the simplicitas et majestas stili, etc. Comp. Gerhard, Loci 1. c. Calov. systema T. i. p. 528 ss. and the other compendiums of systematic theology. See Hase, Hutterus redivivus, p. 99 ss. 6 The mystics opposed, in the first instance, the orthodoxy of the letter. Thus Jacob Böhm said: Though reason may cry: Give me only the letter of Scripture, yet the external letter does not impart sufficient knowledge, although it may guide us in our researches; the living letter also, which is the independent and revealed word and nature of God, must, through the medium of the revealed word, be laid open and read in man, who is taught and instructed by the Holy Ghost himself. See the preface to his work: Von der Geburt und Bezeichnung aller Wesen, quoted by Umbreit, Jacob Böhm, p. 66.-Previous to the time of Bohm Sebastian Frank of Wörd (who lived in the sixteenth century) had maintained, that "the devil himself may be well versed in Scripture, and even adhere to its very letter, as he is now doing in the case of so many sects which have nothing in their favour but mere Scripture," etc., quoted by Umbreit 1. c. p. 60. Wiegel, Postille vol. ii. p. 62. 63. iii. p. 84. says: Scripture, as such, is a dead letter, and an empty word, which sounds through the air; and in another work, entitled Gülden Griff c. 19.: It is not enough to say, such and such a writer has possessed the Holy Spirit, therefore he cannot make a mistake. My dear friend! first of all prove the truth of thy statement; thou wilt find it a difficult work to prove and demonstrate it. Who is Cephas? who is Paul? says the apostle; who is this man or that? They are all men. It is God, God alone, who works faith, and imparts judgment to try the spirits and discern the writings; comp. Walch, Einletung in die Religions streitigkeiten vol. iv. p. 1044. 45. In the same manner Christian Hoburg (quoted by Hollaz. ed. Teller p. 75.) expressed himself as follows: "Scripture, [i. e., the letter of Scripture] is an antiquated, cold, and dead thing, which makes men mere Pharisees."-Arnd, wahres Christenthum p. 28, used terms more moderate, but more to the point: God did not reveal his Holy Word that it might remain a dead letter printed upon paper, but become a living power within us, and create in us an entirely new and spiritual nature, otherwise it is of no use. All that Scripture teaches externally must become manifest in man through Christ, in the spirit and in faith. Ibid. p 89: The living Christ is the book which we must read, and from which we must learn. 7 Spener agreed with the mystics in this, that the dead letter can do nothing. But he opposed quite as decidedly the preeminence assigned to the spirit without Scripture. Thus he said, in opposition to the notions of the Quakers: So far from our feelings being the norm of truth, Divine truth is the norm of our feelings. This norm of truth exists in the Divine Word apart from ourselves; see the passages quoted by Henricke, p. 6 and 7. Concerning the right of the laity to read and search the Sacred Scriptures, he expressed himself as follows (Geistliches Priesterthum, Francfurt 1677. p. 29): "Since the epistle of our heavenly Father is addressed to all his children, no child of God is to be excluded from its perusal; all have not only this right, but are also commanded to read it." "They must also search the Scriptures that they may be enabled to examine the doctrine of their minister, in order that their faith may not be founded upon the authority and testimony of men, but upon Divine truth." But Spener made special efforts to render the Bible practical, both among the people (by a more popular interpretation of Scripture), and among theologians by his collegia biblica. Comp. Pia Desideria (Francf. 1712.) p. 94 ss. 8 The Universities of Louvain and Douay condemned (A. D. 1588) the assertion of the Jesuits that it was not necessary to suppose that the very words of Scripture are inspired. A controversy respecting inspirstion was carried on (A. D. 1622) between the Jansenists and the Jesuit Jean Adam. In his opinion the sacred penmen have sometimes made exaggerated statements; on the whole, it is by no means necessary to take everything in Scripture in its most literal sense. The Jansenists showed the dangerous tendency of such assertions. Reuchlin, Geschichte von Port-Royal i. p. 613 ss.-In opposition to the Protestant doctrine concerning Scripture, Bellarmin maintained (de verbo Dei iv. 4):......Apostolos non de scribendo, sed de prædicando Evangelio primaria intentione cogitasse. Præterea, si a Spener thought it even desirable (p. 38) that the laity should study Greek and Hebrew, "to be enabled to understand the revelations of the Holy Spirit in his own language;❞ nevertheless, "the want of acquaintance with foreign languages does not exclude pious Christians from a true knowledge of that which God has deemed necessary for the edification of their souls." doctrinam suam litteris consignare ex professo voluissent, certc catechismum aut similem librum confecissent. At ipsi vel historiam scripserunt, ut Evangelistæ, vel epistolas ex occasione aliqua, ut Petrus, Paulus, Jocobus etc. et in iis nonnissi obiter [?] disputationes de dogmatibus tractaverunt.-He rejected the testimony of Scripture in favour of inspiration, as a testimony in its own cause; not only the Bible, but also the Koran, claims. inspiration! He further maintained that there was no sure criterion for the canonicity of the separate books in Scripture itself, etc. Nor were the critical investigations of Richard Simon reconcilable with the idea of verbal inspiration. Compare his Traité de l'inspiration des livres sacrés. Roterd. 1687. 9 On the difference between the hermeneutical principles of the Protestants, and those of the Roman Catholics, see above, § 242. notes 6 and 7. For further particulars compare Klausen, Hermeneutik p. 227 ss. 10 Liber de potentiæ S. S. Comp. Aphorismi contra Pontificios. Animadversiones in Bellarmini controversias. His main principle was, "that the words of Scripture must everywhere be supposed to signify just as much as they may signify." In decided opposition to the principle of Arminians and Socinians, according to which every passage is to be considered separately and in its historical limits, Coccejus endeavoured to treat the various books of the Bible as connected parts of a greater whole, so that the one is reflected by the other. Comp. Klausen Hermeneutik p. 282 ss. It is a well-known saying: Grotium nusquam in sacris litteris (V. T.) invenire Christum, Coccejum ubique. 11 e. g., Turretin, Werenfels, and others. The sceptical sentence of Werenfels is well known : Hic liber est, in quo quisque sua dogmata quærit, 12 Thus Becker (die bezauberte Welt, preface p. 11 ss.) represented reason as antecedent to Scripture, but maintained that they did not contradict each other. "To say the truth, reason a To refute Calvin (Instit. vii. 12.), in whose view the Sacred Scriptures are distinguished from profane writings, as light from darkness, and sweet from sour, he adduced the opinion of Luther, who called the Epistle of James a straw Epistle. must precede Scripture, because Scripture presupposes reason; I mean sound reason, to which Scripture must prove its divine origin. Reason exists along with Scripture, speaking of things concerning which the latter is silent. Scripture exists along with reason, because it teaches us something very different which does not belong to the province of reason. And lastly, Scripture is, nevertheless, above reason, not as lord and master (for either has its respective office), but because it possesses greater dignity and larger means......But at times it happens that they meet by the way, or have a meeting in some house, and thus assist each other; both remain, however, free, with this difference only, that reason, acknowledging its inferiority, always pays deference to Scripture." Though Protestants were accustomed to consider both the Old and the New Testament as constituting one norm of faith, it was natural that the material principle of faith, which manifested itself in the evangelical doctrine of justification by faith, should exert a reaction upon the formal, and render necessary some kind of subordination of the Old Testament to the New (of the law to the gospel). The symbolical books make a difference between the ceremonial and the moral law. The former had typical significance, and is now fulfilled; the latter partly shows us the nature of sin (as in a mirror), and partly is still of importance as a rule of life. Comp. Articles of Schmalk. Art. 2. p. 319, Apol. p. 83. Confess. Gallica Art. 23, Belg. 25. Helv. ii. c. 12. 13.-In reference to the Antinomian controversy (§ 217. note 7.) see the Formula Concordiæ Art. 5. and 6. (de tertio usu legis.)—But it cannot well be said that the law and the gospel are identical, the one with the Old, the other with the New Testament; for the prophecies in the Old Testament partake of the nature of the gospel, while the New Testament contains moral precepts. See the preface of Luther to his translation of the New Testament, 1522. 236 SECOND SECTION. ANTHROPOLOGY, JUSTIFICATION, AND ECONOMY OF REDEMPTION. (MATERIAL PRINCIPLE.) A. ANTHROPOLOGY. § 244. MAN PRIOR TO THE FALL. During the present period, the opinion generally prevailed, among Christians of all denominations, that the state of our first parents had been more excellent, both in respect to body and soul prior to the fall, than after it.1 But while theologians of the Roman Catholic Church agreed with the majority of the scholastics in regarding the original righteousness of man as a donum superadditum,2 Protestants (Lutherans as well as Calvinists), maintained that God had created man in the possession of perfect righteousness and holiness,3 qualities which, together with immortality, belonged to his original nature. Arminians, and Socinians,5 entertained less exalted opinions concerning the original state of man. The latter asserted, that the image of God, after which man was created, has only reference to his dominion over animals, or the irrational creation in |