Page images
PDF
EPUB

a firmer hold upon the affections of its members, than its liturgy, its clerical robes, or its punctilious regard to the proprieties of outward worship, or than all these combined together. It will almost uniformly be found to be true, that the clergy of the Episcopal church not only keep a Parish Register, but that they study it closely, and profit by the suggestions which a frequent reference to it is fitted to excite. They know and number the families of their flocks. They regard with interest those whom they baptize and train for confirmation. They show by their personal presence and attentions, that they care for all who are attached to their congregations. It is traditional with them to foster and deepen the impression upon every such person, that he or she has an interest in the community of the Christian church, of which the Rector is the guardian, and in some sense the chief representative and impersonation. It is this personal assumption of care, affection, and duty, this constant maintenance of a living and real function, this holding forth of the word of life by a living person who acts out the claims which he asserts, which gives "the Rector" an advantage which "the Pastor" may assert to himself with equal propriety, and turn to a far more efficient use. It is not at all in a spirit of disparagement that we say these things of "the Rector," but it is to his honor that we record his fidelity to his calling. We could wish that "the Pastor" might be "provoked " in the Christian sense, to copy and surpass him. The increase of the pastoral feeling, on the part of the minister, will certainly contribute to the increase of the true church by feeling on the part of the flock. It would be idle in this connection to enumerate the many advantages which we claim for our own freer and more flexible polity, and for the more earnest and energetic type of Christianity which we desire to promote. If, however, we fail to secure to ourselves this indispensable condition of an efficient ministry, we shall fail to prosper. If it is to be allowed to our clergy with their more earnest theology, their larger opportunities for power in the pulpit, and the offices of devotion, to fail in that one feature which connects them vitally with the people, and gives them power over individual souls, we shall fail in every

thing; and Congregationalism itself will gradually but surely cease to retain its hold upon the confidence and affection of its own children. But the organic weakness of Congregationalism in this as in all other respects has ever been its spiritual strength. It requires "living stones" in the temple, if the temple itself is to be blessed of the Lord, and hence a never ceasing responsibility is imposed upon all its members to be active, zealous, devoted on the one hand, and forbearing, harmonious, and united on the other. It requires that its ministry should in word and life be leaders and examples to the flock. If they fail in any essential function of their office, the whole body must suffer, and they must bear the reproach. Upon the Congregational Pastor, more than upon any other, there is laid the pressing obligation, nay, the ever urgent necessity not only to "preach the word," but to be "instant in season and out of season, to reprove, rebuke, and exhort with all long suffering," and with the wise and well adapted "doctrine" which the Pastor's skill and the Pastor's faithful love alone can minister.

ARTICLE XI.—THE COUNCIL AND THE CREED.

We regret that the time at our disposal before the issue of the present number of the New Englander, is too short for a full discussion of the topic suggested by the foregoing title. We shall content ourselves with offering a few explanations respecting the action of the Preliminary Committee appointed to prepare a Declaration of Faith, and with subjoining a few remarks upon the proceedings of the late Council upon the subject.

The Preliminary Committee simply had to consider and determine a question of fact-namely, what is the Doctrinal Faith of the Congregational Churches? It was no part of their office to inculcate any views, whether old or new, in theology, or to attempt to reconcile differing theological parties. They were called upon to state for the information of the world, as well as for the profit of our own denomination, the Doctrinal Belief of the churches represented in the Council.

Now, to attempt an original statement, in detail, of the Christian system, seemed impracticable, even if it were desirable. In the first place, creeds must, in a sense, make themselves. They must be framed under favoring circumstances and at propitious times, and not manufactured simply for the reason that a company of divines and theologians happen to be assembled. The ancient formularies which have enjoyed the highest authority, owed their influence to the fact that they were recognized as the ripe product of the thinking and experience of the Church. The leading creeds of the seventeenth century, as the Westminster Confession, naturally followed upon the intense agitations and controversies of the preceding age. If the definition is made too soon, it will not heal but foment strife, and either goes for nothing, or must wait for acceptance. Thus, the great Council of Nicæa, swayed by court influence, laid down a formula for which the Church

was not prepared; and not until after more than a half century of eager conflict was the ground fairly won, which the Council had hastily seized. Certain most important subjects of theology now engage the attention of thinking men and excite controversy. The whole Church is more or less stirred by them. But the time has not come to gather up and formulate the results of all this study and inquiry. In the second place, there was no probability that the Council could agree upon any complete, detailed exhibition of doctrine. How, for example, could they agree upon definitions of original sin? Who does not know that the introduction of precise definitions on this subject would be the signal for endless debate? It seemed unwise to kindle theological strife to no purpose. Even were the Council to sit as long as did the Westminster Assembly, and be aided, like that body, by the wisdom and learning of such men as Lightfoot and Selden, or even were the session to last as long as that of the Council of Trent, the old-school and new-school and no-school parties would never harmonize upon any precise, detailed scheme of doctrinal definitions.

It is said that we can agree upon the doctrines, but not upon the philosophy of the doctrines; and the true course would have been to frame a full statement of doctrine, and leave out the philosophy. But can the "philosophy" be thus severed from the doctrine? Take, for example, the doctrine of the Person of Christ. The Arian will call Him divine; he will even style Him God. How then will you cut off the Arian? Not until you have introduced the Homöousion, which he cannot utter, do you adequately define your position. But this famous word, even when "English'd" by the Westminster divines in the phrase same in substance, savors of philosophy in the view of most men. So it is with all the important doctrines of Christianity. Creed-statements must be exact, guarded, unambiguous; and language of this sort is considered, and for aught we know, properly considered, the language of philosophy. It is frequently the case that men who would eliminate philosophy from doctrine, simply mean all philosophy save their own.

These and other reasons dissuaded the Preliminary Committee from attempting to compose a new Westminster Confession, or a new Heidelberg Catechism.

They were convinced that the interest of conservatism and the interest of liberty would both be best promoted by giving a qualified assent to the old symbols. In this they had the example of the Fathers of New England, who took symbols already existing, and accorded to them such an assent. The Committee accordingly brought forward the three symbols which have been recognized by the churches as standards of orthodoxy, namely, the Westminster, the Savoy, and the Doctrinal Part of the Thirty-Nine Articles, and declared them to represent, for substance of doctrine, the faith of our churches. Every one who has not essentially departed from the general type of doctrine prevalent in the Reformed Branch of the Protestant Church, can subscribe to this Declaration. Can anything more liberal be properly demanded in answer to the question, What do the Congregational churches believe?

We have heard but two objections to this recommendation. The first proceeds from a dislike of the phrase, "substance of doctrine," and of any qualified subscription. This objection comes not from the stricter, but the more latitudinarian quarter. We must confess ourselves incapable of seeing any weight in this objection. The Cambridge Synod of 1648 had no scruples of conscience respecting this guarded method of subscription. In truth, if a creed which pretends to cover the ground of Christian theology is to retain its position as a platform for a large body of Christians, this kind of subscription is requisite. Dr. Dutton might compose a full creed to suit himself, and possibly (though not probably) to suit a large body of ministers assembled on a particular occasion; but such are the differences in men's minds that all of its propositions could not be expected to gain the assent of independent inquirers who, nevertheless, agree with him in the general type of their theology. Dissent from this phrase or that would infallibly spring up. Some latitude must be allowed for dissenting, and even for eccentric, thought. Hence both branches of the Presbyterian church in this country are wise in only requiring

« PreviousContinue »