A history of the theology of the disciples of Christ

Front matter

Founded by john d. rockefeller

A Sftstorg of X\\t Styeologg of % itaripba of (Eljriat

A DISSERTATION

Preface

The writer has seen fit, for the benefit of the popular reader, to preface the study of his topic with a brief sketch of the history of theology from the beginning to the appearance of the special phenomena under consideration. He works from within the movement, and has often used the technical name, "The Current Reformation," used by its advocates as best expressive of the whole.

Introduction

I. Essence of Christianity.

1. Distinction between,

(1) The Christian Principle,

a. A sense of worship toward God.

•b. A sense of brotherhood to all of God's creatures.

(2) Historic Forms of Christianity.

2. Tendencies.

(1) Essential Protestantism.

(2) Essential Catholicism.

3. Primitive Christianity Denned.

II. Jewish Christianity.

1. Defined.

2. Problems.

(1) Mosaism.

(2) Messianism.

3. Transition.

( 1 ) Paulinism.

(2) Hellenism.

III. Greek Theology.

1. Factors.

(1) Faith in Jesus.

(2) Greek Philosophy.

2. Product.

The Logos Doctrine.

3. Dogmas.

(1) The Trinity.

(2) The Twofold Nature of Christ.

IV. Latin Theology.

1. Representative — Augustine.

2. Factors.

(1) Pauline Gospel.

(2) Greek Dogmas.

(3) Neo-Platonism.

(4) Roman Law.

(5) Vulgar Catholicism.

3. Problems — Sin and Grace.

4. Dogmas.

(1) Adam.

(2) Adam's Fall.

(3) Corruption of the Race.

(4) Gift of Christ.

(5) Baptismal Regeneration.

(6) Free Grace.

(7) Highest Good.

5. Solutions.

(1) Augustinianism.

(2) Pelagianism.

(3) Semi-Pelagianism.

V. Scholastic Theology.

1. Factors.

(1) Traditions of the Church— Matter.

(2) The Greek Philosophy— Method — Aristotle.

Contents

2. Dogmas.

( 1 ) Atonement — Anselm.

(2) The Church — Aquinas.

Chapter II. The Covenant The0e0gy

I. Statement.

1. Historical Background.

(1) Calvinism.

(2) School of Saumur.

(3) Arminianism.

2. Life of Coccejus.

3. Analysis of De Foedere et Testamento Dei.

(1) Definition.

(2) Elements.

(a) Lex.

(b) Promissio.

(c) Cominatio.

(3) Twofold Nature.

(a) Foedns Operum — Its Abrogation.

(b) Foedus Gratiae — Its Promulgation.

4. Later Contributions.

(1) Burman.

(2) Witsius.

II. Historical Significance.

1. Possible Sources.

(1) The Bible.

(2) Political Philosophy of the Times.

2. The Genesis of Social Contract Theory.

(1) Aristotle.

Contents.

(2) Stoics— Lex Naturae.

(3) Roman Law— Jus Civile et Jus Gentium.

(4) Cicero — Lex Naturae — Jus Gentium.

(5) Aquinas— Lex Naturae et Lex Instituta.

(6) Grotius — Lex Naturae — Jus Gentium.

(7) Coccejus — Lex Naturae — Foedus Operum. 3. Development.

(1) In Politics.

(a) Grotius.

(b) Hobbes.

(c) Locke.

(d) Rousseau — "Contrat Social."

(e) American Revolution.

(2) In Theology.

(a) Covenant Note in Calvinism.

(b) The Marrow Theology,

a. William Ames.

b. Edward Fisher.

c. Thomas Boston.

d. The Seceders.

(c) Translations.

III. Connection with the Current Reformation.

1. Fact.

(1) Lifework of Alexander Campbell.

(a) Sermon on Law.

(b) Progress of Revelation.

(c) Debates.

(2) Analysis of His Teachings.

(a) Definition.

(b) Ninefold Covenant.

(c) Way of Salvation.

(d Positive and Moral Precepts.

2. Influence.

Chapter III. The Phieosophy Of Eocke

I. Statement.

1. Preparation — Bacon; Des Cartes.

2. Life of John Locke.

3. Analysis of the Essay on Human Understanding.

(1) Occasion and Purpose.

(2) Problems.

(a) Origin of Knowledge — Tabula Rasa Th

(b) Degrees of Knowledge.

a. By process of Reason.

r. Certainty.

(a) Intuition.

(b) Demonstration. 2. Probability.

(a) Belief.

(b) Opinion.

b. By process of Revelation — Faith.

(c) Limits of Knowledge.

4. Outcome.

II. Connection with the Current Reformation.

1. External Evidence.

2. Internal Evidence.

(1) Theory of Knowledge.

(2) Origin of Language.

(3) Knowledge, Belief and Opinion.

Contents.

(4) Definition of Faith.

(5) Doctrine of Revelation.

(6) Work of the Holy Spirit.

III. Influence.

Chapter IV. The Precursors

I. The Reformation in Scotland.

II. The Established Church.

III. The Scottish Sects.

1. Cameronians.

2. Seceders.

(1) Associate Presbytery — Erskine.

(2) Presbytery of Relief.

(3) Burghers and Anti-Burghers.

(4) New Lights and Old Lights.

3. The Scotch Independents.

(1) Old Independents.

(a) John Glas.

(b) Robert Sandeman.

(2) Scotch Baptists.

(a) A. McLean.

(b) Wm. Jones.

(3) New Independents.

(a) Robert Haldane.

(b) Jas. A. Haldane.

(c) Greville Ewing.

IV. Influence on the Current Reformation.

Chapter V. The Rise

Introduction.

I. The English Brethren.

1. Circular Letters of Churches Holding to the Primitive Order.

2. Mr. Campbell's Review of Their History.

3. His Connection with Them.

II. The Disciples.

1. Sketch of the New York Church.

2. Walter Scott.

3. Their Contribution.

III. The Reformers.

1. Thomas Campbell.

(1) Sketch.

(2) Contribution — Emphasis on Christian Union.

2. Alexander Campbell.

(1) Sketch.

(2) Contribution.

(a) Application of principles.

a. Church government.

b. Baptism.

c. The Confession.

d. Eaith.

e. The Lord's Day.

f. Work of Holy Spirit.

g. Progress of Revelation.

h. Nomenclature.

i. Design of Baptism.

(b) Proclamation of the Reformation.

Contents.

3. Origin of Early Churches.

Brush Run.

Wellsburg.

Pittsburg,

Louisville and Nashville.

Washington Association.

Mahoning Association.

Churches in Kentucky and Virginia.

4. Separation from the Baptists.

IV. The Christians.

1. B. W. Stone.

(1) Sketch.

(2) The Springfield Presbytery.

2. Their Contribution.

Conclusion

1. Proof of Thesis.

2. Origin of Names.

CHAPTER VI. the; principles.

I. The Ultimate Principle — The Conversion of the World. II. The Material Principle— The Union of All Christians. III. The Formal Principle — The Restoration of Primitive Christianity. Items.

1. No Creeds.

2. Bible Names for Bible Things.

3. Primitive Order of Worship.

4. Primitive Organization.

5. Primitive Discipline.

Conclusion — Observations and Exhortations.

Chapter VII. Principles Of Interpretation

I. Sources.

II. Rules.

Chapter VIII. Theology Op Alexander Campbell

I. Cosmology

II. Bibliology.

III. Theology.

Doctrine of the Trinity.

IV. Anthropology.

V. Christology.

VI. Soteriology_.

1. Faith.

2. Repentance.

3. Baptism.

(1) Action.

(2) Subject.

(3) Design.

(4) Place.

VII. Pneumatology.

VIII. Ecclesiology.

IX. Eschatology.

Chapter I. Introduction

rA Brief Sketch of the History of Theology from the Apostolic Age to the Close of the Reformation.

In order to place the average reader in touch with the period of history out of which we wish to draw the threads of this narrative, we make a brief sketch of the progress of Christian thought from the beginning to 1648.

1. The Essence of Christianity .

One must distinguish between the Christian Principle and any of the historic realizations of Christianity. The first is the core, the essence, the inner principle of Christianity, which runs through all ages, and is the vital redemptive force in the world. The second is the shell, the phenomenal, the outer form of Christianity. It is Christianity subjected to the limitation of any particular time, place, race, and moral and industrial conditions of society. Thus, we have one Christian Principle — in all and through all — and many historic forms — as Apostolic Christianity, Greek Christianity, Latin Christianity, etc.

The source of Christianity is Jesus. Its essence is best seen in his consciousness. What he realized in his life with the Father, what he gave to the world in his teaching, in his work, in his person — this is the Gospel, his Word of God to men. Two elements are prominent in this kernel: — (a) A sense of sonship to God; (b) A sense of brotherhood of all of God's creatures. The first is Christian Faith — a trust in God through Jesus Christ, the sense of forgiveness, of favor in his sight, of union and communion with Him, — reliance on Him, — self-resignation and peace in the midst of the conflicts of the world. It is the filial feeling raised to its highest power. The second is Christian Love — the fraternal duty which springs from filial trust. "For he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen cannot love God whom he hath not seen." This core is a faith, personal, not propositional. It is faith in Christ as Savior, as moral guide — the willingness to live the Christ kind of a life ; not the belief of any truth about him, however true this may be. It is religio-ethical, not intellectual-legal. It is not mere Orthodoxy. Again, this core is Life, not doctrine, not institution. It is a relation to God realized in the inner life, — filial and fraternal ; not in the saving value of right thinking, not in any historic form idealized and handed down in toto. It is not any kind of High Churchism. Lastly, the Christian principle is Gospel, not Law. It proclaims the freedom of the child of God from any bondage to sin or to a law for sin. It is the love principle regnant in the life, not any subjection to detail rules. It is not Judaism.

Hence, two tendencies are ever present in Christianity, — to preserve it in principle and propagate it as such, and to realize it in form and hand it down as such. The one is essential Protestantism, — the attempt to get back to the Eternal Word of God stripped of all temporal forms. The other is essential Catholicism, — the attempt to bring the Word of God into the life of the race and bless it thereby. One is the individualistic, prophetic ; the other, the universalistic, the traditional. Both are good tendencies. They have always been present in the church. They are the complements of each other.

Primitive Christianity was the first historic realization of the Christian principle. It had the advantage of all others, in that it was nearer the source; in that it was under the personal direction of Jesus and His Apostles ; in that it had the special inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Here enter some crucial questions in the determination of the character of the original church and its normative relation to other periods. In how far does the Divine Spirit, and in how far does the human enter to make up the empirical content of Primitive Christianity? Did Jesus care for the spirit, merely, and leave the form to take care of itself?

Did He teach His Disciples His view of God, His view of the world, i. e., His religion, to have faith ; then send them out with the impulse to take the world, leaving it to them to adapt their message and work to the forms of the world around, — or did He anticipate these forms also, and fix them for all time? In how far may Christianity be said to have taken the form of Judaism, — the soil from which it grew? How much was it affected by the limitations of the Jewish nation; its racial characteristics; its religious inheritance? What in Primitive Christianity was meant to be a norm for all religion? In how far does its precedent remain a rule for faith and practice to-day ?

These are ground problems in any treatment of the Christian religion. They have been much discussed among the Disciples of Christ ; and between them and their religious neighbors. I leave them here, as they will come up later ; with the mere distinction between the Christian principle and its historic forms.

Jewish Christianity.

Jewish Christianity.

In the Jewish world Christianity found historic forms ready made for it. It took over a language and literature. The Old Testament became the first Bible of the Christians. Religious rites and customs were adapted to the new cause. This is evident from the analogy of the Lord's Day and the vSabbath, of baptism and the Levitical washings, of the Lord's Supper and the Passover Feast. The new institutions were modeled on the old. Compare the Jerusalem Church and the Jewish Temple service, the local church and the synagogue, the Apostolate and the Sanhedrim, the ministry of the church and that of the synagogue. Here lies patent a continuous course of conflicts in the history of Christianity,— viz., between its historic heritage and its prophetic spirit, between the traditional tendency and the new truths ever welling up within the bosom of the church. The Apostolic Age was no exception. It was not a period of ideal peace and unity — a golden age, as many have supposed. There were conflicts, divisions, ill-feelings as now. These arose from the contradiction of the Christian Principle with the historic Jewish heritage. They appeared in two forms: — (i) Mosaism; (2) Messianism.

1. Should the Christians keep the Law? It must be remembered that the Law meant a concrete mass of detail regulations hedged about by the traditions of the Rabbis. Various answers were made. The Judaizers said, "Yes, it is necessary that the Gentile converts should be circumcised and keep the Law." Paul said, "No." And between these there was a mediating party, to which possibly James and Peter belonged, who held that the Jews should keep the Law, but that Gentiles were not so obligated. The Pauline party won the victory, but this was due, not so much to any triumph of logic within the church, as to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman army. When it was no longer possible to keep the Law, its importance faded from sight.

2. The Messianic Hope passed through a like crisis. The Disciples repeatedly misunderstood Jesus upon this question during his ministry. It is probable that they were not wholly free from errors as to the Second Coming after Pentecost. -There is a gradual dropping of Jewish Messianism in the Apostolic writings. In Paul it is an early note, but found little place in the major epistles. It is wholly absent in the Fourth Gospel. It lived on among the common people and

The; Rise; of the Current Reformation.

sprang up in the Montanism of the third and fourth centuries. But with the decay of the Jewish nation it became a minor note.

Hence the important fact for the history of Christianity in the first three centuries is the rejection of the religion of Jesus by the mass of the Jewish people, the decadence of that nation, and the passing over of the Gospel treasure to the Gentiles. This is the transition from Jewish Christianity to Greek Christianity, from the Jerusalem Church to the Old Catholic Church, from Peter, James, Paul and John, to Clement, Origen, Athanasius and the Gregories.

Two media may be mentioned in this transition — Paulinism and Hellenism. Gentile Christianity was the product of Paul's ministry. It is significant that his doctrine is the most theological in form. The field m which Paul worked was Hellenism — that larger world of Greek learning which had spread over the whole eastern half of the Roman Empire. Philo, the apostle of Hellenism, had made a union of the Hebrew Scriptures and the Platonic philosophy by means of the allegorical method of interpretation. This was incorporated into the church by his successors — the Alexandrine fathers, Clement, Origen, etc. The Apostles' Creed, which had grown up from the Baptismal Formula, became the text for future theological developments.

The Greek Theology.

What form should the Christian Principle take in the Grseco-Roman world? Two factors must be taken into account in the reply — the Christian Principle itself, and the Weltanschauung (view of the world) incident to the Greek mind. With the Jew there was no such contrast. The Gospel was set in the forms of his own view of the world. But the Greek was essentially a philosopher. Behind him were Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and Epicureans. He had a made-out scheme of things. This was simple except in religious matters. Scepticism had destroyed the power of the old myths. The Christian missionary found the door opened for him. Many Greeks "turned to the Lord believing r the Gospel." For a while things went on thus. The newly made convert held the two apart — the Greek heathen view of the world and the Jewish-Christian religious life. But this partition could not last interminably. The human mind seeks unity. The two spheres must be brought together. Then began the eternal conflict between Philosophy and Religion, between Science and Faith. In this conflict occurred the birththroes of Theology. It was the mind's attempt to harmonize, to interpret the religious experiences of the heart in the language of cool thought, to make room in a world filled with things and events for the invisible God,

The; Gresk Theology.

and to find the true avenue for the soul's communion with Him.

How, then, should the Greek put together what he knew as a Greek and what he had learned as a Christian? He had no thought of giving up the former. It was essential to his mental makeup. The latter offered no substitute. It dwelt in another world. The two poles were the Greek metaphysics on the one hand, and the Worship of Jesus, on the other. The ruling conception of the former was the Realism of Plato. God is the Absolute Reason. This is pure thought, free from all form. It finds expression in the Logos. The Logos, or Word, is Reason expressed, i. e., in its most universal form. This is further differentiated in the ideas (t'Sea). The Logos is the universal idea. Other ideas are the genera and species under this. These ideas are as yet disembodied spirit, but they are embodied in the particular — in things of the world of matter, and in minds of the world of spirit. Knowledge is by contact of the two. It recognizes the unity back in the Absolute Reason. Now, the Gospel was made to fit into this system of metaphysical idealism. The Logos was identified with Jesus. The harmony was made complete. The outcome after much conflict was the two Greek dogmas, — the Doctrine of the Trinity, and of the Twofold Nature of Christ. In the first the Son is declared to be ofioovaios t£> irarpl (of the same substance with the Father), and in the second Jesus is said to be o^oow-ios r§ -narpl

stantial with the Father according to the Godhead and consubstantial with us according to the Manhood). Both of these dogmas are metaphysical. They pronounce upon the nature of God and of Christ. The distinction was between ovvia and woo-rao-is, substantia and persona.

These dogmas were codified in the councils of Nicaea (325 A. D.), of Constantinople (381), and of Chalcedon (451). They constituted the bulk of the Greek Theology. They were accepted in the West. When Luther revolted from the Roman Church, he fell back on them, and thus they were incorporated into Protestantism.

The Latin Theology.

With the decadence of the eastern half of the Roman Empire, the heritage of Christianity passed over to Italy and the West. On Latin soil a new product arose. The Latin mind was practical and political. It was not speculative. It was filled with the memory of the glory and grandeur of the Roman Empire. The new product was the Roman Catholic Church, the successor to the Empire.

In Latin Theology there is but one great name — Augustine. There is a preparation for him in Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose, but Augustine

The Rise or the Current Reformation.

is both flower and fruitage of Latin thought. Five elements enter to make the body of his system :

1. The Pauline Gospel.

2. The Greek Theology, whose dogmas he took over.

3. Neo-Platonism —

A working over of Platonism by means of Oriental influences resulting in the emanation theory.

4. The Roman Law —

Roman legal conceptions which came down through Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose.

5. Vulgar Catholicism —

Heathen rites and mysteries which were taken over into the church, and became the basis of the later developments of the "mass" and "works."

Thus, Augustine was a great personality which gathered up all that preceded, held it in spite of apparent contradictions, and became the source of all that followed. He is the great father of the church — of the Roman Church, whose imperialism, mysticism, monasticism, vulgar Catholicism, came hy him ; and of Protestantism as well. Luther found in him his doctrine of Justification, and Calvin's Predestination was but a modified Augustinianism.

The problem of Augustine was the religious one — the relation of man, the sinner, to God. He asked, what is the source, nature and goal of the human personality. He came to this problem as a Roman with the practical, common sense mind. He lived in the midst of the breakdown of ancient civilization, saw decay written all around. He had himself lived an immoral life when a youth, and knew the awful struggles between good and evil in his own soul. He was instructed by Paul, and led to turn away from the vain speculations of philosophy to the heart of the matter as set forth in the Gospel. It was his beyond all others to have a realizing sense of man's sin and to produce the great dogmas of Latin Christianity, — viz., those grouping about Sin and Grace. His points were as follows:

1 . Adam —

A perfect being. This is in reality the personification of one of the Platonic ideas and not the Adam of the Scriptures at all.

2. Adam's Fall.

3. The Corruption of the Race.

The nature of fallen Adam is carried over to his descendants — Traducianism. This is "Original Sin."

The Latin Theology.

4. The Gift of Christ.

This makes possible the Grace. It is not developed by Augustine, but is later taken up as the thesis of Anselm.

5. Baptismal Regeneration —

A magical infusion of grace which removes the guilt of "original sin."

6. Free Grace.

This creates in man all faith and goodness, over against which the heathen virtues are only splendida vitia.

7. The Highest Good —

All later theology deals with these points. How can God and man meet in salvation ? Three answers were made.

1 . Augustinianism.

Man can do nothing ; all is of grace ; this is made possible by the gift of Christ, — a Determinism.

2. Pelagianism.

Man is not so helpless ; he is free ; he can meet God halfway,— Indeterminism. There is room for human merit.

3. Semi-Pelagianism.

A combination of the above. All is of grace in regeneration. Afterward works are necessary to retain the saving goods, — Synergism. There is room for merit within the church. After Augustine came the invasion of the German hordes. Gregory the Great becomes the great savior of the Church and the founder of the future Papacy. A long period of anarchy ensues. There is no advance in thought. Only the personality is preparing for a new enlightenment. The Scholastic Theology.

The new enlightenment for which the world had been preparing occurred in the Middle Ages ( 1000- 1250 A. D.) . On the soil of Mediaeval Europe grew up a new dogmatic product. It had been prepared for by the feudal system, the supremacy of the Papacy, the intellectual life of the universities, and the religious labors of the monastic orders. This product was the Scholastic Theology. Its method was Scholasticism. Its leaders were Scotus Erigina, Anselm, Bernard of Clairvaux, Abelard, Thomas Aquinas, and Duns Scotus.

Two factors enter into the body of this theology. I. The Traditions (writings) of the Church These are —

a. The Holy Scriptures.

b. Greek and Latin Fathers — Augustine is foremost.

c. Lives of the Saints, etc. 2. The Greek Philosophy —

( 1 ) Neo-Platonism —

At first via Scotus Erigina.

(2) Aristotle —

Through a translation first of the Logic, later of both Logic and Metaphysics.

The first factor gave the matter for theology ; the second, its method — the Aristotelian logic. The Church said, "Deus homo fit." Scholasticism asked, "Cur Deus homo?" A division was made between Natural and Revealed Theology. Natural Theology was what reason could give — as the existence of God, his power, etc. Revealed Theology comes through the Church. Its motto was: "Credo ut intelligam." Assensus (assent) is faith. The theologian goes as far with Natural Theology as he can, then Revelation steps in. Philosophy is the handmaid to Theology.

The new problems are — (1) The Atonement ; (2) The Church. 1 . Atonement.

Anselm took the problem of the Atonement over from Augustine. Augustine said, the gift of Christ makes Grace possible. Anselm shows how. It is by way of his Satisfaction Theory. In Adam's fall man has sinned. God must have satisfaction. As a sin against an infinite God, it is infinite and must have an infinite punishment. How can man escape and satisfaction be made? Man cannot make it himself, yet he must. It is his sin. God alone can. The dilemma is solved in the God-man. As God he can pay the debt ; as man it is of avail for the race. Because he was blameless, he had no debt of his own. As a free-will sacrifice, his act was infinitely meritorious. God must reward it, yet He cannot. The God-man has all fullness before. He gives the benefits over to his fellow-men. This is the store of merit which men receive in relation with Christ.

The premises of this theory are evident :

a. The Satisfaction which punishment renders for sin. Man takes from God his due — perfect obedience. God must retaliate. He takes from man what is his — happiness. God's honor is offended. His magnanimity steps in to avoid the disastrous results. The background of the doctrine is the Chivalry of the times.

The; Scholastic Theology.

b. The dogma of the Twofold Nature of Christ— the God-man.

In the argument the fallacy of the divided middle term occurs several times.

c. The notion of Solidarity — God, God-man, man. This is from the Platonic Realism and does not agree with the modern conception of personality.

Yet Anselm set the problem for all time. It was a great advance over the conception of a ransom from the Devil, or the theory of God's veracity. He brought in the ethical element. Who can solve the antinomy between Justice and Mercy in the Divine Nature ? Aquinas with his Federal theory, Duns Scotus with his Acceptilation theory, Grotius with his Governmental theory, only build upon Anselm's naive but real foundation. 2. The Church.

Thomas Aquinas presents the dogma of the church in its fullest development. He is seized with the imperial idea — Papal Absolutism. In him the Vulgar Catholicism comes to its triumph. The Church mediates Grace. It is the vicar of God on earth, It is the incarnation of Deity in various degrees of fullness. The order of ascendancy is — Papacy, hierarchy, laity. The church possesses the store of the merits of Christ and of the Saints. Christ is offered continually in the miracle of the mass. The individual appropriates the Grace through the "works" demanded of him. This Church is declared to be "One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic.,, Aquinas marks the culmination of dogmas and their co-ordination in a system of theology (Summa Theologise) . Then began the breakingup of dogma, which lasted throughout the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and in the sixteenth century issued in the three-fold partition: (i) Tridentine Catholicism ; (2) Socinianism ; (3) Protestantism.

Duns Scotus is the critic and skeptic through whom most of the dissolution is accomplished. Scholasticism was founded upon the thesis that God was Absolute Reason, and sought to find the truth by analysis and syllogism. Scotus said that God is liberum arbitrium (Free Will). He magnified impulse, action, as against the rationalizing process. The world had grown tired of the refinements of Scholasticism and had begun to distrust the reasoning powers. All parties hastened to accept the principles of Scotus.

The Rise of the Current Reformation.

Tridentine Catholicism.

First among these was the Papal Party. Scotus was a loyal son of the Church and labored in its behalf. If God is primarily Will, that will is known through the Church. The Church mediates the Word of God. This is identified with the rules and practices of the Church. These are under the care of the hierarchy. Instead of dogma, we have a dogma-politik. The Church becomes the one dogma and is jealous of any other. This is illustrated in the Council of Trent. The Papal Party did not want the Council called. When it was forced upon them, they did not want to formulate a creed. The creed when formed was ambiguous in character. They wanted to leave the hierarchy free in all matters of doctrine and practice. The culmination of this course was the Council of the Vatican (1870), which set forth the doctrine of Papal Infallibility — "that the Roman Pontiff, when he speaks ex cathedra, that is, when in discharge of the office of pastor and doctor of all Christians, by virtue of his supreme Apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine regarding faith or morals to be held by the universal Church, by the divine assistance promised to him in blessed Peter, is possessed of that infallibility with which the divine Redeemer willed that his Church should be endowed for denning doctrine regarding faith or morals ; and that, therefore, such definitions of the Roman Pontiit's are irreformable of themselves and not from the consent of the Church." (SchafT — Creeds of Christendom, II. p. 270). Henceforth there is no need of Councils or dogma.

The Ultra-Reformation.

There had all along been elements in the Church which were hostile to the claims of the hierarchy. These took refuge in the practical piety of the church and lived apart from its dogmas. They were the disciples of the "inner light," "seekers after God" — the mystics, the forerunners of the Anabaptists. Alongside were others who found their truth in the Natural Theology, who pitted reason against the church ; as yet a smouldering flame, but ready to break out when the wind stirred — the Rationalists, the forerunners of Socinianism. Duns Scotus too prepared the way for these. If God is Will, this is not known through the church, but through my will, my impulses, my insight. Here appears the sense of the growing Individualism, which is to play so great a part in modern civilization.

The Scholastic Theology.

In the Middle Ages, the collective will, the universal, was everything. There was little sense of personality, or of the rights of the individual. The so-called Ultra-Reformation was Individualism carried to the extreme. Luther turned against his Anabaptist followers, Carlstadt and Munzer, with ferocity. Calvin opposed Servetus and Faustus Socinus with all his might.