Progressive orthodoxy, a contribution to the Christian interpretation of Christian doctrines...

Front matter

H9fS tlKi

til

Ei

Contents

PAGE

I. Introduction 1

II. The Incarnation 17

Introduction

The phrase "New Theology" is applied largely and loosely to a great variety of opinions advocated quite independently by numerous writers in many countries. In its widest inclusion it embraces tendencies which are more or less contradictory to Apostolic Christianity and to the general tradition and faith of the Church. In its more correct and reasonable use it covers many movements of thought which are quite distinct, one from the other, and are not likely immediately to coalesce or harmonize. Even where there is greater affinity of conception there is diversity in the field which is cultivated. One class of writers busies itself chiefly with the dogmatic problems necessitated by the growth of the evolutionary Philosophy. Another is occupied with questions of historical Criticism. Another is absorbed in the development of the new science of Biblical Theology. Another seeks from a yet more interior and central position to state the leading doctrines of our religion in the light and under the inspiration of the revelation of God which is given in Christ. Perhaps the stamp which marks most distinctly and comprehensively this new Divinity is reality ; and the phrase " real Theology " is in this and other respects a better designation than " new Theology." It is real because it deals with beings more than with abstractions, with actual processes and their rational contents more than with a priori assumptions, with laws of life and organic forces more than with mechanical combinations, with wholes or parts in their relations to wholes, with things more than with words, and with persons more than with things. Wherever an investigator in the wide domain of knowledge is seeking for and touching reality he is contributing to this Theology ; and there is consequently a strong bond of sympathy between all such workers, even though the limitation of their labor and the narrowness of human vision may hold them apart.

The following essays are offered as such a contribution. Their special themes and the mode of treatment have been determined by current discussions. They make no attempt to formulate the " New Theology," or to indicate its scope. Such an endeavor might be too ambitious ; it would doubtless be premature. Along with a general unity of spirit and aim on the part of the advocates of the " New Theology" there exists, as we have intimated, a noticeable variety of special opinions and judgments. Not all of these can be harmonized. Not all will be able to vindicate their character as purely Christian. Some are professedly advanced as provisional, hypothetic, tentative. Problems are above the horizon which are not yet clearly within the field of vision. Even their provisional and relative solution is at present impracticable. Too early an attempt to define and systematize is likely to cramp and repress inquiry, and to promote a dogmatic self-satisfaction which is a deadly foe to progress. The aim, accordingly, of the writers of these papers has been to keep clearly within the range of what is immediately necessary and practical. For the most part, a single line of inquiry has been followed, under the guidance of a central and vital principle of Christianity, namely, the reality of Christ's personal relation to the human race as a whole and to every member of it, — the principle of the universality of Christianity.

This principle has been rapidly gaining of late in its power over men's thoughts and lives. It is involved in the church doctrine of the constitution of Christ's person. It is a necessary implication of our fathers' faith in the extent and intent of the Atonement. It is an indisputable teaching of sacred Scripture. It lies at the heart of all that is most heroic and self-sacrificing in the Christian life of our century. We have sought to apply this principle to the solution of questions which are now more than ever before engaging the attention of serious and devout minds. We have endeavored to follow its guidance faithfully and loyally, and whithersoever it might lead. We have trusted it wholly and practically. By the publication of this volume we submit our work to the judgment of a wider public. If we have anywhere overestimated or underestimated the validity and value of our guiding principle, we hope that this will be pointed out. Or if we have lost sight of any qualifying or limiting truth, we desire that this may be shown. On the other hand, if we have been true to a great and cardinal doctrine of our holy religion, and have developed its necessary implications and consequences, we ask that any further discussion of these conclusions should recognize their connection icith the principle from which they are derived , and, their legitimacy, unless this principle is itself to he abandoned. A subordinate aim of the following essays is to point out, as the occasion arises, certain theological improvements which we regard as already assured.

Leaving general phrases which may easily be made to hold either too much or too little, we would turn attention to a few fundamental doctrines, and show in what respect there actually is improvement in their apprehension and use. The task is not an easy one. But no important work is, and it seems to us to be timely and to promise good. There has been a great change in the public mind, especially that to which we are most immediately related, even within a brief period. The number of persons who desire information as to what the " New. Theology" can offer is increased. Prejudices have been overcome. Not a few friends of progress, if we are not mistaken, who once were distrustful of this Theology, have already discovered that it has something in it desirable and helpful for them ; and that even if some of its positions and inferences are insecure, yet, taken as a whole, it is a real and salutary advance in Christian thought. Such persons will welcome our endeavor, and will deal kindly with its imperfections. We cannot but hope that others, at present more critical in their attitude, possibly pronounced in their opposition, may see reason for a less unfavorable judgment ; may even discover that the new movement really signifies a better apprehension of the truth and a larger use of the power of the gospel which they and we alike have received in faith and as a sacred trust. So far, therefore, as the new thought in theology commends itself to us as a real and definite gain, and so far as it naturally comes under review in prosecuting the special purpose of this volume, we shall endeavor to set it forth, and to indicate in what respects it is differentiated from the old.

We have retained the general title — "Progressive Orthodoxy " — under which these papers first appeared. The word " orthodoxy " was employed as a concise and convenient expression of our conviction that theological progress does not involve or require any break with the faith of the church catholic, any recasting of the primitive ecumenical creeds, any departure from the fundamental principles of the Reformation. We have no special regard for the epithet orthodox. It has been sufficiently abused to give ground for offense. It suggests to some minds narrowness, arrogance, and intolerance. We much prefer to be recognized as disciples of Him who is the Truth than to be credited with conformity to standards of belief of human construction. But we are not insensible to the reality and worth of character in the sphere of thought. Human progress would be impossible if everything in belief were changeable. No man could hope for moral perfection if in the power of choice itself there were not the possibility of a permanent preference, or if liberty were not exercised in a system of things which makes for stability. The word orthodox designates theological character, recognizes constant as well as variable elements in religious belief, discriminates the position and work of those who are entitled to appropriate it from the revolutionary aim of men who deny the historical basis of Christianity, or resolve its doctrines into what are called the eternal truths of the spirit, or substitute for the divine Spirit the human reason, and are unable to save themselves from the method and consequences of rationalism.

The present is rooted in the past. Christianity has a permanent basis in historical facts, in a faith once for all delivered to the saints, in a Canon of sacred Scrip* ture. There is a collective and continuous Christian consciousness. Our recognition of this relation of the new to the old is expressed in our motto, " Progressive Orthodoxy.'' To be more definite, it emphasizes our belief that the positions to which we have assented, the conclusions we have adopted, are in the line of that development of Christian doctrine which has been advancing in the church from the beginning. First of all, the church settled its rule of faith, confessing the fundamental historic facts of the gospel, discriminating its authoritative Scriptures, affirming against Ebionism and Gnosticism the distinctness, universality, and absoluteness of Christianity. Impelled by the inward necessities of its own life, as well as constrained by outward oppositions, it proceeded to affirm yet more clearly and fully its central Principle. Everything in Christianity centres in Christ. For more than a century after the church became fully conscious of the distinctness of its mission and of its catholicity, its thought was chiefly turned to the doctrine of the second Person named in its baptismal formula and Apostles' Creed. Then followed a similar, though less protracted, concentration of interest upon the doctrine of the Holy Spirit; then a like, though still more restricted, absorption in the question of the relation of divine grace to human depravity.

In this way results were reached which have stood the test of time, and are a part of the belief to-day of the universal church. It is through the same process of inquiry, reflection, comparison of opinions, growth of belief under the demands of successive periods in human history, disclosures of Providence, and promptings of the Holy Spirit, that more and more fully the Christian revelation has been translated into creed and life. Progress in theology is a progress in method, and then a progress in result. It may bo intensive when not extensive, qualitative when not quantitative. It is at times a matter of accent and emphasis more than of additional information and improved statement, of interpretation rather than of new data, of combination and proportion as well as of increased knowledge, of new order and not simply of new materials. There is no doctrine of the Bible, however rudimentary and essential, which is not susceptible of illumination or higher systemization in the development of a scientific faith; and there may be an endless advance in the larger inclusion and better correlation of known spiritual facts and truths, for these are intrinsically, not simple units, or measurable quantities, or tangible things, but revelations of the highest and grandest personal qualities and actions, and of the vastest relations and destinies. The church has always proclaimed that " God is love," but there can be no question that in thought and life this truth has a far more commanding influence to-day than ever before.

Christian faith has always accepted the fact of the Incarnation, but it cannot be doubted that enlarged conceptions of the contents of this fact have been gained through centuries of earnest discussion and even bitter controversy, or that it is now r more amply interpreted than was possible to earlier thought. Nor do we exhaust the meaning of progress by conceiving of it as merely formal, or intensive, or qualitative. There is material enlargement. The church of to-day has a fuller knowledge of the purpose of God respecting the extension of Christianity, a better conception of the dispensation of the Spirit and of the relation of Christianity to human history, than it was possible to communicate to the early church. The fulfillments of prophecy yield an ampler knowledge than could be derived immediately from the original record. Events are God's messengers ; providences are his interpreters ; the Christian centuries are the promised times of the Spirit, and unfold divine purposes. Something new is revealed in the growth of the Christian church, as indeed in all development. To deny such progressive unfolding of the Christian verities is to ignore or to falsify history. It has been actually going on from the beginning. It is rooted in the necessary laws and established conditions of human thought. It is a witness to the living relation which the Head of the church sustains to it. It is the product of the presence and energy within the church of the promised Spirit of truth. To doubt that a progress thus provided for, pledged, and realized is jDossible also in our own time is a symptom of unbelief, not the sign of a Christian's faith.

The injunction, however, doubtless still holds good : " Prove all things." There may be novelty of doctrine without progress, as w T ell as progress without entire novelty. The question is always legitimate and necessary whether any alleged improvement is a real advance. So far as in the following essays we have recognized progress it has been under the full and constant acceptance of the supreme authority of sacred Scripture. Whatever new light may break forth, it will come from this source, as the church is led by the Providence and Spirit of God to a better understanding of its teachings. We have no reason to anticipate that there will be opened to theology any absolutely new doctrine, or to practical piety any other way of salvation than that revealed in the beginning. If, in the ensuing pages, opinions are expressed which can be shown not to harmonize with the voice of Scripture, or with the religious life that the Word of God instrumentally produces and sustains, they are thereby judged and condemned. We advocate them because we believe them to be Biblical and Christian. We use both of these adjectives because they seem to be necessary. It appears sometimes to be overlooked that an opinion may be Christian which cannot be grounded in, or fortified by, an array of proof-texts. The Bible, it should be remembered, is not a collection of texts designed to establish propositions in systematic theology. It is written after another method, for a different purpose. It presents persons, events, principles, warnings and promises, precepts, and examples.

"Every Scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness ; that the man of God may be complete, furnished completely unto every good work." The systemization of Christian doctrine proceeds under the laws of thought. Inferences must be regulated by the nature and scope of the premises. A great historical fact, a union of the ideal and the real, like the Incarnation, radiates light upon all the problems of human history and destiny. Reason, illumined by it, may trust it and use it, and not be misled, even though it cannot quote an explicit utterance of an Apostle for all that it discerns. Or, if this be thought to be too bold an assumption, this much must be admitted: Christianity is revealed as the universal and final religion for mankind. Whatever is legitimately and necessarily involved in this premise has the authority of Scripture which attests this religion, even though it be not a matter of direct and explicit Biblical assertion. The Scriptures teach, as we have just said, the principle of the universality of Christianity, but the humblest disciple of Jesus can to-day draw inferences as to the meaning of this doctrine, as to its verification in the progress and prospects of Christian missions, that exceed anything explicitly declared in the Apostolic preaching or writings. On a variety of themes conclusions are drawn and generally accepted in the Christian church from the revealed character of God, from the character and spirit of Jesus's teaching, from the character of his religion, which are wider or more specific than can be proved by any particular inspired utterance.

Such inferences are current and accredited respecting the salvation of infants, the obligation of the Lord's day, the doctrine of the Trinity, the extension and triumph of the Christian church, the nature of the Atonement. The light of the gospel as a revelation of God, the light of Christianity concentrated in the Person and work of Christ, not only shines back upon ancient Scripture, giving it new meaning, not only irradiates Apostolic preaching and prophecy, but also streams along the track of the Christian centuries, interpreting their significance, and onward into the unseen universe, whose heaven is the presence of Christ and all whose worlds are under his sway. Single proof-texts or collected proof-texts are not a measure of Christianity, nor of our knowledge of Christianity. The greatness of Christ is reflected in history, as well as in Apostolic teaching; in the fulfillments of prophecy, as well as in the comparatively indistinct letter of the original prediction ; in the advance of the church in an appropriation of the spirit of his teaching ; in its growing power to think after Him his thoughts and to be inspired by his love; in the long succession of centuries which require new interpretations of the meaning of his second coming ; in the evolution of the economy of the Holy Spirit whom He sends, and whose work is conditioned by his Person, sacrifice, and reign. All these things put the church now in a relation to his religion which never before has been paralleled. The facts revealed in the Scriptures speak with new tongues. We do not honor Scripture less, but more, when we trust these facts, and God's interpretations of them in reason and history. They are life ; the human mind feels their vivifying power in the world of thought and theology, and cannot be held back from larger conceptions of God and his kingdom and human destiny, because everything it cherishes in hope and expectation was not definitely uttered by an Apostle in writing a practical letter to the Romans, or the Corinthians, or the Diaspora. Theology is the science of God. God is revealed in Christ. The possibility, the unity, the verification, of a science of divinity are given in Him. The ultimate test of progress, therefore, is Christological. The point always to be determined with reference to any alleged improvement is whether it promotes the knowledge of the central principle of Christianity in itself or in its operations.

We suppose that it is a sense of the truth of this criterion which underlies the frequent representation made by the opponents of the "New Theology" that their own systems are Christocentric. It is implied that if they were not so the claim of this Theology to be a real advance would be justified. We gladly recognize the full measure of truth which resides in such claims. The tendency of Christian thought has for long been in the direction of such a method of theological construction. One of the most marked characteristics of modern theology, as compared with either the mediaeval or ancient, is the development given to the doctrine of the Atonement. This movement culminated in the "New England Theology." The doctrine of divine sovereignty had still a formal ascendency, but this sovereignty was thought of as sovereign grace, and as administered on the basis of a universal atonement. This is an important approach to a Christocentric system. The work of Christ is exalted to a position of dignity and power never before so adequately and scientifically represented. Yet this system with all its excellences is still far from being Christocentric. Its doctrine of God and of his purposes is not yet thoroughly christianized, but contains unassimilated deistic and pagan elements. Its theory of the Atonement subordinates the Person of Christ to his work. Its anthropology is individualistic, and is not ruled by the thought of divine sonship. Its eschatology, with special merits, is a receptacle of many imperfections and misconceptions which have crept into previous parts of the system. The whole of it, as Dr. Henry B. Smith has said, needs to be Christologized. A truly Christocentric system will be won when, and not until, the Person of Christ rather than his work is made central in redemption, and is seen at the same time to be central also in creation, revelation, and the universal kingdom of God. For such a theology is not a mere pietistic eulogy of the historic Christ, nor even a profound apprehension of some one or more of his offices or acts alone, but a systemization of religious doctrine through the knowledge of God, and especially the knowledge of God's ethical nature, communicated by Him who is the beginning and end of all divine revelations. And when once this fundamental conception of the nature and method of theology is really gained it will be discerned with equal clearness and necessity that the true and ultimate test of all theological progress is its christianization of its materials, from whatsoever source they may be derived.

With reference to several of the topics considered by us, it should be borne in mind that as distinct, specific, and absorbing questions of theological discussion they belong to the modern era ; one of them is but just beginning to attract the attention it deserves. Each and all, indeed, have from early times received more or less notice. Certain elements or factors of each have been made prominent. But none have been discussed as now, or within a comparatively brief period. The question, What is the Bible ? could not earlier be investigated as in recent days, for lack, apart from other reasons, of the requisite critical apparatus. The doctrine of the Atonement even in so late a Confession as the Westminster — the last of the great historic creeds — is merged in the larger doctrine of Redemption. Many questions in eschatology, now rife, have never until recently received thorough consideration. The special inquiry as to the relation of ^ Christ's Person, sacrifice, final judgment, to those who never hear the gospel in this life is becoming more and more urgent and important, because it is ^ the next and necessary one now that the Atonement has become a distinct and specific doctrine, and the interpretation has won general approval that it has an absolutely universal relation and intent. We claim in that portion of our work which will natu- \ rally attract the most criticism to be pursuing the path opened by our predecessors in vindicating the now accepted truth that Christ's sacrifice on Calvary was for every man. It is a reasonable request that this connection and relation of what we have to say on eschatology should be kept in view, and that the conclusions reached should be tested by their harmony with the revelation given in and through the Incarnation. The ultimate question between conflicting opinions must be, Which most perfectly appropriates the grace and truth revealed in Christ ? We do not decline the test of orthodoxy, but it is obvious that, with reference to inquiries which could not arise at an earlier stage of Christian knowledge or doctrinal development, and which have never been adjudicated upon ecclesiastically because never fully opened for discussion, the question of orthodoxy happily merges in the more profitable question of truth.

We add a single remark upon the general philosophical conception of God and his relation to the universe which underlies these essays. It is a modification of a prevailing Latin conception of the divine transcendence by a clearer and fuller appreciation (in accordance with the highest thought of the Greek fathers) of the divine immanence. Such a doctrine of God, we believe, is more and more approving itself in the best philosophy of our time, and the fact of the Incarnation commends it to the acceptance of the Christian theologian.

II. The Incarnation

The new or more developed thought respecting the Incarnation which we would now consider relates to the uniqueness of Jesus's humanity, the unity of his Person, and its significance.

I. The uniqueness of Jesus's humanity. The church has from the beginning maintained the reality of this humanity. The opposition which it has encountered has fastened successively upon its various elements. First it was denied that Jesus's body was real ; then that He possessed a soul ; then that his spirit or higher reason was homogeneous with ours ; then that He had a human will. Each negation was at once confronted with an explicit affirmation, so that no article of our faith has been more analytically and fully confessed. In modern times the cultivation of history and improved methods of Biblical interpretation have greatly increased the degree of attention given to this subject. The "New Theology" appropriates the fruits of these investigations. It seeks in every way to attain to a just historic appreciation of the actual life in Palestine of the Man of Nazareth, and to give a truthful representation of his personal 2 relations to his times and to the course of history. For this purpose it enters fearlessly and fully into the most critical and thorough examination of the proper sources of evidence. But it comes out from such an investigation with a clear, positive conviction that, regarded as a man, Jesus is not only like other men, but also different from other men ; that his unlikeness is an aspect of the truth or reality of his perfect manhood, and the ground of his universal human helpfulness, especially of his ability to enable men each to fulfill the idea and purpose of his own personality. This development of the doctrine of our Lord's humanity is a characteristic and most important advance of modern theology, and we will therefore dwell upon it long enough to make evident its import.

1. The uniqueness of Jesus's humanity appears in its universality. Every other man finds a limitation of his nature more or less positive, more or less influential, in his peculiar temperament. Though ordinarily not determinative, at least as respects the higher forms of the mind's action, it is always a modifying and differentiating power. Somewhat higher than individualizing forces of this sort are those innate mental tendencies and aptitudes which prompt or facilitate different kinds of labor. Each man finds it easier to work in certain directions or ways than in others. And then there is an endless variety of personal force and character secured through the proportion of powers which creative wisdom allots. An accomplished critic has pointed out, if memory serves us, that Plato, Milton, Edwards, Napoleon, John Howard, each possessed in a conspicuous degree the gift of imagination, and that it was the modification of this common endowment by other gifts with which it was associated that made one a speculative philosopher, another a poet, another a theologian, another a soldier, another a philanthropist. And thus it comes about that no one person is absolutely like or can adequately represent any other person. This peculiarity which distinguishes one man from another and from every other we call his individuality. It fits him for his place and calling. It is his distinction. But it is also his limitation.

The uniqueness of Christ's humanity appears in this, that it was not thus circumscribed. He was an individual man, but his individuality is his universality. He was " the Son of Man." x That which distinguishes Him from all other men is that He represents them all. His separation from any one of us is that which brings Him near to every one of us. His peculiarity is that no man's nature is so peculiar that He cannot comprehend it. He has kinship with us all by being our common Head. His benevolence embraced all men of every race, age, and clime. Whosoever does his will is his mother, sister, brother. His words are not those of any school of thought. His death was for every man. The record, "in all points tempted

1 On the significance of this title see note by Dr. Westcott in Speaker's Commentary, ii. 33-35.

like as we are," is as true for one reader as for another. A life so comprehensive and complete requires as its basis and prerequisite a nature equally universal. And in this — its recognized and evident universality — Christ's human nature is without a counterpart.

2. The uniqueness of his humanity is further manifest from its participation in the work of mediation between God and men. How essential is the part it sustains in this work is suggested by the Apostle's declaration, " one Mediator, also, between God and men, himself man." This mediatorial office Jesus alone of all men sustains. He alone is Prophet, Priest, and King. So exalted, so transcendent, are the services He renders that it is sometimes difficult to make real to our minds that it is through the human nature of Christ they are achieved. And since the Scriptures themselves assure us that the divine nature entered into this partnership by which heaven and earth are united, God and man are reconciled, it is very easy, in the effulgence of the divine glory which invests the Redeemer, to lose sight of that humanity which He ever bore, and by which He accomplished his delivering and saving work. Yet if we commit ourselves trustingly and fearlessly to the authoritative Scriptural representation, we shall soon discover that the humanity of Christ is not set before us in the New Testament as sustaining merely a conditional or adminicular relation to a work whose intrinsic and essential value comes from another source. On the contrary, throughout its entire achievement we everywhere see as an integral and necessary part of it the obedience, suffering, sacrifice, victory, and glorification of a human nature as real as our own. That this achievement had a lustre and value transcending anything possible in a merely human experience is also true, as the faith of the church has ever held. But we are not to conceive of this as an arbitrary imputation of value. For this humanity was fashioned to be the perfect organ and instrument of revelation, to be freely swayed and controlled in all its movements by the will of God, to be more and more filled with his gifts as its powers expanded from infancy to maturity, to receive the Spirit without measure, to be transfigured by the indwelling Deity, to be glorified in God. All its experiences, whether active or passive, were those of a nature created capacious of Deity. This is true also of other men according to their measure. Indeed, it is the highest note and attribute of humanity at large. Christ could not be a representative man and a mediator, if his humanity were not real. But it lies also in his mediatorship that He is the head of the race, and not a mere member of it, and that humanity in Him becomes receptive of the divine fullness, so that there are gathered up in Him all divine gifts for men.