صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

227

FURTHER MEANS OF ESTIMATING THE QUALITY OF THE NICENE THEOLOGY.

THERE is a very simple method of ascertaining the tendency and theological quality of religious writings, which, although it may seem a little arbitrary, yet will, I think, very seldom prove to be fallacious: it turns upon the rule that a writer's selection of Scripture, incidental, or formal, indicates his personal feeling, and his doctrinal bias. This rule would at once be admitted by many, as a safe one, if applied to some of our modern ultra protestant writers, who, while expounding and quoting, a thousand times over, certain noted passages in Paul's epistles, are found to advert much less often to our Lord's discourses; and very sparingly adduce any of the merely preceptive portions of the very epistles, the doctrinal parts of which engage so much of their attention. Why may we not then avail ourselves of this same rule, in other directions? It surely has a foundation in the reason of things, and it implies that, if at any time, or in any particular church, certain elements of truth have lost their due place in the system of doctrines, those passages of Scripture where such elements are prominent, will be seldom adduced, or when adduced, will be confusedly or perversely expounded.

Now, nothing can be more striking than is the result of a general survey of the patristic literature, as brought to the criterion of this special rule. The question being-Did the nicene divines themselves understand, and preach, the Gospel? Look to their choice of Scripture-the lists of texts most in favour with them. The general reader should be apprised that, in almost all the editions of the fathers, there is found, besides a general

index-rerum memorabilium, an index also of the passages of Scripture which the author expounds, or which he incidentally cites. By the aid then of these indices, a pretty exact idea may without much labour be obtained, of the feeling and doctrinal tendency of these theologians, on the ground of the rule above advanced. It will not be imagined that the absolute completeness or correctness of these indices should be vouched for; nevertheless, their general accuracy may very safely be affirmed: nor do I believe that the issue of such an examination would be at all affected by the few instances of omission, which a diligent research might probably discover.

Assuming then these tables of texts cited or expounded, to be in the main correct, we shall find, in the first place, that, with a remarkable uniformity, they offer to the eye those half dozen texts which afford a colour of authority to the principles and practices of the ascetic institute. Few indeed omit a reference to our Lord's words-'Let him that is able to receive it,' &c. or, 'They neither marry nor are given in marriage,' &c. or, to Paul's'It is good for a man not to touch a woman,' &c. These tables exhibit also, and of this we do not complain, an abundant gleaning, nay a rich harvest, gathered from the preceptive portions of the inspired volume: generally, more from the Old Testament, than from the New, and more from the Gospels, than from the Epistles, and more from the didactic, than from the doctrinal parts. of the Epistles.

But those noted passages which, to protestant ears, are the most familiar, and, to the well taught and spiritually minded, are the most dear, such bright passages are, in some of these lists, altogether wanting, and in most are the least frequently cited; or where cited, it is in a sense, or for a purpose very unlike, as we must think, their true intention. There are certain passages which, setting forth in the clearest manner, the freeness, the largeness, and the sufficiency of the method of salvation, are the first to convey hope and joy to contrite spirits; and they are the very same which the most eminent (modern) christians-the most laborious, and the most holy, have clung to in their last hours: they are the passages, moreover, which the most efficient and enlightened preachers and pastors have employed as the key-note

of their ministrations, public and private; and the very same are what may be called the hinges of controversy, between the first reformers and their purblind antagonists of the romish church.

Now I would recommend those who are conscientiously determined to satisfy themselves, by personal researches, concerning the great question now at issue between the nicene fathers and the reformers, to pursue the suggestion I am here offering, and to ascertain—no very difficult task, whether the allegation be true or not-That the great divines of antiquity either avoid all reference to passages of the kind now spoken of; or cite them in some incidental manner, and apart from any expression of their own feelings; or, if they quote and expound such passages, do it in a perverted manner, and so as to make it certain that they themselves discerned little or nothing of the glory of christianity, as therein expressed. This strange forgetfulness of what, on every account, claims our constant regard, and which, in modern times, has, on all sides (among those who have seriously addicted themselves to the study of the Scriptures) received the most attention, forces itself upon our notice, whenever we open the remains of ancient christianity. Every thing is wrought up and expanded, and repeated, and expounded-every thing, but the Gospel itself! From the apostolic fathers, and Justin, down. to Gregory I. and Boethius, nearly the same dimness in this respect attaches to all.

I am anxious to suggest to those who will avail themselves of such aid, various and independent modes of bringing to the proof the patristic theology, on this most serious allegation, of its sad deficiency in evangelic feeling, as well as doctrine. Among these methods, I have already mentioned, as peculiarly conclusive, an examination of those portraits of christianity, in the concrete, with which the works of the fathers abound. To this criterion, let it be objected that the false rhetorical taste of the times may perhaps have hidden from us, in such instances, the simple evangelic element of which we are in search, and which actually attached, as well to the orator, as to the subject of his too flowery declamation. Be it so; but is it not a rule in historical science, that, though men may often, after their death, be painted in false colours by their admiring friends, they will be found to have

R

truly painted themselves, in their letters to their intimate associates?

Now if this rule be a good one, I fear its application to the nicene divines will exhibit them in no very advantageous light, as christian men. That they were, most of them, sincere, devout, assiduous in their duties, and anxiously intent upon the welfare of the churches under their care, is incontestably proved by these remains. But does it appear from the same documents, that their hearts were warmed by those truths which are the glory of the christian system, and which, when so entertained, impart an unction, and an animation to christian communion? I think the affirmative cannot be pretended in favour of these divines, by even their most devoted admirers. What can be more lifeless and trivial than a large proportion of the epistolary remains of the ancient church? I will not name the epistles of Synesius, or those of Gregory Nazianzen; but what are those even of Basil, or Ambrose, or Chrysostom? If these specimens of ancient christian friendship are found, generally, to breathe a simplehearted evangelic piety, or to glow with an apostolic zeal for the furtherance of a pure Gospel, then let it be acknowledged that whatever unfavourable inferences may seem to have resulted from a perusal of other portions of the early christian literature, we have been mistaken in the estimate we have formed of the men and of the system. Are the advocates of nicene christianity willing to abide by the result of a full examination of the extant patristic epistles? I suppose not; and yet it does not appear why the criterion should not be regarded as a fair and conclusive one. Putting out of view, for a moment, their inspiration, we think ourselves able, in reading the apostolic epistles, to say what subjects were uppermost in the minds of the writers; nor can protestant readers of the Bible find themselves at a loss in determining, from these documents, whether the religion of the writers was a system of fear, servility, bodily service, ascetic virtue, credulity, exaggeration, sacramental mystification, and ecclesiastical arrogance; or a system of warmth, affection, hope, joy, love, substantial virtue, and real holiness. Now, judging of the nicene writers precisely in the same way, that is to say, by the general tenor and apparent temper of their letters to the churches,

or to their individual friends, is there any one bold enough to affirm that the latter, not the former, are the characteristics of these remains, and to invite ample citations, in support of so perilous a challenge? I can only mention these methods of proof, and express the hope that the conscientious inquirer will avail himself of them.

In looking broadly at the ancient expositions of Scripture, the well-known, and prominent characteristic of many of them, namely, the mythic, or allegorizing interpretation of its plain histories, and simple statements of fact, has a meaning which, I think, has been too little adverted to. This propensity to mystify the plainest things, may be, and has been, attributed to the operation of several independent causes: but there is one which, although the less obvious, was, as I am persuaded, the principal and the most constant. If Origen be named (whether justly or not) as the author of this allegorizing method, he will aid us, as we shall see, in tracing it up to its secret source that same gnostic feeling, which explains so many other characteristics of ancient christianity. A reference to two or three places in this learned, amiable, and pious writer, will exclude any doubt as to the fact, that the christian church, participating with the gnostics in those sickly and oriental notions of the divine nature, which led the latter, as heretics, to attribute the visible creation to an inferior and imperfect being, and to regard the jewish history, and economy, as unworthy of the supreme goodness and wisdom-this deep gnostic feeling impelled the christian expositors to rid themselves, as far as might be, of difficulties so formidable, first, and where it could be done, by roundly affirming that certain narrations, in the Old Testament, are not histories of facts, but pure allegories, or mythic inventions, conveying spiritual truths; secondly, where this bold hypothesis was altogether inadmissible, or where its adoption was not to be hazarded, by merely diverting the attention from the plain history, in the copious use of ingenious accommodations; that is to say, allegories appended to the history, where the history could not be absolutely melted down into

« السابقةمتابعة »