« ElőzőTovább »
bad by threatening punishment; that he rendered, consequently, self-love and egotism the motives of action. That man is a contemptible one who honors father and mother that it may be well with him, and he may live long on the eartb, (Eph. 6: 2-3.) Christ's moral law can no more be ours, no more the law of refined mankind. The most vulgar egotist-the most wretched miser-could find no more acceptable precept than to forsake houses, lands, etc., in order to receive a hundred-fold,' (Matt. 19 : 27.)
" What shall I answer to this? It may be admitted that the Christian motive of retribution appears frequently among Christians in this impure form; that they strike, as it were, a bargain between the present life and the future, in order to gain, by the sacrifices brought in this life, a so much higher reward in the other. But this abuse and misapprehension is not to be imputed to the Christian doctrine it. self. The latter deprives, on the contrary, egotistic hope of roward of this ground, by the very fundamental doctrine of justification through faith and not through works; and by the fact that it does not recognize any merit of human virtue, (Luke 17 : 10,) and teaches to expect every thing from the mere mercy of God, (Matt. 20 : 1-16.) It denies all moral value to actions resulting from selfish regards, (Cf. 1 Cor. 13, Matt. 5:46, and the energetic language against the Phariseean egotism, Matt. 6,) and makes even hatred of our own life and the nearest relations--that is the subordination and neglecting of personal interests with regard to the moral requirements of the kingdom of God-a condition of discipleship of Christ, (Luko 14:26; Matt. 10: 37-39.) The motives of action resulting from a regard for our own welfare, are without any moral value if they are the only or prevalent mo. tives; but not, if they are subordinated to the higher and nobler. And this is the caso with Christianity, which represents love—that banishes all ogotism-as (the) principle and motive of action and suffering. It demands the desire of the good for its own sake; that is, for God's sake, or because it pleases God, the primitive good. It represents the inner tranquillity-the peace of the soul-as the aim of the moral and religious life; pointing, undoubtedly, to the inner beauty and worth of virtue. It is to this inner worth of the good that Jesus alludes when he says of Mary: She hath chosen the good part, (Luke 10 : 42,) which shall not be taken away from her; she hath wrought (Matt. 26: 10) a good work upon me. While He represents to His disciples the child as an example of humility and mod. esty, He shows them in this metaphor the moral beauty of this virtue. And what, if not the pure love of good, is contained in the symbolic expression of Jesus, My meat is to do the will of God,' (John 4: 34,) for which His believers, too, ought to labor, (6: 27.) Nay, eternal life often signifies (especially with John) not only tho future happiness, but also the moral-religious life of the spirit, flowing even hero below from faith-the imperishable—that springeth up into everlasting life, (John 3:18; 4: 14; 5: 24.) To moral action (obedience to the will of God) is ascribed an absolute, eternal, and imperishable value, while all the rest becomes a prey to corruption, (1 John 2 : 17.) Such and similar passages prove amply that the good is also recommended for its own sake-for the sake of its absolute worth.
"A reward is, in the popular language of the Scripture, often promised to strug. gling and suffering virtue. But this reward is by no means to be confounded with merit. It is merely the happy state resulting as a consequence of the unity of our will with God; it is the hormony existing between the inner essential happiness and its outward appearance. This does not take place in this world to its full ex. tent. There exists, rather, a disproportion between both, that will only be righted above, in the state of perfect liberty of the children of God, (Rom. 8.) But when the outward glory corresponds to the inner, Christian virtue will have obtained its perfect development, and therewith its reward, (Col. 3: 3-4.) Condemnation is, likewise, the outward representation and appearance corresponding to unrighteousness. Both are, indeed, represented, in the popular language of the holy Scripture, in symbolic images that have borrowed their color from earthly relations. But there is no want of hints—especially in the Gospel of St. John and the apostolic letters-with whose aid more spiritual and more ideal views are developed from outward forms.
"In as far as eternal happiness is only promised under the condition of the unity of our will with God, the aspiration to the former can, in reality, not be separated from the aspiration to harmony with God through moral perfection; this is evident, for example, in the confession of the apostle Paul, (Phil. 3 : 12–14.) But because the weak human nature gains, amid the struggles and sufferings of this life, a counterbalance and continual strength only by the hope of future happiness; or because the hardened sinner is often roused up to a moral life only through the fear of damnation, Christianity satisfies the human wants by the very circumstance that among its motives it also puts in motion the instinctive desire for happiness and the fear of evil.
"Even the regard for good or bad consequences (reward or punishment) of our actions in our life here below, is not unconditionally to be looked upon as an im. pure and immoral motive, unless it be the only and highest. Various as the degrees of moral power and development are, and in consideration of the manifold human relations of life, an inferior motive may often be efficient where the higher is not yet appreciated. And Christianity proves by this very fact, most strikingly, its practical character and general applicability, since it arouses the human heart by such a great variety of motives.
"Equally unfounded is the objection made even in the earliest times by the Pagans, that Christianity, by a constant direction to the heavenly, renders its professors unfit and unpractical for earthly life. There are, in fact, in the Christian Church, numerous examples of such as were in a hostile manner opposed to the real life, or wasted their powers in (an) inert longing for the eternal. But this occurred either in times of opposition to rising Christianity to the pagan life, or in consequence of psychological aberrations, connected as these frequently are with a strongly excited religious feeling. Genuine Christianity, however, unites the temporal and eternal life in beautiful harmony. It emphatically recommends the respect for our earthly avocation, (1 Cor. 7: 17, 20, 24,) and exhorts to an active, conscientious use of our faculties in every situation, (2 Thess. 3 : 10-12; 1 Thess. 4:11; 1 Tim. 5: 3-16; Rom. 12: 4-10, 13; 1 Peter 4: 10,) without, however, as is done now. adays, deifying industrial activity, and declaring it the only salvation of the world, How touching is, for example, the manner in which Paul moderates his fervid longing for the world above, by the consideration of circumstances requiring his protracted presence on earth, (2 Cor. 5:8; Phil. 1 : 21.) The eye turned toward heaven--the hand laboring upon the earth-this is the symbol of Christian life.
“Christianity avails itself, finally, of the high dignity of the human nature, as a vigorous motive to moral action. By representing man as the image of Divinity, as child of God, it admonishes him to act according to this higher nature, and to harmonize with divine life by casting off the bonds of error and deceitful lust, (Eph. 4:22.) It tends to arouse and awaken within him an elevated, vigorous self-con
sciousness, that he might, out of respect for his own nature and destiny, avoid so much more decidedly all that which violates and profanes it. Christianity has been called a religion simply of humility and resignation, a religion rather for women than for men. It has been asserted that it was, as a religion of suffering resignation, no more fit for our age; which latter requires more strengthening agencies, and whose vocation is endeavor and action, not suffering. Christianity leads, in. deed, man to the deepest humility in consequence of his becoming conscious of his moral weakness and entire dependence upon God. But this humility is not such that (as St. Macarius says) we should, if we have five ounces of evil, add twenty more. But Christianity leads to that humility which also rejoices in the good we possess, but in the good as wrought in us by God. The pagan doctrine of the selfsufficiency of the human nature, seems to ascribe to human individuality a higher dignity than the Christian doctrine of divine grace. But this is only apparently 50. If not, how could it have happened that the pagans, through their elevation of human nature, have, nevertheless, not succeeded in forming an idea of freedom and personality, which has only been developed by the Christian religion denying to man all merit before God? Christianity teaches resignation, but such resignation as is at the same time consistent with energetic action. Or is our ideal only the weak, suffering Christ? is it not also Christ primarily and incessantly acting and working? Christianity creates, therefore, not only the sense of suffering, but also the freest, most cheerful fortitude, the highest energy, in the contest with all ungodliness; the most active enthusiasm for all the good and the true, (Phil. 4: 13; 2 Tim. 1 : 7.) . . . . . .
* Thus Christianity is infinitely preferable, since it is no mere law-tablet and dry doctrine of duties, but a quickening power, seizing upon man in his inmost vitality, and calculated to display the fullness of the higher, spiritual nature of man; to create a disposition of mind uninterruptedly directed towards the good and that which pleases God; and, finally, to render law unnecessary, because no law is given to the just. Christianity is not only a doctrine, but also life and education. It nourishes and strengthens the moral life in particular by the communion with the Church, the sacraments, and the word of God. And even its commandments are nothing strange to the human heart; they are essentially written in the hearts of all men. What man's nobler nature demands by its spiritual motives and sentiments, the Gospel requires by its doctrines and examples. It wants only to touch the strings of the human heart, and to call into life faculties that are slumbering germs in all. It is only the commentary of the human heart. For, although it looks upon human nature as corrupt and diseased, and offers itself as a remedy therefor, still the efficiency of the remedy (pre)supposes a certain life and exhibition of strength. And it is to this nobler remainder of the original god-like life that it attaches itself, in order to awaken it to new fullness of strength and energy.
- Thus is Christianity, with its doctrines, facts, faculties, and institutions; from which a fresh life of vigor and health streams forth into the infected life of the soul and by which the dissonant being of a man is led back to a consonant accord and to a primitive harmony. Understanding and will, feeling and vigor of action, are equally moved and animated. Earnestness and cheerfulness, humility and selfconsciousness, earthly and heavenly, meet together in a new, divine union. The soul reaches happiness, freedom, peace. And because the mind is in all things the dominant and deciding power, physical welfare, as far as allowed by the finite, must thereby be promoted and increased."
One other work remains to be examined, but of this onr limited space forbids us from giving more than a brief sketch. This, also, owes its origin to one of these prize organizations, which, both in England, Holland, and Germany, have been found so useful in drawing out and supporting theological talent. The Teyler Theological Society of Harlaem, gave ont, in 1848, a prize question for an answer to the then recent attacks by the Tubingen school on the consistency and unity of the apostolical letters and teachings. The essay before usthe apostolic and post-apostolic period, considered in reference to distinction and unity of doctrine and life* -received the prize, and has met with a popularity which is due not merely to the ability with which it defends the unity and the divine authority of the apostolical writings, but to its peculiar conciseness, elegance, and precision of style. The movement is most important, for it is the advance-guard of faith detached to meet and beat back the attack of the advance-guard of rationalism, on a point which, as being apparently least defended, was supposed by the assailants to be most open to a surprise. Dr. Baur's method of assault we have already noticed; it remains for us simply to say that Dr. Lechler is entitled to the credit of having, in the work before us, not only repelled the attack, but erected an impregnable rampart against future invasion.
* Das apostolische und das Nach-apostolische Zeitalter, mit Rücksicht auf Unterschied und Einheit in Lehre und Leben. Dargesellt von GOTTHARD Victor LECHLER, Doctor der Philosopbie, Dekan zu Knittlingen, K. Wurttemburg, etc. Stuttgart, 1857.
On the Authorized Version of the New Testament, in connection with some recent Proposals for its Revision. By R. C. TRENCH, D.D. New-York. 1858.
SOME notice was taken of the work of Trench, whose title we give above, in our last number. It was then said, “that the question of a joint movement to be made in the direction of a general and dispassionate revision, under circumstances that would unite in the work the best scholarship and capacity of the entire Protestant Church, was commended to the grave consideration of our readers."
That question we now propose to discuss. After giving a brief history of the origin of our version, we shall give some account of the various efforts that have been made towards a new version, and then give our views on the general subject of its necessity.
At the time when our present version was made, there were two rival versions in use in England, the Genevan, made by the English refugees in Geneva, in 1560, and the Bishops' Bible, a version published under the superintendence of Archbishop Parker, and other Bishops, and authorized to be read in churches in public service. The Genevan version was used by the Non-conformists, and the Bishops' Bible by the Established Church. This last version is specially interesting to us, as it was the basis of the present version.
The origin of King James' version seems to have been quite accidental. It proceeded from the Hampton Court Conference, held in Hampton Court, January 14th, 16th, and 18th, 1604, in cosequence of the “ Millenary Petition," from near a thousand Non-conformist Clergymen, praying for reform in the Church. King James, always fond of meddling in such matters, issued a proclamation for a conference between the Nonconformists, on one side, and the Bishops and Lords of the Council, on the other. We have a full account of this conference in Fuller's Church History, vol. iii. p. 172. King James