"Follow peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. But foolish and untaught questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes."--II. Tim. ii. 23.

      In reference to one of the principle [sic] objects of the present Reformation, there are no injunctions in Scripture more pertinent or important than those just quoted from II. Timothy. Nor are there any which possess a more obvious propriety in the view of sound reason and experience. It was the primary purpose of this religious movement to effect a union of the pious of all parties--or, in the words of the Apostle, to establish "peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart," and, as an indispensable condition of the establishment and maintenance of Christian union, it was in the very beginning adopted as a fundamental principle that all should "avoid foolish and untaught questions," it being clearly perceived that these were the occasion, in almost every instance, of the existing religious strifes and divisions.

      This principle was not designed as a prohibition of legitimate religious inquiry, nor was it intended to deprive any one of the liberty of forming or even expressing his opinion on any religious subject. It would, indeed, have been futile to have denied to men the exercise of their reason, or even of their imagination, in reference to the things of religion. Men will reason upon the subjects presented to the understanding; they will frame conceits; they will construct for themselves such theories as seem to them best fitted to explain the facts which they believe, and no scheme can be devised by which men will ever be compelled to coincide perfectly in their trains of thought, or in the conclusions to which they trend.

      It is the attempt to establish such uniformity of opinion, that is, in fact, the principal cause of partyism. The religious teacher who propounds a specious and ingenious theory, will find many who are willing to give a general assent to his views. It is rare, indeed, that there is perfect agreement, but there is, at least, a central point of influence created, around which individuals conglomerate, at different distances, and with varying adhesive force, until there is formed a distinct and independent swarm, which will have no communion with those who follow a different leader. The attempt is made to quash [47] all free investigation, to repress all rivalry; to protect the community from the intrusion of strangers and to build up the interests of a separate party.

      All works well for a time, and peaceful labors occupy the harmonious and prosperous colony. But in the midst of this apparent quiet, secret influences are at work, and separate interests are established, and when it is, perhaps, least expected--when the day is calm and the sky serene, a new leader issues forth to lead away disciples after him. The opinions of no single individual can afford intellectual space enough to accommodate all the world, or even any considerable portion of it, and the attempt to confine men's thoughts, serves only to provoke resistance and create division.

      To concede, on the other hand, an unrestricted liberty of opinion, is to preserve peace, by simply avoiding the cause or occasion of dispute. It is to remove every apology for schism, by conceding universal toleration. It is to obviate all necessity for revolt, by granting freedom. And all this without any extreme. For as to opinion in the proper sense of the word, and as it is constantly used in this reformatory effort, there can be neither bigotry nor latitudinarianism. An opinion is, at least, a mere intellectual conception. It is not a fact. It is not a truth. It can not be legitimately a matter of faith. It is something that is incapable of verification, something that is merely plausible; and, though it may sometimes be probable, it is always apocryphal. It is this just view of the position which religious opinions occupy, which at once relieves us from all difficulty in regard to them, and delivers us from their thraldom by divesting them of their usurped authority. It is this which restores to us Truth as our rightful sovereign, who rules by an inalienable divine right--the only theological Melchizedek--King of righteousness and of peace. It is in showing an unswerving fealty to the truth, and in avoiding "foolish and untaught questions," that we can alone "follow peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart." Now, the word of God is the truth; and the "foolish and untaught questions" constitute the staple of men's opinions.

      In order to determine, then, whether or not a proposition is a legitimate subject of discussion or of belief, it is only necessary to ascertain whether or not it be found in Scripture. If it can be found there, it can be produced without difficulty, and will be at once accepted as conclusively proved. If it can not be produced as expressed or directly implied, in the terms of Scripture, it is at once evident that it is not a matter of revelation, and, consequently, not a matter of faith, but that it belongs to the chapter of untaught questions which occupies so large a space in all the editions of Popular Theology. We [48] should, therefore, have nothing at all to do with it, as Christians and Reformers.

      That there have been departures from this most wholesome restriction, and that some in our ranks have committed very grave errors in debating questions never mooted in the Bible, can be neither denied nor justified. Individuals have come into the reformation who seem to have no just conception of its nature or designs. Some of them, vain of even a superficial knowledge of the gospel, (though knowing scarcely any thing as they ought to know it) and confident in their polemical abilities, seem ready at all times to discuss any and every question, with any one and every one. It matters not whether the subject be Calvinian or Arminian; economical or doctrinal; deep or shallow, it is all the same to them, since it furnishes the occasion for their usual display of flimsy rhetoric, artful misrepresentation, and specious emptiness. They will boldly undertake to maintain propositions no where found in the Bible, but involving some favorite theory or opinion of their own, and they become thus the means of attaching to the reformation the discredit of doctrinal errors, which are not really held by us as a people, and which, upon our principles, it is impossible that we should ever believe.

      I do not say that religious controversy is either improper or unnecessary. As long as error exists, truth must be free to combat it. It is enjoined upon the Christian to "contend earnestly for the, faith once delivered to the saints," but it is to be noted that this struggle is not to be for matters of opinion, but for the things of faith; not for the nations and idle reveries of human fancy or philosophy, nor far any modern style or modification of Christianity, but for "the faith formerly delivered to the saints." If thus confined to its legitimate sphere and purpose, religious discussion, properly conducted, is a benefit, and one, too, of so important and so desirable a character, that it is a thousand pities it is not oftener enjoyed. Such a struggle is for truth; undertaken for the love of truth; and not for victory, or for personal emolument or display. It is conducted with humility and love: with faithfulness and candour. It is, in fact, a process of investigation and of instruction, and differs, across the whole heavens, from that pert, self-sufficient, lawyer-like advocacy which, even when successfully employed on the side of truth, injures the cause of religion, in substituting self-conceit for humility, and logic for love.

      As it respects opinions, these can never, with us, become legitimate matters of discussion. They are divested of importance, when it is known that they are incapable of proof, doubtful and variable products of the human brain. They can be entertained without injury as conjectures or hypotheses of greater or less probability, often agreeable to the mind, as bridging over, by a fanciful structure, some wide [49] chasm in the path of knowledge, or as picturing forth, in pleasing visions, the possible modes in which one class of facts can be rendered harmonious with another, and the established truths of Divine revelation be reconciled with an ever varying human experience. They are not, therefore, to be proscribed, but tolerated. They are not to be repressed, but rather encouraged. It is only when the attempt is made to blend them with faith, to substitute them for faith, or make them terms of communion and tests of orthodoxy, that they become destructive of the peace of religious society.

      As for us, we have adopted the only infallible standard of religious truth, and it is our duty to adhere to it with scrupulous fidelity. The Bible reveals the only way from earth to heaven. It is a narrow way--it is but a single track, and the car of the reformation has been placed upon it. So long as we keep upon the track, we will go pleasantly and prosperously upon our journey, however the road may curve amidst the hills or pass over the vallies and the streams. We may gaze with pleasure upon them as they flash upon us in the sunlight, and rejoice in our safe and rapid progress, and even should we be suddenly whirled, from amidst those scenes of light and life, into some dark and sepulchral mountain tunnel, we shall fear no evil so long as we are assured that the car is still upon the track, but shall hope to emerge at the proper moment to see again the living landscape, glowing, from contrast, in more than former light and beauty.

R. R.      

      Admitting that there has been, on all sides, a lamentable inattention to the above quoted injunctions of the Apostle, it is the part of wisdom and of genuine piety, to labor for such a reformation as will secure their careful observance. In order to this, the subject must be understood, and a clear and impartial judgment must be rendered in regard to the extent to which these commands have been fulfilled or violated. It is proper for both individuals and communities to engage in self-examination, in reference to the manner in which they are fulfilling the responsibilities which rest upon them, and no pride of partyism, nor love of self-justification, nor personal and unworthy aims, should prevent that free and careful scrutiny which is always necessary to the discovery of truth. As the skilful navigator who knows that no ship pursues a direct line from port to port, but that it is often drifted aside by imperceptible currents, or driven far out of the way in long continued storms, will carefully take, at every opportunity, celestial observations to determine his exact position, and will vary his course accordingly; so every individual and every community, especially if they have been involved in the storms of protracted controversy, should, as often as in their power, consult their chart, observe the aspects of the heavens, and regulate their future [50] movements by a just induction from the things of the past and of the present.

      In entering upon such inquiries in relation to the religious movement now in progress, it would be important to consider if there has been a steady adherence to the principles and objects proposed in the beginning, and if there has been a regular and happy progressive development of primitive Christianity in its original simplicity, purity and power. Have there been no deflections from the course proposed by its originators, and prescribed by Scripture? Has there been no drifting away from the true line of direction? Have no schemes or theories of human nature been introduced and adroitly blended with the things of faith? Have no untaught, or, as in the common version, "unlearned" questions been entertained and adopted, to become themes of perpetual controversy and strife? If not, then have we been truly fortunate, for even the apostolic churches, with all their peculiar advantages, failed to enjoy such immunities, or to judge themselves authorized to treat with neglect or scorn the pointed admonitions and exhortations in reference to these very things which they so often received from their religious teachers.

      As, however, but little practical benefit can be expected to result from mere general statements or inquiries, I desire to direct attention to some definite instances of such aberrations on the part of some who profess to be engaged in this reformatory movement, and to express my conviction that a careful examination of the facts will convince any candid inquirer, that the attempt has been made, and with no small success, to merge, in a good degree, its noble plea for the Bible; for the primitive faith and practice of the church, and for Christian union, into a senseless and never-ending debate about "spiritual operations in conversion." Let any one compare the discussions and disquisitions which have taken place and are still progressing upon this subject in its various bearings, with the little that is said upon the great purposes and principles of the Reformation, and he will be surprised to see how small a proportion this will bear to the former. The truth is, that untaught questions about conversion have been started and debated to such an extent, as almost to equal the Arabian tales in number, though certainly not in merit, and theories about the Power of the word and of the Spirit have been propounded, of which apostles never dreamed, but which are urged with as much earnestness and zeal as if the salvation of the world depended on believing said theories, rather than on believing the Gospel. Thus it is that the Reformation which was designed to put an end to all controversy, except with infidelity, is in danger of being turned aside from its legitimate aims, and that the freedom of opinion which it permits is converted into a license for a sort of universal polemical disputation. [51]

      As untaught questions in relation to this very subject of conversion are, at this very moment, creating "strifes" in certain quarters, I can not, perhaps, do better, for the elucidation and illustration of the whole subject, than present some of them to the attention of the reader, in order that he may perceive their entire irrelevancy in relation to the cause we plead, and realize that the discussion of such points can have no practical tendency either to convert sinners or to promote "peace among those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart."

      Some there are, then, who, basing their views of conversion and their interpretations of Scripture upon a certain theory of human nature, derived mainly from the writings of Locke, have diligently sought to establish such propositions as these: "The Holy Spirit can exert no influence over the human mind except by words and arguments, and there is, therefore, no converting power except that which is contained in the words and arguments of the Scripture." "All converting power is in the facts, arguments and motives of the written word." "The Scriptures are all-sufficient and alone-sufficient for the conversion of sinners and the sanctification of those that believe." Others, again, are found, who, disgusted with the rationalism and empty human philosophy which underlies such propositions, and anxious to substitute their own favorite theories, furnish us with such propositions as these: "In conversion, there is an intimate co-operation between the word and Spirit, but their distinctness is not lost nor their respective portions of the work dispensed with. The preached or written word--the forerunner is indispensable." "The word is 'quick and powerful' only when it succeeds in arousing the slumbering conscience, and thus calling to its aid the 'quickening, Spirit."' "The word is the 'sword of the Spirit,' and is only efficient when the Spirit wields it." "The Spirit co-operates with the preaching of the written word in convincing the world of sin, righteousness and judgment." Thus we have two sets of opinions diametrically opposed to each other, each advocated with earnestness and zeal by well-meaning and pious persons, who urge them upon the attention of the brethren, and insist upon their adoption as indispensable articles of belief, and incontrovertible confessions of faith.

      But where did these persons get their creeds? Not in the Bible, I am sure. No where in the Sacred Volume do we find such propositions stated. No where in God's Book do we find such questions discussed. They are things wholly unscriptural and untaught, with which, so far as faith or practice is concerned, we, as Reformers, can have nothing at all to do. If, indeed, any one chose to entertain such questions for his own enjoyment, or even to adopt such propositions as matters of private opinion, we have no particular objection, provided he do not make such opinions rules of action and grounds of controversy. [52] It is strange that the just and conservative position we occupy in relation to such discussions should not, by this time, be better understood; and that all our intelligent brethren should not have yet learned to make a practical application of the principles of the Reformation in the settlement of all such vexed questions, and the "strifes" which they create.

      Let the reader take any one of the above propositions and consider for a moment into how wide a field of speculation it introduces us. It is asserted, for instance, that "all converting power is in the facts, arguments and motives of the written Word." Now who knows what is meant by "converting power"? We do not read of it in Scripture, and must, therefore, seek elsewhere for definitions. To what source shall we apply except to human philosophy? Is "converting power" physical, moral, or, as some contend, spiritual power? On what is this power exerted--on the heart or on the mind? If on both, if not simultaneously, then on which of them first? and how? and why? With regard to facts, arguments and motives, how are they to be distinguished? and what "power" belongs to each? Do the "heart" and "mind" remain intact, or is there "contact" or "impact," or nothing but a compact? Or, after all, what do philosophers mean by "heart" and "mind," or moral and intellectual powers? etc., etc., etc.

      Again, when it is said, "The word is quick and powerful," we have a proposition worthy of all acceptation, because it is expressly stated in the Scriptures. But when it is added, "only when it succeeds in arousing the slumbering conscience, and thus calling to its aid the quickening spirit," we have a statement not only foreign to Scripture, but one which directly proposes to decide and define the manner in which the word and the Spirit operate, and which introduces us to a large company of questions of a very martial aspect, and veterans in the wars of religion and philosophy, to whom fighting is a regular vocation. "What," it will be immediately asked by a crooked little figure with but one leg, called a point of interrogation, "what do you mean by a slumbering conscience?" "Who put it to sleep?" "How does the Word sometimes succeed in awakening the slumbering conscience, and why does he sometimes fail?" "If the word can, of itself, awaken the slumbering conscience, for what more difficult task does it afterwards demand the aid of the Spirit?" etc., etc., etc.

      In like manner, when it is said, "The word is the sword of the Spirit," all will be ready to consent to it, since it is so stated in the inspired volume, but when it is affirmed in addition that "it is only efficient when the Spirit wields it," we have a most unscriptural proposition, which, I fancy, will find but few supporters in the Reformation, and which is refuted in the very passage in which the expression occurs, in which the Apostle commands the Christian to "take the [53] sword of the Spirit"--a useless injunction, if the Spirit alone could "wield it." It is this very erroneous view of the relations between the Spirit and the word that is held by our opponents, who labor to show that the word of God is "a dead letter," until the Spirit, by some special influence, imparts to it an additional energy--and who seem to take the greatest delight in convincing men that they are hence unable to receive the Gospel, and that it is an indispensable preliminary to their salvation that they believe that they cannot believe.

      But it is not the present object of the writer to discuss any of these propositions on either side. He presents them merely to arrest attention to the fact, that they are unscriptural, and that, notwithstanding this, they have been suffered, in some shape or other, to occupy the time and the minds of the brethren: that they have been made matters of debate and strife; and have acquired an undeserved prominence and authority which entitles some of them, in the estimation of many, to be regarded as cardinal doctrines of a reformation which utterly repudiates them, and the whole tribe of "foolish and untaught questions" to which they appertain.

R. R.      

      The distinction between faith and opinion was clearly drawn at the very commencement of the present effort at reformation. It was evident to those with whom this movement originated, that the strifes and divisions of religious society were owing, not so much to differences in regard to the great facts and principles of Christianity, as to the theories and speculative opinions according to which men attempted to construct their religious systems. It was hence especially insisted on, that a broad distinction should be made between the things of direct revelation, and those remote inferences, conjectures, possibilities or even probabilities which depended upon mere human reasonings. The former alone were to be received as matters of faith. The latter were to be dismissed as unworthy of entire confidence, and as constituting no just ground either of Christian fellowship, or of ecclesiastical censure.

      At first view, nothing could seem more simple than this method of resolving religious controversy; of disentangling the perplexities of interminable discussion, and of establishing universal peace and brotherhood amongst all who sincerely profess the name of Christ. It was so easy to make a direct appeal to the Scriptures; it was such a relief to know that their express teachings were to be decisive of every question treated in the Bible, and that any question not there treated and thus decided, were to be avoided as foolish or untaught, that there seemed to be no longer any room for disagreement or discouragement, or any apology for schism. Certainly, nothing could be more reasonable than such an overture for peace. Certainly, nothing [54] could be devised so likely to end dissensions among Christians, as a return to the precise ground occupied by the Apostles of Christ and the primitive Disciples, before such dissensions had ever originated.

      However just the method thus proposed, and however reasonable the hopes of peace which it inspired, there was needed, nevertheless, but a short experience to show how much more easy it was to devise than to execute, and how very unreasonable it was to expect that any effort to restore primitive Christianity should be exempted from the difficulties and drawbacks which attended its introduction in the beginning. The same perversity of human nature was speedily apparent, and various weaknesses and errors, contentions and defections have accompanied this movement, similar to those that attended the Gospel when it was first preached among the nations. We have still "disciples," so ignorant of Christianity as not to know "that any Holy Spirit is received" by the believer. We have still those who "teach things which they ought not," and "strive about words to no profit, but to the subverting of the hearers." We have still, it is to be feared, those who "seek their own things and not the things of Christ," and labor to promote their own popularity and interests, rather than the real advancement of the cause of truth. There are still found those who "will not consent to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness," but who are "proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth. Iii a word, there are still those who, in open violation of the principles which they ostensibly advocate, and in contempt of all the lessons of experience, refuse to "follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart," and to avoid those "foolish and untaught questions which gender strifes." It is, hence, profitable to recur to the teachings and warnings of the Apostles upon these subjects, not only for the instruction and correction they afford, but that we may derive from them the encouragement which a similar experience warrants, as well by its example of a continued advocacy of truth even amidst the treachery of friends, as by the evidence it furnishes that while such aberrations may attend the best and noblest efforts, they detract not, in the slightest degree, from the value and importance of those immutable and eternal truths which God has revealed for our salvation, and which will ever command the support and the suffrage of his people.

      How beautiful, how precious is Divine truth! What strength it imparts to the soul!--what a solace to the heart! And how delightful is the thought that God's truth is free, that the word of God is [55] not bound, and that, however men may seek to confine it by unrighteousness, or clothe it with the fetters of false glosses and interpretations, it will, nevertheless, burst all its bonds, and continually reassert its Divine unconquerable power! Let no one, then, flatter himself that he can succeed in establishing permanently any thing that will not bear the test of Holy Scripture. The word of God is as a fire that will try every man's work. "It is as a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces," and will most assuredly accomplish the destruction of error, and the final overthrow of every structure which has error for any part of its materials.

      We readily admit that some opinions may be true. The future may show this in regard to many conjectures and hypotheses of pious men, which admit of no such verification now. But it matters not, even if they were all true. They form no part whatever of the structure of Christianity, which consists alone of divinely revealed facts and truths, which are ever to be held sacred, and kept separate, by a wide interval, from the very best conclusions of the very best of men. The learned and honored Apostle Paul, gifted and privileged beyond his fellow Apostles, presumes not on these, nor on any other accounts, to combine his own judgments with the teachings of the Spirit of inspiration. What a lesson he teaches (if our opinionative scribes could only learn it), when he so carefully distinguishes what are merely his opinions as a man, from his teachings as an Apostle! "This," says he, "I speak by permission and not by commandment," but to certain others, "I command, yet not I, but the Lord." Even in regard to matters of mere expediency, with what scrupulous delicacy he inhibits an undue reliance upon the advice he gives, or the possibility of its being mistaken for a Divine injunction! Concerning a certain matter, he says, "I have no commandment of the Lord, yet I give my judgment as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose, therefore, this is good for the present distress," etc. And how pointed a reproof is administered by John to such as presume to replace the words of inspiration, by the interpretations they put, upon them! When Jesus said to Peter concerning John, "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" there went forth, we are told, this saying among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet, adds John, with beautiful simplicity, "Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, if I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" It is with "what the Lord hath spoken"--and with "what the Lord hath answered," that we have to do in Christianity, and not with the inferences, the glosses and the guesses of fallible mortals, whether these be learned or ignorant, wise or simple, inspired or uninspired. However true their opinions may be, they are to be [56] carefully separated from the materials of our religion, and denied any place in the Divine edifice of Christianity. We do not need them here, for it is God that furnishes every thing from the "tried stone,' the "foundation corner stone," to the topmost finishing stone, alike the gifts of the Divine grace and the means of the Divine, mercy.

      If our first parents had kept close by the word of God, and refused to hearken to opinion, they could have continued to dwell amidst the bowers of Eden. Satan was the first who tried his hand at interpreting the word of God, and it was his commentary that became at once the unwritten creed, and the ruin of our race. It was he who first introduced untaught questions, and tempted the human soul to go beyond the boundaries of divine revelation, and to add to the knowledge of good, the knowledge of evil. It was he who first infused into the human mind that criminal curiosity which lures its victims into the snares of Death;--the lawless ambition to "be as gods" in knowledge, rather than to resemble God in goodness. He, himself, "abode not in the truth," and in seducing our first parents from the truth, he acted in harmony with his own character, as he continues still to act, turning men away from the faith to fables, beguiling unstable souls, and leading them away captive by means of their vanity and their lusts.

      It was by keeping close to the word of God, that the second Adam foiled this insidious foe. It was by a direct appeal to what was "written," that he repelled every assault, and triumphed in his terrible conflict with the Prince of darkness. He lived not by "bread alone," out by "every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God," and when Satan sought to delude him, as he has deluded many, by false quotations and false applications of the Scripture, he knew how to overcome by the majesty and simplicity of truth, truthfully and faithfully uttered. It is this example that his Disciples should ever imitate. "I have written unto you, young men," says John, "because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one." "If that which ye have heard from the beginning abide in you, ye also shall continue in the Son and in the Father."

      It is a most fearful thing to know that Satan employs even the word of God itself as the means of temptation and delusion, and that there is no crime so great and no error so damnable, that he can not and will not attempt to sustain it by "it is written." How careful, then, this should render every disciple of Christ, in hearing and handling the word of God! How watchful he should be to avoid false applications, false renderings, false glosses and interpretations, and all the foolish and untaught questions which false teachers thus adroitly introduce to lead the mind away from the truth and turn men aside to fables. Let every true disciple, then, hold fast the faithful word [57] as taught by Christ and the Apostles, and endeavor by sound teaching, to confute those gainsayers, and empty debaters. who would convert the truth of God into a lie, and who, instead of prayerfully and humbly seeking to learn the way of the Lord more perfectly, are not ashamed to appeal from the Scripture itself to the authority of men's opinions in order to bolster up their theories.

[R. R.]      

      Without purity, there can be no peace either individual, ecclesiastical or social. "Wars and fightings" come from the lusts of the carnal mind, ever unsubmissive to the law of God, but ever trusting in a wisdom that is "earthly, sensual and devilish," and which leads men to cherish bitter envying and strife in the heart, to glory in themselves, and to lie against the truth. "But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy." And this is the wisdom that is taught by the "pure in heart," who alone bring forth its fruits; for purity is as necessary an attribute of that which receives as of that which is received. As the limpid dew of heaven should be received into a pure vessel, so the pure word of God must he received into a "good and honest heart," that it may be preserved in purity, and be productive of good fruits. It is with "those who call on the Lord with a pure heart," that we are to follow and to enjoy peace. And it is in avoiding "foolish and unlearned questions" that we are to secure the purity of Divine truth, and the peace which truth alone imparts.

R. R.      

[MHA2 47-58]