Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Whatever may be the relative merit of the arguments drawn from Scripture and philosophy in support of either view, it must be admitted that the argument from tradition is in favor of the oriental theory, since the single procession of the Holy Ghost is taught by the Nicene Creed, and the Filioque is the interpolation, of after generations. We wonder that a difference so slight and unessential should ever have assumed such proportions, and exerted such a pervading and potent influence. And we readily appreciate and approve the judicious estimate. of Archbishop Platon: "We do not wish to pry into this, for it is an unsearchable mystery; and we ought not to engage much in dispute upon it."

The Nicene Symbol, accepted without question by the Greek Church, also asserts the incarnation of Jesus Christ, his sufferings and death, his resurrection and ascension, and his final coming and judgment. In these doctrines Protestant and Greek Christians agree. What is their relative importance in the Christian system it is not necessary for us, if it were competent, to determine. Luther claimed the first place for the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ. Dean Stanley asserts that, next to the moral doctrines of ne Gospel, the most vital, comprehensive, and fruitist has been and is, not the power of the pope or of the 'contil, not the supremacy of the Bible or the authority of its several books, not the sacraments, not original sin, not predestination, not justification, but the doctrine of the incarnation. The Nicene Creed, says Dorner, showed to Christian theology the end at which it was to aim, even if it did not perfectly realize that end. Arianism had pressed back toward Ebionitism. It had lost the idea of the Incarnation, . . . and made a perfect revelation or manifestation of God impossible. The Nicene Fathers met this by proclaiming the real and proper divinity of the Son. However we may regard this statement of Dorner, it is evident that in this creed is formally answered the fundamental question propounded by the Saviour: "What think ye of Christ?" Protestants as well as Greeks cordially adopt the remaining articles of the Nicene Creed: "I believe in one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come."

These general doctrines were somewhat expanded and carefully defined by subsequent councils. The speculations of the Greek Fathers were directed chiefly toward theology, and their writings based mainly upon the creed which they were intended to illustrate and maintain. After these were combined into systematic form by St. John Damascene, the Greek Church for eight hundred years presents but little of doctrinal disquisition or development; while its external history during the long interval is distinguished by its disputes with the Roman Church, and by the firmness with which it resisted every overture of union. (Waddington on the Greek Church, p. 76.) Onward to the seventeenth century Bolchofsky asserts that the Russian Church, in common with the rest of the Eastern, found no need of any special doctrinal standards of her own, but was content to refer for her faith to the writings of the ancient Fathers, and especially to the treatise of St. John Damascene. She received and self-complacently appropriated to herself the epithet "immutable," claiming to represent the primitive Church in her faith and forms. Wherever, then, in her formularies she has not given full expression upon any specific point, the declarations of the Greek Fathers will relieve the obscurity and safely guide us in our conclusions. Though this research will not lighten our task, it will compensate us by presenting both the modern and primitive in one view. This will appear somewhat in the doctrine of redemption, and particularly in the doctrine of sin, or Greek anthropology and soteriology, which are of especial importance in this discussion, and which, together with the Greek theory of the Church and sacraments, we reserve for another article, and in the order intimated. The present article we conclude with a notice of the Greek Church view of predestination.

In regard to predestination, or divine decrees, it has been said by a certain reviewer (with no reference to authority) that of the Eastern Church the Russians, to a far greater extent that the Greeks, recognize the doctrine of predestination. How much this signifies it is extremely difficult to conjecture, as he does not inform us whether the Greeks accept or reject this doctrine. The difficulty is not diminished when we are told, but not by this reviewer, that a common text-book of high authority in Greece is "The Orthodox Instructor, or Sum

mary of Christian Theology," by Platon, Archbishop of Moscow, of like authority in Russia. Another reviewer asserts (with no mention of authority) that it has been said that many of the Russian clergy are ardent admirers of Calvin, but all the leading theologians, and indeed the ecclesiastical acts that are read in their churches, denounce Calvinism as a dangerous heresy.

The Synod of Jassy, it will be remembered, was summoned at the instance of the Prince of Moldavia, because of scandal and confusion occasioned in his provinces by the Calvinists, and especially by the Calvinistic Confessions bearing the name of Cyril Lucar. To this synod the Patriarch of Constantinople sent a synodal letter containing eighteen articles drawn up against the Calvinists, together with answers to four questions appended. These articles the Synod of Jassy subscribed. In 1672, at the Synod of Bethlehem, these eighteen articles and the questions and answers were considered and approved, and in 1723 were sent by the patriarchs as an ultimatum to the English bishops. Both these synods revised and approved the book by Peter Mogila, styled "The Orthodox Confession," etc. This Confession therefore unquestionably harmonizes with the Ultimatum in reference to the doctrine of predestination. Hence citations from the latter will suffice upon this point.

The Eighteen Articles of the Synods of Jassy and Bethlehem follow the order of the Articles of Cyril Lucar, which they are designed to complete and condemn. Cyril says, in Article III of his Confession, "We believe that the perfectly good God, before the foundation of the world, predestined to glory whom he had elected, in no respect regarding their works, nor having any cause impelling him to this election other than his good will, divine mercy. In like manner before time was, that he rejected whom he has rejected; the cause of this rejection, if we look to the uncontrolled mastery and dominion of God, we shall doubtless discover to be the divine will; if we turn to laws and rules of order which Providence uses in the government of the world, we shall perceive it to be his justice; for God is merciful and just also." Article III of the synods accordingly treats of predestination thus: "We believe that God, who is exceedingly good, from eternity ordained to glory those whom he has

chosen, and gave up to condemnation those whom he rejected; but not that he thus willed to justify the former and give up to condemnation the latter without cause. . . . But foreseeing those would use their free-will well, but these ill, he foreordained or condemned. . . . But for execrable heretics to say that God foreordains or condemns without reference to the works of those foreordained or condemned, we know is impious and profane. . . . But that the divine will should be the cause of those who are condemned thus simply, and without reason, what madness does it not show! . . . For God equally desires the salvation of all; as we know that respect of persons has no place with him, and we acknowledge as right the giving up to condemnation those vessels who have become profane by their own wicked choice and impenitent heart." This article, of which we have quoted a part, concludes with a solemn anathema pronounced against those who believe and teach the opposite doctrine.

If it be said that there are other Russian authorities, which have appeared since the date of the synods, and which should be summoned, we refer to Platon's "Orthodox Instructor," pp. 120, 122, quoted by Masson, p. 6: "We see in these times, to the great scandal of Christianity, three principal heresies, those, namely, of the Papists, the Lutherans, and the Calvinists. And these three are different, each from the others. The Lutherans and Calvinists were separated no long time ago from the Papists by means of Luther and Calvin; in their wish, however, to throw off the papistical superstitions, they cast away in like manner the apostolic traditions also. They hold in common the opinion of the Western Church concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost; but especially the Lutherans assign to the body of Christ the attribute of omnipresence, which is peculiar to the divinity alone; and the Calvinists subject all human actions to a fixed and unavoidable decree.

The Longer Catechism of the Russian Church, with theological precision, defines predestination thus: "That will of God by which man is designed for eternal happiness." It then proceeds:

Q. Does God's predestination remain unchanged, seeing that now man is unhappy?

A. It remains unchanged; inasmuch as God of his foreknowledge and infinite mercy hath predestined to open for man, even after his departure from the way of happiness, a new way of happiness, through his only begotten Son, Jesus Christ. "He hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world," are the words of the Apostle Paul, Eph. i, 4.

Q. How are we to understand the predestination of God with respect to men in general, and to each man severally?

A. God has predestined to give to all men, and has actually given them, preventing grace, and means sufficient for the attainment of happiness.

Q. What is said of this by the word of God?

A. For whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate. Rom. viii, 29.

Q. How does the Orthodox Church speak on this point?

A. In the Exposition of the Faith by the Eastern Patriarchs it is said: "As he foresaw that some would use well their free-will, but others ill, he accordingly predestined the former to glory, while the latter he condemned." Art. III.

The very article, it will be remembered, which I have cited from the Ultimatum of the patriarchs to the English bishops. In this view foreknowledge is evidently the basis of foreordination.

Without lingering to multiply illustrations from the Greek Fathers, I conclude with the words of St. John Damascene, (De Fide Orthodoxa II, c. 30): “ Χρὴ γινώσκειν, ὦ πάντα μὲν προγινώσκει ὁ θεὸς, οὐ πάντα δὲ προορίζει· γαρ τὰ ἐφ' ἡμῖν, οὐ πρоoρíšει dè avτá”-intimating here, as elsewhere, that although God foreknows, yet he does not foreordain our moral character.

ART. III-WORSHIP OF RELICS, AND THE MIRACLES OF THE ANCIENT CHURCH.*

THE worship of relics legitimately followed the worship of the Virgin Mary, of martyrs and saints, and took its rise simul

*For the most ample material on this whole subject, the reader is especially referred to the famous Acta Sanctorum quotquot toto orbe voluntur, thus far fifty-eight volumes fol., (1643-1864,) coming down to October 22d, and now slowly approaching completion. This rare and costly work of the Bollandists is arranged after the Roman Calendar, and is the richest source for the knowledge of religious life, the worship of martyr saints and relics in the Roman Catholic Church. A complete copy of it may be found in the Astor Library, and another in the Union Theological Seminary Library of New York.

« AnteriorContinuar »