or are to be directly deduced therefrom. impossible to remain in the mere letter of Scripture, because the necessities of interpretation, for in stance, of such a phrase as " the Word became flesh," lead at once to a series of further questions. Other questions, such as the Canon of Scripture, its inspiration and authority, can not be answered from Scripture itself, because the Apostles had not then given any decision on them. As within the Biblical religion itself there " development through the Prophets to Jesus, so, again, in the apostolic teaching no historical point can be fixed at which the growth of doctrine ceased, and the rule of faith was once for all settled. " Finally, in Scripture itself the necessity of such a progressive develop ment distinctly indicated, for instance, the parables of the Leaven and the Mustard Seed. If in all this the author displays undoubtedly degree of sound historical sense, the reader immediately surprised by a very unhistorical and
? of the true principle! In order to guide the process of the development of Christianity, to distinguish correct developments from false, and to sanction them, there -- required an infallible authority outside the
genuinely dogmatic application
development namely, the Church. If Christianity as a whole, revelation, the results of its development must share the guarantee of its credentials. Revealed religion distin guished from Natural by the very fact that substitutes the voice of Law-giver --an objective authority, Apostle, Pope, or Church --for the voice of conscience. In Protestantism this authority the Bible but as can be proved that this authority insufficient, we must conclude that this required living and present source of revelation can only be the infal lible arbiter of all true doctrines -- the Church. Nor
per
? ? is
is,
it
is
is
a
it
a a
is
is
it
is
in
is
It is
a ;a
is,
is a
is
a
a
of
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 365
sonal judgment precluded by this infallible authority, but is only limited to its proper range and preserved from error. --We must allow that this defence (following in the footsteps of the German Catholic Theologian Mohler) of the principle of Catho
lic tradition and authority is conducted very cleverly. It rests,
all the same, upon a great fallacy. The fact is overlooked
that the alleged infallible authority is itself a product of the f general development, and that it participates in its changes,
and is therefore subject, like every historical phenomenon, to the law of relativity. Moreover, the false traditional idea of development is throughout taken for granted -- namely, that development consists solely in positive growth, in an extension and more complete definition of older truth ; we hear nothing of the great fact, that development has also a negative aspect, that new truth does not come merely as an addition to the old, but often abrogates the old, so that in reality there is accom plished in it the continuous criticism of mind in the process of its development. We readily grant that this process does not go on without obedience to an inner law of rationality ; but precisely because reason is realised in the process of historic development, it does not require a special infallible institution to guide which can only become an impediment to the living spirit.
In the same year in which Newman set on foot the reac tionary High Church movement, Thomas Arnold, the Head Master at Rugby, published his pamphlet on The Principles\l of Church Reform, which, though provoked at first storm of indignation on all sides, presented in its fundamental thoughts the ferment of a new progressive movement in the English Church in the next decades. Arnold had, like New man, been a pupil of Whately's at Oxford, and a friend of Keble's. But while in the case of Newman the influence of
the devout friend soon overcame the cool intellectual acute-
ness of the tutor, with Arnold was the reverse.
out his life Arnold continued to combine profoundly earnest piety with clearness of intellect, manly love of truth, and a restless desire for practical work indeed, not easy to say which of these aspects of the noble man's character was most marked. Arnold was at the beginning of the thirties not less alarmed than Newman and his Oxford friends at the political troubles and threatening tempest which appeared to
<<.
? Through
? ? _?
it ;
a
a is
it
it
a
it,
? 366 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
be gathering thick over the Church ; but while they sought salvation by the abandonment of the Reformation in a reform of dogma and the constitution and ritual of the Church, by which its boundaries would be narrowed and more sharply separated from the pulsating life of the nation, he demanded a reform in the opposite direction. In order to preserve to the nation the blessings of the State Church, he advocated the opening of its doors to the Dissenters, and the widening of its boundaries, so that all Englishmen who were, and wished to be Christians, should find a place in As the condition of membership, nothing more than an acceptance of the essential doctrines of the Christian faith, common to all parties both within and outside the Established Church, was to be required, differences in doctrine, constitution, and ritual being considered minor matters and permissible. The essential thing in Chris tianity practical godliness, based on the revelation of God in Scripture, and especially the person of Jesus, and mani festing itself in the moral purification and sanctification of personal and social life. the function of Church and
State equally, though from different point of view, to be in struments and organs of this ideal. There may not, therefore, be any separation between them, or jealousy and quarrel the State needs for its moral ends the religion of the Gospel, as the Church can exercise its educating influence over the nation only within the constituted forms and regulations of the Chris tian State. -- These are the main principles of Arnold's pam phlet on Church Reform, principles which have as their basis, not only an ideal view of the nature and ends of the State, but also broad view of the nature of Christianity a stand point exactly the same as that represented by Rothe his
? der Kirche and his Ethik} But this combination of Christian idealism and large-hearted humanity was then so new in England, that Arnold's proposed reforms were obnoxi ous to all parties alike to the High-churchmen they breathed heresy and revolution, and the Liberals considered them too conservative and narrow.
The storm of opposition from all sides did not shake Arnold's conviction of the truth and wisdom of his ideas. The force of his personal character the success of his work
Though Arnold differed from Rothe as to the source of the corruption of the true idea of the Church. See Arnold's Letter to Bunsen, Jan. 27, 1838.
Anfdngc
? ? 1
;
:
in
;
a
is
;
a It is
in
it.
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 367
in the school at Rugby, by which he initiated a reformation
in the entire system of public schools in England ; his power- . '/ ful sermons, in which he proclaimed the eternal truths of the Gospel with profound earnestness in simple undogmatic lan
and with constant reference to the various depart ments of moral life ; lastly, his work as a scholar in the field of classical literature and Roman history --all this combined in compelling his opponents even to respect the assailed and censured man, so that his sudden death (1842) was lamented on all sides as a national calamity.
It is Thomas Arnold, if any one, who must be regarded as the pioneer of free theology in England. It is true he wrote no considerable theological work--his vocation led him into the field of scholarship and history : and his views with regard to the interpretation of the Bible were neither quite new, nor do they meet completely the present require ments of historical criticism. But Arnold was the first to show to his countrymen the possibility and to make the demand, that the Bible should be read with honest human eyes without the spectacles of orthodox dogmatic presupposi tions, and that it can at the same time be revered with Christian piety and made truly productive in moral life. He was the first who dared to leave on one side the traditional phraseology of the High-Churchmen and the Evangelicals, and to look upon Christianity, not as a sacred treasure of the Churches and sects, but as a Divine beneficent power for every believer ; not as a dead heritage from the past, but as a living spiritual power for the moral advancement of indi viduals and nations in the present. If the universality of his interests and occupations was a hindrance to strictly scientific theological inquiry, it was really very favourable to his true
guage,
? mission : he showed how classical and general historical studies may be pursued in the light of the moral ideas of Christianity, and how, on the other hand, a free and clear way of looking at things may be obtained by means of wide historical knowledge, and then applied to the interpretation of the Bible and the solution of current ecclesiastical
ques tions. Thus he began to pull down the wall of separation
which had cut off the religious life of his fellow-countrymen,
with their sects and churches and rigid theological formulas
and usages, from the general life and pursuits of the nation.
It is also clear as day, that if longer life had been granted r
? ? ? 368 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [BIt IV.
to him, the result of the further prosecution of his historical studies, which had been made, in his last year, part of his vocation by his appointment to the chair of Modern History at Oxford, would have been further insight and courage to apply his historical and critical principles to the Bible. At all events, his work was subsequently further prosecuted in this direction by his friends and pupils.
Arnold was pre-eminently an independent character, both in his scientific and his political principles. For this reason he was prepared to learn from men of different schools.
him, and he confesses that he found in him what he had never
Samuel Taylor Coleridge exercised great influence upon
been able to find in any other English theologian : "
is at once rich and vigorous, and comprehensive and critical ; while the >>;0o? is so pure and so lively all the while. "1 From
Coleridge
His mind
? Arnold adopted the distinction between the reason and the understanding, and the determination of the relation of reason to faith as of two modes of perceiving religious truth, which are not antagonistic but supplementary. Of Coleridge's Letters on Inspiration? which he saw in manuscript, he expressed the opinion, 3 that they were " well fitted to break ground in the approaches to that momentous question which involves in it so great a shock to existing notions, . . . but which will end, in spite of the fears and clamours of the weak and bigoted, in the higher exalting and more sure establishing of Christian truth. " His friend ship with Bunsen, too, whose acquaintance he made in Rome in 1827, had an important influence on Arnold's mind ; it was through this scholar particularly that he kept himself in close relations with German literature, though principally only with its historical and Biblical exegetical works, but not with
German philosophy or systematic theology ; of Schleier- macher he read only his critical essay on 1 Timothy, the results of which appeared to him too bold.
The most direct and lasting influence on the mental development of Arnold was that of Whately, who had been in Oxford his tutor and adviser, and with whom, as Arch bishop of Dublin, he kept up a close friendship and constant
1 Letter No. 209, to Mr. Justice Coleridge, Sept. 25, 1839. 2 See ante, p. 311.
3 Letter No. 94, to Mr. Justice Coleridge, Jan. 24, 1835.
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 369
intercourse. Whately was a man of clear intellect, humour, and benevolent heart, but not a learned theologian. His best known book is his Logic, constructed upon Aris totelian principles, which was once largely used in English
and universities. He carried his sound common sense into theological questions also, and found that not a few orthodox dogmas have no foundation in the Scriptures. Thus the orthodox doctrine of election is not in harmony with Paul's teaching, for in the latter what is dealt with is not the unconditional predestination of individuals to salva tion or destruction, but only the appointment of the whole Church to salvation in Christ, which is elected from the rest of the Heathen, as previously the people of Israel had been elected from the other nations. The final destiny of indi viduals depends solely on whether they personally do or do not make use of the advantages offered to them, by partici
colleges
faith, too, must not be understood of an imputation of the merits of Christ, but of the forgiveness
of sins on the fulfilment of the moral conditions. The death of Christ as a sacrifice must be received on the authority of
but it cannot be shown to be necessary. It is the same with the Deity of Christ : it must be believed on the
of Christ's own declarations in the Gospels, but interpreted essentially in the sense of Christ being the perfect moral example. The object of Christ's coming was the foundation of the kingdom of God as a moral common wealth. The claim of an apostolical episcopal succession, with power to impart the Holy Spirit, cannot be proved from Scripture, and is wrecked on the historical improbability of a chain of tradition being kept unbroken through eighteen cen turies; the true succession is holding fast to apostolic principles, that the moral character of Christianity. This violated by the Tractarian doctrine of the sacraments, which substi tutes the opus operatum for the heart. The rigorous obser vance of the Sabbath, too, not in harmony with the New Testament, the law of the Sabbath having been abrogated for Christians with the rest of the Mosaic legislation Sunday voluntary institution of the Church for the good of men. Generally, the Bible does not claim to be a law book for the regulation of faith and practice, but contains system of practical truths, motives, and principles in popular
Scripture,
ground
G. T.
happy
? pation justification by
in the revelation of the Church. The doctrine of
? ? is a
it
Ba is B
a;
is
is,
? 370 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
form. 1 The unwearied diligence with which Whately devoted himself to his ecclesiastical duties, to promoting- the education of the lower classes, and unostentatiously assisting the poor, both Protestant and Catholic, of his diocese in Ireland, reflects favourably on his practical and rational theology, which was not either in philosophy or in history and criticism pro found. In the latter respect there is much affinity between it and the Rationalistic (Kantian) supernaturalism, as it was represented in Germany in the first decades of the century by not a few theologians deserving of all respect.
As contemporaries and men of a kindred spirit with Arnold and Whately, we may mention the Oxford theolo gians Hampden and Milman, and the Cambridge theologians Thirlwall and Julius Hare. The name of Hampden is associated with an episode of considerable moment in the Tractarian movement. When he was nominated in 1836 to the Regius Professorship of Divinity at Oxford, the dominant party there, with Newman and Pusey at its head, got up a protest against his appointment, and charged the learned
? theologian with heresy on the ground of his Bampton Lec tures of the year 1832, on The Scholastic Philosophy in its
\
unimpugned.
which had till then remained In his lectures he had shown how orthodox theology, as having risen in its Patristic and Scholastic form under the influence of the philosophy in vogue at the time, is not identical with the doctrine of the Scriptures, but is in many respects an adulterated reflex of the simple Christian
belief. This indisputably correct account of the origin of
orthodox dogmas gave naturally great offence to High- churchmen, whose fundamental principle was the identifica
tion of Christianity with Scholastic theology. Pusey 2 main tained that this distinction between uncertain Scholastic doc trines and certain facts of Scripture was but the beginning of scepticism and rationalism, as the example of Semler had shown. The defence of Christianity then in vogue, which
threw the stress entirely upon the practical side of our religion, he declared tended directly to unbelief, since every
1 These are the leading principles of Whately's theological works, Essays on the Difficulties in the Writings of St. Paul (1828), The Kingdom of Christ
(1841).
2 Hampden's Past and Present Statements.
relation to Christian
Theology,
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 37 1
thing that could not be brought under the rubric of practical applicability, would be forgotten, and in the end denied. Hampden himself, in his inaugural lecture, professed his full belief in all the doctrines of the orthodox faith in a way not
easy, it must be confessed, to reconcile with the expositions of his Bampton Lectures. Consistency seems rather to have been on the side of his assailants. But the manner of their attack upon him, their denunciation of detached propositions torn from their context, in order to convict him of heresy, aroused the fierce indignation not only of Whately and Arnold, but of wider circles, in which the reaction against the principles of the Oxford party began from this time to make itself felt. A pamphlet published at that time gives the following not complimentary picture of higher education at Oxford. In all higher branches of knowledge the aim is to put down free opinions. The endeavour is to give a safe direction to young minds, and to confine their movements within the narrowest limits possible. No inquiry which
might possibly lead to other results than those of the estab lished formularies is permitted. It is not easy to form any idea of the extent of moral terrorism with which this in tellectual tyranny is practised, with what jealousy the words, behaviour, reading of those is watched, who are under the suspicion of having diverged from the majority. This system is commended in and outside of Oxford as a thoroughly practical and wholesome method of training devoted servants of the Church, who shall be free from all doubt. But the evil fruits of it are a terrible distortion of sound intellect, widespread ignorance and hypocrisy. "The student who comes at every step upon the warning, Not too deep! " is discouraged and takes refuge in deliberate ignorance. He persuades himself that knowledge at best is a dangerous acquirement in his career. In the consciousness of his own inability to defend rationally a position he has taken, he regards all speculations that are foreign to his mode of thought with vague fear. The consequence is that theology is studied in Oxford to no purpose, however much is said about because studied apart from the simple object of discovering the truth, and merely with the object of finding proofs in support of dogmas which dispense with all further inquiry. Such was the view taken by an Englishman of the Oxford of those years. The less reason we have to
? ? ? it,
it is
? 372 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
doubt the truth of the picture, the more cheering is it to observe how great progress has been made there in the course of the last half century.
Even in those years bright exceptions were not wanting. Milman was connected with Whately, Arnold, and Hampden,
belonging like them to the pre-Puseyite generation. His History of the Jews, which appeared in 1829 (2nd ed. rewritten
1863), treated the narratives of the Old Testament in the same way as the historical traditions of any other ancient people, took up a critical attitude towards the chronological data of the Bible, explained not a few narratives as oriental poetry and allegory, and sought generally by its graphic style, catching the national and antique character of early
Hebrew times, to deliver Biblical history from the bonds of traditional sanctity, and bring it nearer to the mind and heart of the present day. It is the same freer attitude towards the
Bible which is seen in Arnold's method of interpretation, but Milman was as far as Arnold from holding the principles of scientific criticism now followed by Wellhausen or Robertson
Smith. He was rather an imaginative narrator than an acute investigator of history. Nevertheless, by his History of the Jews, and his later History of Latin Christianity,
Milman contributed his share towards making in the bulwarks of traditionalism breaches through which a freer spirit might enter when the time arrived.
The same is true of the Cambridge theologians Thirlwall and Julius Hare, who by their joint translation of Niebuhr's History of Rome, and by theological works, did good service
in spreading the knowledge of German historical science amongst their countrymen. Thirlwall published in 1825 a translation of Schleiermacher's book on the Gospel of Luke, with an introduction of some length, in which he accepted and defended the principles of Schleiermacher's Biblical criticism --a bold thing to do in those days, when the strict doctrine of inspiration was still in full force, and German theology was but little known in England, and on that very account was the more summarily condemned as heretical ! Next to Coleridge, whose way of thinking on philosophy he
? Hare was above all his English contempor aries the student best acquainted with German theological
science. As a youth he had felt on the Wartburg the breath of Luther's spirit, and subsequently wrote a thoroughly learned
adopted, Julius
? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
373
Vindication of the German Reformer, in reply to the charges of the historian Hallam and the Scottish philosopher Sir William Hamilton, and the Puseyites. Against the latter he wrote the important polemical essay, The Contest with Rome, 1842, which had the greater influence as Hare's Christian devotedness had been placed beyond doubt by his earnest and thoughtful sermons. Speaking generally, it appears that Hare made a deeper impression on his contemporaries by his noble and amiable character than by his writings, which were comparatively few, and of which the best known is his volume of sermons, The Mission of the Comforter, dedicated to the memory of Coleridge, 1846, in which he maintained the principle of development of Christian doctrine. Amongst his closest friends were Thomas Arnold and Frederick Maurice. Maurice was Hare's pupil at Cambridge, and later his brother-in-law, and to this intimate relation owed the most powerful stimulus in his mental development.
Freder1ck Den1son Maur1Ce was one of the most impor tant English theologians of this century, with great individu ality of mind. To describe his mode of thought in theology in a brief sketch, such as this necessarily not easy, for his theology more complicated than that of any other theo logian, and on many points extremely vague. In his biography, published by his son two large volumes, there
presented the picture of a man of deep religious feeling and of decided speculative and dialectical power, but at the same time of man who failed to reduce his convictions into a consistent logical whole such as could fully satisfy himself, or make a dominating and prevailing impression upon his con temporaries, because his own thought lacked clearness and
steadiness, and his knowledge concentration and thoroughness. In reading his biography, the comparison of F. D. Maurice with the German theologian Dorner has again and again
forced itself upon me. In both the same high moral and re
ligious character compelling profound respect, the same mul tiformity of learned and moral interests, the same combination
of speculative theological thought with vivid concern for practical Church life, the same restless endeavour to mediate both practically and theoretically between opposing parties and modes of thought but in both also the same incapacity for taking a clear and logically consistent position on questions of principle, the same indefiniteness in dogmatic speculation, the
? ? ? ;
a
is
a
is is
in
is, is
? 374 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1S25. [Bk. IV.
same dislike of rational historical criticism, the same shrinking from the consequences of their own ideal principles, the same
hesitancy in estimating the real factors of life ; finally, as a result of all this, the same fatality of giving offence on all sides and the same waste of power on the endless frictions of the actual world.
Maurice's father was a Unitarian minister, but his mother and three sisters abandoned the faith of the father and joined various other religious communions. This division in the household made a profound impression upon the loving heart and thoughtful mind of the boy, and early led him to the conviction that every one's faith is true in what is positively asserted by and untrue what denies, in its negations, in charges against the opinions of others when they are not sufficiently understood. But this charitable view of religious differences did not prevent his own secession to the Estab lished Church, nor even his re-baptism, by which he accord ingly declared the Unitarian faith of his father un-Christian. At Oxford he became acquainted with the leaders of the Tractarian movement, which had just commenced and ap peared as zealous convert in his pamphlet, Subscription no
Bondage, in which he sought to prove that subscription to the Thirty-Nine Articles (though few years previously he had left Cambridge without taking his degree rather than sign
? no infringement of liberty, but rather help in the of the studies of University. The Tractarians believed that they had found in him a hopeful ally for their cause, but they were soon disappointed, for he quickly turned his back upon them on account of Dr. Pusey's tract on Baptism, which he considered most dangerous, although, as
he thought, contained very important doctrine which was denied by the Dissenters, and was adapted to unite all Churches. Soon after this he published his first book, The Kingdom of Christ (1838), in which he seeks to show that the English Church the true incorporation of the spiritual universal fellowship of the kingdom of Christ, because
them) pursuit
alone teaches the full truth as to baptism, the apostolical succession, Scripture and tradition, and establish
ment, whilst Quakers, Lutherans, Calvinists,
and Roman Catholics respectively hold but part of it. But the optimistic champion of Anglicanism was later on com pelled to find by bitter experience that for the dogmatist
eucharist,
Philosophers,
? ? it
is
a
it
is
a
in
it
is
a
a
a
a
;
it,
it
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
375
but a short step from the position of the defensor fidei to that
of the condemned heretic. When Maurice taught in his
Theological Essays (1853) that the Biblical phrases "eternal life" and "eternal death" do not signify states of time of indefinitely long duration in the future, but spiritual states of communion and oneness with or separation from God, that divine punishments are instruments of God's love employed for our salvation, and that the Gospel of God's love for all men, and not the fear of eternal torments in hell, constitutes the object of faith, -- it was found that these doctrines are not by any means in harmony with the Creeds of the Anglican Church, and Maurice was removed from his theological pro fessorship at King's College, London. But though thus deprived, he continued to assert his attachment to the Thirty- Nine Articles, when properly understood, that according to his interpretation of them. And when Bishop Colenso, who had been on terms of intimate friendship with Maurice, and had defended him at the time of his removal from King's College, gave offence to the orthodox by his critic ism of the Pentateuch, our unaccountable theologian put himself on the side of the same denunciators against whom Colenso had been his advocate few years before in fact, he declared to his former friend that he expected from him
the resignation of his bishopric, to which he had no claim as an unbeliever, receiving from Colenso the cutting reply that there were many who were similarly of opinion, that the author of the " Theological Essays " had no right to retain his chaplaincy at Lincoln's Inn.
plain from all Maurice's letters to his friends and con nexions that through all these paradoxes he was absolutely sincere and in earnest that the various changes through which he passed were not owing to outward considerations that his want of consistency was due to the indefiniteness of the fundamental principles of his thinking, to the disharmony existing between his heart and his intellect, between the need he felt of adhering to an authoritative ecclesiastical
communion and his strong theological individualism. To his father (Feb. 12, 1832) he explains his secession to Anglicanism from the necessity of his heart to have God, the Invisible and Unsearchable, revealed in human form as a man such as can be understood, "a man conversing with us, living amongst us," who, order thus completely to reveal God, cannot be
? ? ? in
a
;
;
It is
a
;
is,
? 376 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
less than God. The greater simplicity of the Unitarian faith he considers is of no value if it does not satisfy wants which we feel, if it does not account for facts which we know. As regards the Athanasian Creed, his explanation to a friend of the supposed difficulties in the way of its accep tation is simply this : To know God is eternal life ; God is perfect Love, the Father dwelling with the Son in one Spirit is this perfect and eternal Love, which is the basis of all things, whereupon we base our hopes for ourselves and the world. (Certainly a very wide and free interpretation of this Creed, an interpretation which may be made to include both Arianism and Sabellianism as well as Athanasianism. ) Par ticularly characteristic of Maurice's theological thought is a letter to his mother (Dec. 9, 1833), in which he endeavours to comfort her in her doubts as to the evidences of her being in Christ. The truth is that every man is in Christ, created in him, who is the Head of every man ; the difference between the believer and the unbeliever is that the latter does not perceive or acknowledge the truth, that except he were joined to Christ he could not think, breathe, live a single hour. It is the devil's lie to imagine that we are something apart from
Christ, and have a separate, independent existence. To believe that we are in Christ does not require any special re ligious experience. We have the warrant for this faith in that we cannot do one living act, or obey one of God's command ments, or pray, or hope, or love, without him ; and yet God bids us do all these things. The state of independence, the fleshly Adam state, is no state at all, it is a life of our own vain imagination. The one thing therefore is to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Lord of our own spirit, that our spirit belongs to him and not to the flesh, that Christ is in us, and that we must let him do his will in us and through us. This is a Christology which is a long way removed from ortho doxy, and is to a certain extent speculative and philosophical ; very much like Dorner's. Christ is the ideal man, or the Divine idea of Humanity, which is as a principle in the whole race, but exists also, realiter, in one eternal Person, who by the Incarnation became the historical Saviour Jesus. If humanity is thus from the first essentially associated with Christ, a
saving revelation pervades human history from the beginning ; there is no need for the reconciliation of a world alienated from God, but the work of the historical Saviour can be no
? ? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
377
other than by his word and example to reveal and bring home to the consciousness of men what had always been the fact -- their being in the eternal Christ, and thereby in God. Con sequently Maurice reconstructed in this sense the orthodox doctrine of the atonement. In his book, The Doctrine of Saerifice (1854), he teaches that Christ so far partook of sin as to identify himself in sympathy with sinners. He did not bear as a substitute the punishment of sin, but by his loving
in the miseries of sin he delivered men from their sins, by teaching them to believe in the love of the Father towards them, for with this faith in the loving God the
from God is ended, which constitutes the essence of sin. It is a heathenish view of God to suppose that the punishment of sin had to be removed by a sacrifice presented to him. The Christian view is that God by the perfect self- sacrifice of his Son, who was in his sympathy one with sinners, made known his eternal love to the sinful world, and that on that ground peace has been offered which men could not of themselves have found. By this act of love on the part of Christ the one possible method of peace and harmony in the world generally is revealed. The principle of self-
sacrifice is revealed as the truth in which God displays his inmost character and which all creatures must obey by appro priating the mind of the loving Christ. Thus Christ, the
eternal Head of mankind, becomes the Head of a new moral
world, in which no longer selfish discord reigns, but lasting
and self-sacrificing love.
These ideas tend obviously in the direction of that idealistic
philosophy of Christianity which is represented in the specu lative theology of Germany and in the writings of such men as Caird and Green in Great Britain. But Maurice even more than the kindred German theologian Dorner failed to work them out consistently and thoroughly. The cardinal con tradiction of making the eternal idea of humanity at the same
time an historical individual of an absolutely supernatural nature
participation
separation
? involved everywhere the diversion of all ideal speculative effort of thought into traditional supernaturalism. And in the case of Maurice this supernaturalism was the more pronouncedly narrow, inasmuch as he found the spiritual community of humanity, founded by the revelation of Christ, embodied not in the universal kingdom of God, or the in visible community of the children of God, but in the Church
necessarily
? ? ? 378 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
of England. 1 Accordingly, while he teaches on the one hand that the entire human race is created and has its essential nature in Christ as its ideal Head, he seems to maintain on the other hand that it is only in the Church of England that the Kingdom of Christ has attained actual existence ! This is a contradiction that a German intellect finds it hard to comprehend, or can only explain by supposing that the strong national feeling of the Englishman had got the better of the intellect of the theologian.
The sources of the characteristic points of Maurice's
profession, had, by his own independent study of the Bible, arrived at the conviction that the orthodox representation of the Gospel did not properly represent its real and scriptural nature. 2 For the Gospel announces the forgiveness of sins not as a reward of faith any more than as a reward of works, but as the free unconditional gift of God, which was bestowed on mankind once for all in their representative Head, Christ, so that every man may appropriate Yet forgiveness
not itself salvation, but only the means of and salvation itself not a future good, but spiritual fellowship with God in the sanctification of the character by means of his holy love. The very purpose for which God offers his free unmerited love, as forgiving mercy to sinners, that they may thereby be encouraged and impelled to love him in return, and to grow themselves into the image of his holy love. Glad devotion to God, loving dependence on the Creator, the perfect condition of the creature, in which all the faculties
This, the fundamental thought of his book, The Kingdom of Christ,
stated in strong and emphatic language in letter of July 12, 1834 (Life,
p. 166).
The most interesting of Erskine's writings, which has been followed
the above account of his system, The Unconditional Freeness of the Gospel (1828); to must be added The Brazen Serpent, or Life coming through Death (1831) The Doctrine Election, and its Connection with the General Theory Christianity (1837) his first work, Remarks on the Internal Evidence for the Truth Revealed Religion (1820), of less importance.
are to be found in the idealistic philosophy of
teaching
Coleridge (whose metaphysical ideas, however, acquire in Maurice's system a Platonic modification), and in the doc trines of the Scottish theologians, Thomas Ersk1ne, of Linlathen, and John McLeod Campbell, at whom we must take a brief glance. The first of these men, an advocate by
? ? ? of
a
is
of
it
is
;
; of
is
21
in i- is
is
a
is is
is
it ;
it.
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY.
379
of the soul are kept in their proper order by that ruling principle. The Fall of man consisted in the rise of the spirit of independence, in that " each man became an independent individual, loving and desiring and approving things accord ing as they affected himself, without regard to the will of God or the sympathies of the universal family. " And this sin of man was also his misery, his hell. The punishment of sin did not consist in external evils, which might be re moved by arbitrary acts, but it consisted in the very fact that the man himself had revolted from saving fellowship with God, and had
the love of him for the love of self and the world. " Restoration to a condition of salvation cannot therefore be effected otherwise than by the restoration
of the love of God to its place as the paramount principle in the heart, resulting in the due subordination of self and the creature under it. Any remedy which falls below this re storation falls below man's need. No pardon which leaves this undone is of any value to him. He needs no infliction from without to make him miserable ; and it is not the re moval of any outward infliction that can give him happiness. He must know that God is better than happiness, and that sin is worse than sorrow. The love of God, not the desire of happiness, is the true keystone of the arch. " The means which God has provided for the attainment of this blessing is the Gospel. It shows us, in the appearance of Christ, the gracious character of God in relation to his rebellious creatures, in order thereby to draw back our hearts to him, which had been estranged through hatred, fear, or
indifference, and thus to restore love to God and to the whole divine human family to its true place in the heart. It is particularly the sufferings of Christ in which the holy love of God has been revealed ; but not in the sense that God had to be reconciled, that his love had to be purchased, by the sacrifice of his Son ; on the contrary, his holy love itself was the source of the mission and the self-sacrifice of Christ. Christ, by his patient endurance of all the misery that had
from the sin of the world, overcame sin itself by love and glorified God by his obedience. His glorifying of the Father, by obediently enduring suffering from love of his sinful brethren, was both the expiation and the putting away of sin ; and because it was the Head of mankind who accomplished this as representing all men, the sin of the entire race is once
sprung
exchanged
? ? ? ? 380 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
for all forgiven in Christ ; the resurrection of Christ was the seal of this forgiveness. The message of this forgiveness is proclaimed to all the world as the free gift of God offered for its acceptance, but only those who actually accept it are really justified and made part of the Church of Christ. The fear lest the Gospel of free, unconditional mercy should pro duce a false peace in a world dead in sins, and expose the
moral interests of Christianity to the dangers of antinomian- ism, rests, as Erskine is continually reiterating, upon a mis conception. For the pardon, which is the free gift of God in Christ, is of advantage to men only as they receive and with Christ himself, the revelation of the holy, loving character of God, into their hearts and thereby the principle of holy, self-sacrificing love made the dominant power and the root of personal holiness and salvation. Pardon therefore, really received only when evinces itself as the effective means of sanctification and accordingly of salvation.
not itself salvation, for salvation cannot be given to men
? without conditions consists in the fellowship of the Holy Spirit heaven holiness, and the forgiveness of sins blessing only in so far as produces holiness.
Holiness the ultimate object God has view with us, and the Gospel message serves only as means to this end.
These ideas of Erskine's were further worked out and established by his friend, the theologian, McLeod Camp bell, in his very suggestive book, The Nature the Atone
ment, and its Relation to Remission of Sins and Eternal Life (1856, 5th ed. , 1878). As believing Biblical theologian, Campbell does not deny that Christ presented an expiatory sacrifice for us, but he maintains that when this sacrifice not interpreted in accordance with preconceived opinions, but looked at as and as represented in the Scriptures, cannot be regarded as the suffering of the punishment due to man's sin his stead, but moral and spiritual meaning must be put upon it. Christ effected our salvation by becoming the mediator between God and man, and representing both -- God with man and man with God. This twofold relation of the atonement worked out with reference to its retrospective and its prospective action. In the first respect, Christ's work was to reveal the Father in humanity and for humanity, to be the witness of God's holy love, a love which hates sin and seeks to save the sinner by
gratuitously
? ? is
a
J. of
in
is it ;
is it
it
it
is,
a
is
;
it is
a
in it
it
is
it, is,
is is a
;
It is
? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 381
him. Christ felt the pain on account of sin that filled the holy heart of God, and in a perfect, vicarious contrition acknowledged the righteousness of the divine condemnation of sin, as the representative of mankind before God. When he identified himself with his brethren in the flesh by his compassionate sympathy, he endured the deepest pangs, such as only the Holy One could feel, on account of the sins of men, both as guilt before God and as the source of human misery. This pain on account of sin, and this perfect repentance of offered to God in the name of man kind, constituted the true atonement for the sins of mankind,
sacrifice well-pleasing to God, such as no execution of punishment could have supplied. With this complete con demnation of the sinful past of mankind by its representative
Head, full satisfaction was offered to the holy will of God.
But this moral atonement of Christ had at the same time
prospective significance. must be conceived as effecting salvation, or eternal life, not merely as the indirect result of Christ's work, but as inwardly connected with as, in fact, already included in that work. This would not be the case on the supposition of an imputation of vicarious punitive suffering to sinners, which leaves their moral condition in relation to God unchanged, and makes salvation only a future state of happiness. The atonement must therefore be con ceived thus Christ in his person represents humanity as
converting
? to God, and animated solely by love to Him, and by means of his identification with his brethren Christ communicated his righteousness as new life to them. He thereby not only revealed the Divine Fatherhood to men,
but he also discovered the treasure of the Divine image in man, which had until then been veiled under their sin. The
holy, well-pleasing
putation.
of Christ was the revelation of the latent
righteousness
capacity in man for righteousness, which he possessed by virtue of the indwelling Son of God. Christ must not be conceived as so standing apart from humanity that his righteousness could not avail for otherwise than by im
He as the second Adam, the Head of humanity, so truly one with that his righteousness counts the sight of God as the righteousness of mankind generally, and that
can pass from Christ to all men. Christ himself had in his human consciousness the witness to the ability of man kind to be filled with the love of God. In his love to his
? ? it
a
is, it
in
it,
it
a
:
It
it,
? 382 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1825. [Bk. IV.
brethren lay the prophetic hope that they also would open their hearts to the love of God, from which they had for a time been estranged. Accordingly, the atoning work of Christ did not consist in the deliverance of men from future punishment and the obtaining of future happiness ; but in
to them his knowledge and love of the Father, and making them thereby children of God, in the possession of eternal life and a righteousness well- pleasing to God. Everything that the Son accomplished, and that the Father accepted, had the prospective intention of being reproduced in us ; both his pain on account of sin, and his confiding and obedient love to the Father, were intended to be appropriated by us. Nothing of a mere external nature
that God could do with us or could give to us, which is not involved in the relation of our souls to God and in the re lation of our own hearts answering to his heart, can possibly
be our salvation.
This is manifestly the same reconstruction of the Christian
doctrine of salvation which was effected by Kant and Schleier- macher in Germany, whereby it is converted from forensic externality into ethical inwardness and a truth of direct religious experience. Erskine and Campbell appear, however, to have reached their convictions in entire independence of German theology, by their own absorbing study of the Bible ; and I regard their ideas as the best contribution to dogmatics which British theology has produced in the present century.
That the Scottish Church rejected and thrust out from its
midst, in the person of Campbell, this line of theological thought, was the heaviest blow that it could inflict upon itself;
thereby it arrested its healthy development for more than half a century. For it is only just now that Scotch theo
logians begin to start once more from Campbell, though, it must be confessed, with great timidity, as may be seen from the book of the Glasgow theologian, Alexander Bruce,
The Humiliation of Christ in its Physical, Ethical, and
Soteriological Aspects (1876). It is here taught (following rather Hofmann, of Erlangen, than Campbell) that the Son of God entered into the condition of humanity, as it lay under the wrath of God, in such a way that he felt in himself the effects of that wrath, though he was not himself in his per sonal relation to God the object of it. The value of the sacrifice of Christ, Bruce holds, was equal to his Divine
communicating
? ? ? ? Ch. II. ] PARTIES AND MOVEMENTS IN THEOLOGY. 383
dignity multiplied by his perfect obedience, multiplied by his boundless love, multiplied by his sufferings, which reached the utmost limits of what a sinless body could endure. As God took all this into account, and was thereby satisfied, we also must take it all into consideration, in order to say " Amen " to the Divine view of the sacrifice of Christ. This is an attempt to mediate between the old and the new, which does not approach in clearness of principle the thought of Erskine and
Campbell, although we must acknowledge that it is in the same direction which they took.
Though condemned in the land of their birth, the ideas of Erskine and Campbell were received in the soil of the
Liberal theology of England. The religious profundity of the Scotchmen admirably supplemented the thought of the Englishmen, which is characterised more by a practical breadth than religious and speculative depth. It is to them that Maurice's theology owes its best features. And from Maurice again Charles Kingsley received the dominant
direction of his theology, which gave fitting expression to the feelings of his heart in its warm sympathy for everything truly human, and supplied the theoretical rallying-point for his philanthropic aims. In the history of the Christian- socialist movements of the century, the names of Maurice and Kingsley occupy a foremost place. They showed by their deeds what was the fundamental thought of their theology -- that Christianity is the leaven which is destined to regenerate and to hallow the life of human society. Side by side with them stands the great preacher Freder1Ck W. Robertson, whom death too soon removed, who was equal to them in nobility of character and their superior in the wealth and depth of his mind. The biography of this man, so admirably executed by Stopford A. Brooke, reads like the life of a saint, but of a Protestant and modern saint, who does not escape out of the world, but, as a soldier of God, fights the great fight with all ungodliness, with the sins of the upper and the lower classes, with the unreality and falsehood of even religious parties, who at the same time keeps his own soul unspotted from the world, and who is compelled often and deeply to drain the bitter cup of suffering, which no
soldier of God can escape in this world of wickedness and folly. There is little in homiletical literature to compare
with the four series of Robertson's sermons, in
? respect
? ? ? 384 THEOLOGY IN GREAT BRITAIN SINCE 1 825. [Bk.
