The dubious twilight of mystical devotion, and the vague apprehension of unrevealed mysteries, surely cannot but seem greatly at variance with the very nature of Christianity, to those who regard it as fully and finally disclosed in the written word. ... That which is disclosed is perspicuous and undisguised; and with this alone it is that we are concerned: with what may be hidden from us, we have nothing to do. Religion to us exists only so far as it is clearly revealed. The acknowledgment of this, upon its proper evidence, is faith: the suspicion that there may be something beyond, with which we are yet concerned, is the spirit of mysticism. BADEN POWELL: Tradition Unveiled, p. 74; apud "Is the Church of England a Scriptural Church?" pp. 12, 13.

The truth is, that a very large part of this profound theology is nothing better than a mere jargon of words without meaning, unintelligible even to ❝ the learned" themselves, and in respect of which the people have already this great advantage over such teachers, — that the people are aware of their own ignorance of these matters, while their teachers pride themselves on understanding what really cannot be understood. Sometimes, indeed, when they are pressed with objections to their own explanations of Scripture doctrines, divines are apt to say that these are mysteries which cannot be understood by even the most exalted intellects, and that it is impious to pry into them too curiously, or bring them to the test of reason. But then the answer is obvious: "If you do not understand these things, why do you undertake to explain them? To every thing, indeed, which God has revealed, the deepest reverence and the lowest submission are due; but not so to man's explication of it. If we venture to give a further account of what he has said, it should, at least, be a rational and intelligible account."... Many ingenious theories have, indeed, from time to time, been devised and set forth to explain and reconcile the statements of Scripture with respect to the Trinity, the atonement, the divine decrees, and other matters, on which the Bible gives us only imperfect information. On such subjects, men have taken up the hints which the sacred writers seemed to drop, and sought to follow them up by conjecturing what the full account of the matter may be; and then they have gone on to settle that this account, which they have conjectured, must be the true one, because it gives what they think a satisfactory solution of much that is difficult without it; and so they have finally made their own theories a part of the gospel. — ARCHBISHOP WHATELY: Cautions for the Times, pp. 275-7.

SECT. III.

CHRISTIANITY NOT A RELIGION OF SPECULATIVE OR THEORETICAL PROPOSITIONS, BUT OF VITAL FACTS AND PRACTICAL PRINCIPLES.

To them, the sounding jargon of the schools
Seems what it is, a cap and bell for fools:
The light they walk by, kindled from above,
Shows them the shortest way to life and love.

COWPER.

Instead of those simple and clear ideas which render the truth and majesty of the Christian religion sensible, and which satisfy a man's reason and move his heart, we meet with nothing in several bodies of divinity but metaphysical notions, curious and needless questions, distinctions, and obscure terms. In a word, we find there such intricate theology, that the very apostles themselves, if they came into the world again, would not be able to understand it, without the help of a particular revelation. This scholastic divinity has done more mischief to religion than we are able to express. There is not any thing that has more corrupted the purity of the Christian religion, that has more obscured matters, multiplied controversies, disturbed the peace of the church, or given rise to so many heresies and schisms. JOHN F. OSTERVALD: Causes of the Present Corruption of Christians; in Watson's Theological Tracts, vol. vi. pp. 297–8.

...

The manner of teaching religious truths was [in the first century] perfectly simple, and remote from all the rules of the philosophers, and all the precepts of human art. . . . Nor did any apostle, or any one of their immediate disciples, collect and arrange the principal doctrines of Christianity in a scientific or regular system. The circumstances of the times did not require this; and the followers of Christ were more solicitous to exhibit the religion they had embraced, by their tempers and conduct, than to explain its principles scientifically, and arrange them according to the principles of art. There is, indeed, extant a brief summary of Christian doctrines, which is called the Apostles' Creed; and which, from the fourth century onward, was attributed to Christ's ambassadors themselves. But, at this day, all who have any knowledge of antiquity confess unanimously that this opinion is a mistake, and has no foundation. JOHN L. MOSHEIM: Ecclesiastical History, book i. cent. i. part 2, chap. 3, § 3, 4.

The gospel is not a system of theology, nor a syntagma of theoretical propositions and conclusions for the enlargement of speculative knowledge, ethical or metaphysical. But it is a history, a series of facts and events related or announced. These do, indeed, involve, or rather I should say they at the same time are, most important doctrinal truths; but still facts and declarations of facts. S. T. COLERIDGE: Aids to Reflection; in Works, vol. i. pp. 234–5.

We might suppose, from such notions of the Christian faith [the notions entertained by modern fanatics], that Christianity was a set of speculative disquisitions, where, if a man agreed only with the barren and useless results, he was left in liberty to follow the devices of his own heart, and to lead what manner of life his fancy or his passions might dictate. It is evangelical, according to these notions, to preach to men of high and exalted mysteries: it is unevangelical to warn men against pride, against anger, against avarice, against fraud, against all the innumerable temptations by which we are hurried away from our duty to our Creator, and from the great care of salvation.... But let any man turn to his gospel, and see if there is a single instance of our blessed Saviour's life where he does not eagerly seize upon every opportunity of inculcating something practical, of bringing some passion under subjection, of promoting the happiness of the world, by teaching his followers to abstain from something hurtful, and to do something useful. . . . But the moment fanatical men hear any thing plain and practical introduced into religion, they say this is secular, this is worldly, this is moral, this is not of Christ. - SYDNEY SMITH: Sermons, vol. i. pp. 98-100.

...

It was the consummate excellence of Christianity, that it blended in apparently indissoluble union religious and moral perfection. Its essential doctrine was, in its pure theory, inseparable from humane, virtuous, and charitable disposition. Piety to God, as he was impersonated in Christ, worked out, as it seemed, by spontaneous energy into Christian beneficence. But there has always been a strong pro pensity to disturb this nice balance: the dogmatic part of religion, the province of faith, is constantly endeavoring to set itself apart, and to maintain a separate existence. . . . The multiplication and subtle refinement of theologic dogmas. the engrossing interest excited by some dominant tenet, especially if they are associated with or embodied in a minute and rigorous ceremonial, tend to satisfy and lull the mind into complacent acquiescence in its own religious completeness. H. H. MILMAN: History of Christianity, book iv. chap. 5.

We should rather point out to objectors, that what is revealed is practical, and not speculative; that what the Scriptures are concerned with is not the philosophy of the human mind in itself, nor yet the philosophy of the divine nature in itself, but (that which is properly religion) the relation and connection of the two beings, — what God is to us, what he has done and will do for us, and what we are to be and to do in regard to him. ARCHBISHOP WHATELY: Sermons on Various Subjects, p. 136.

Christians . . . are called upon to consider, not so much the doctrines or the duties of Christianity, as they are its design, its great object, its nature, its tendency, its genius. They have disputed long and earnestly on its doctrines; they have hesitated and doubted, and been reluctant to follow the precepts of the New Testament. Let them try now to drink in its spirit. Let them examine what the profession of religion means, not in regard to one or two doctrines, or one or two precepts, but in its inherent spirit, in its true import, in its vitality as a thing that is to come into the soul with spiritual power, waking the dead to life. Christianity is not a set of opinions, nor a system of duties. It is not an orthodox creed, nor a moral law. It is life and light.... He who does not catch its spirit knows nothing about it. Now, this spirit is, more than any thing else, diffusive benevolence. ... It is doing good to all men. It is glad tidings of great joy for all people. Christianity is not designed for one denomination, or one color, or one language. It is all-diffusive, like the air which surrounds - B. B. EDWARDS, as quoted in Bib. Sacra for October, 1853. It is nowhere intimated [in the Scriptures] that Christianity is a speculation or a theory, or that any terms of human thought scientifically employed can organize it. Nothing is said of theologic confessions or articles, or of scientific efforts in Christian doctrine. The texts constantly cited in commendation of "sound doctrine," and supposed to be injunctions that maintain the necessity of being grounded in theologic articles, are found, when narrowly inspected, to be only scholastic misapplications or mistranslations, tokens of the universal imposture regarding this matter of doctrine, that, long ages ago, had gotten possession of the Christian mind. . . . Thus, we have the epithet “sound," which occurs many times in application to "words," "speech,” “faith,” “ doctrine," and is understood to commend the study of a rugged, solid, and sturdy system of speculative theology: whereas it only means "wholesome," as it is once translated; that is, health-giving; in the original, hygeian. So also the

us.

famous all-text of Paul, a text which seems to have worn itself into the tongues of many teachers, becomes what it is only in the manner above described. It reads in the translation, "Hold fast the form of sound words which thou hast heard of me." In the original, "Hold fast the impression of the health-giving words thou heardest of me," &c.; having no reference at all to any matter of theoretic doctrine, or church article, any more than to the Copernican doctrines of astronomy. The text in Jude, "Contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to the saints," has suffered a similar hardship. Literally and properly translated, the call or exhortation is "Strive (agonize) for the faith, once for all delivered to the saints." "Contend," a word of churchly pugnacity, is not here. By "the faith," too, is meant no scheme of speculative or theologic doctrine, but the practical doctrine of a godly life, as grounded in the living faith of Christ. The current of the Epistle shows that the errors in view are not errors of opinion, but licentious manners and wicked practices.. Furthermore, it will be seen that the apostles are continually protesting, in one form or another, against exactly that which most resembles a speculative and theoretic activity, - "gnosis" or "knowledge” of one; the "wisdom" of another; "foolish and unlearned questions that do gender strifes;" "oppositions of science, falsely so called;" "vain janglings;" "profane and vain babblings;" the being spoiled "through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ;"" doting about questions and strifes of words." They discourage, in a word, all the attempts of inquisitive and would-be wise men to work out a theory or philosophem of the gospel, by activity in and about their own human centre. Christ, they say, is the doctrine, and the method of reason is faith. "Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines" (i. e. doctrines of mere speculation, that do not minister to godly edifying, and are therefore "strange,” i. e. foreign, or outside of the Christian truth), "for it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace;" implying a conviction, as we see, that it is the heart, and not any platform of articles, that will anchor a soul in stability. And for just this reason, I suppose, the same apostle declares that the grand test of orthodoxy is in what the heart receives, and not in what the head thinks: "Now the end of the commandment," that which includes every thing, "is charity, out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned."DR. HORACE BUSHNELL: Christ in Theology, pp. 74–7.