CHAPTER III: __________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
§ 56. Of the Church [1] in a Wider and a Narrower Sense.
IN view of the efficiency which God has communicated to the means of grace appointed by Him, it may naturally be expected (Is. 55:10; 59:21) that through their instrumentality there should arise a community of such as really embrace the saving grace offered to them. These recognize as their Lord and their Head, Christ, who, by giving Himself up to death, has not only made a congregation of the redeemed possible, but preserves the same, presides over it as Head and King, and procures for it everything that is necessary and serviceable for its existence and prosperity. [2] This congregation is most intimately united to Him, and its members are also most intimately joined together by the bond of a common faith, a common hope, and reciprocal love; [3] so that all who have become so united and believing constitute a single, great communion, which we call the Church. [4] To the Church belong all those who have the same faith and the same hope, however widely they may be separated one from another by space and time. The Church embraces, therefore, not only those now living, but, as well, those who have died in the faith; and between these there is only this difference, that the latter have already reached the goal, the former are still striving after it (Church militant, triumphant). [5] There is, therefore, only one such communion, because there is only one Head to whom all are subject, and only one faith through which they can be saved. This communion we then call holy, because in it the Holy Ghost is operating, to sanctify it; catholic, because, however widely the members of the Church are scattered, yet at all times and in all places the same faith is confessed; apostolic, because its faith, resting upon that proclaimed by the apostles, has never, in the course of time, been changed.
[6] Only those who belong to this communion are certain of their salvation, for the only way of salvation lies in the faith which is the faith of this communion (extra ecclesiam nulla salus). [7] To this communion, moreover, the promise is given that it shall endure for all times, [8] and it can never utterly fall into error, because in the Word of God it possesses the eternal truth. [9]
If moreover, the members of this communion are joined together by the like hope and the like faith, it is just as natural as it is desired by God, that those who dwell together in the same place and at the same time, should combine in a close, visible community; so that thus the one, universal Church should take the form of several particular churches (ecclesia universalis -- particularis), [10] and its actual existence be also externally recognized by such combination. It then becomes the duty of each such congregation to draw others also into the same saving fellowship with Christ, and for this end to employ the means of grace by which individuals can be gained. The particular [or individual] Church will then have to count all such as belonging to it, who unite themselves to it, though it be only by an outward profession: for, first, as it cannot, like God, look into the heart, it has no means whereby to determine whether any individual has indeed inwardly followed the call addressed to him; secondly, it can still always hope, in regard to those who at first have only outwardly accepted the call, that, through the power of the divine Word and Sacraments, they will still in time give inward heed to it. Concerning the particular church we cannot, however, assert so unconditionally, that it is a congregation of believers, i.e., of such as have accepted the saving grace offered to them; to it, therefore, the definition of the Church thus far given, viz., the communion of believers, does not apply, for in the midst of it there may be those who have not yet accepted the offered grace. While we count only those as belonging to the Church, as the communion of believers, whose treatment of the offered grace is what it should be, we must count as belonging to the particular Church all those also who stand in outward relation to and in connection with it. And thus we see ourselves driven to admit a twofold conception of the Church, viz., the Church in the narrow sense, composed of only true believers, and the Church in the wider sense, by which we understand the congregation of those who have joined themselves together in the same confession in the use of the Sacraments (ecclesia stricte et late dicta). [11] We do not thereby assume two churches, antagonistic and standing alongside of each other; rather, the relation between them is this, that the Church in the narrower sense exists in the midst of the Church in the wider sense -- not so that the latter is numerically equal to the former, but that it contains, or at least may contain, members within itself whom we dare not count as belonging to the Church in the narrower sense. [12] Thus, every one will readily understand that individuals are to be counted as belonging to the Church in this wider sense, not, however, who of them belong to the Church in the narrower sense; and hence the distinction between the visible and invisible Church corresponds to that between the Church widely and narrowly considered. [13] It becomes of the greatest importance, then, if these distinctions be made, not to transfer without qualification the promises and predicates that are given to the Church in the narrower sense to the Church in the wider sense, [14] which course might easily give occasion to false fear or to false hopes, and to selfdeception. [15] Concerning the latter it cannot be said, in the same sense, but only by synecdoche, [16] that it is one, holy, catholic, and apostolic, or that it cannot fail or err; [17] rather, from the fact that the call reaches many who do not receive it in their hearts, it already is manifest, that individuals in it often fail and err, and it is quite as possible that the evil may preponderate in the Church as the good should do so.
The Church (in the wider sense) is further called a true or a false one, not in consequence of there being a greater or smaller number of believers or unbelievers in it, but just in proportion as the doctrines of the Gospel are preached in it purely or impurely, and as the means by which we attain salvation are more or less purely and fully administered in it. [18] The pure preaching of the divine Word and the proper administration of the Sacraments are, therefore, the marks by which we may recognize the Church as a true one. [19]
[1] GRH. (XI, 7): "The word Church [ecclesia] (from ekkalein) generically signifies an assembly or congregation, whence it is applied to political and secular assemblies. In order, therefore, that the holy assembly of the Church may be distinguished from secular assemblies, it is called the Church of God, e ekklesia tou theou, Neh. 13:1; Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 1:2; 10:32; 11:16, 22; 15:9; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:13; 1 Thess. 2:14; 2 Thess. 1:4; 1 Tim. 3:5, 15. Likewise ekklesia en theo, 1 Thess. 1:1, tou kuriou, Deut. 23:1; Micah 2:5. But, inasmuch as even heretics boast of a church, for the sake of difference and honor the true Church is called e ekklesia ton agion, Ps. 89:15; 149:1; 1 Cor. 14:33, to which is opposed e ekklesia ponereuomenon, Ps. 26:5; Rev. 2:9. Finally, inasmuch as the Church of both the Old and the New Testaments is said to be the Church of God and of the Lord, in order to express the difference, the New Testament Church is said to be the Church of Christ. Matt. 16:18; Rom. 16:16; Col. 1:24."
[2] HOLL. (1292): "The Head of the Church is Christ, the God-man (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22, 23; 4:16), not only because of His superior eminence and perfection above the members, but also especially because of the moral and physical or real influence, which, according to both natures, He affords the members of His mystical body. The influence which Christ exerts over the members of the Church is twofold: (1) moral, which consists in this, that Christ, by virtue of His merit, has acquired all spiritual blessings, Eph. 1:3; (2) physical, or real, so called in distinction from that which is moral; this Christ affords the members of His Church efficiently, through actions terminating in themselves, by enkindling, increasing and strengthening faith, love, and other Christian virtues; by comforting anxious minds, by sustaining the wavering, by bringing back the wandering, by governing each and every one in the course of life."
The Church is, accordingly, the kingdom in which Christ exercises His dominion; hence many Dogmaticians append the doctrine concerning the Church to that concerning Christ as the Sovereign in His empire.
In connection with the foregoing proposition, the following antitheses to the Roman Catholic doctrine are presented:
HOLL. (1293): (a) "Neither from necessity, nor from Christ's free will and appointment, are we to recognize, in addition to Christ, any other head of the Church, that in Christ's stead visibly governs the Church Universal."
(b) (1295): "Christ never appointed the Apostle Peter the general head of His Church, neither did He grant to him primacy of power and jurisdiction over the Catholic Church."
(c) (1297): "The Pope of Rome is neither the successor of Peter in the episcopate nor the head or monarch of the Catholic Church."
The Protestant Dogmaticians, in expounding the passage, Matt. 16:18, understand the "rock" to mean the confession which Peter had made, v.
17. HOLL. (1295): "The meaning is, Thou art Peter, a man made of rock, standing upon thy confession just as upon a rock, or most firm petra, and upon this rock will I build my Church, so that it may be made a rock, immovable and impregnable, as long as it shall stand upon this confession of doctrine, as upon an immovable rock.' v. 19. Christ gave the keys to Peter, not as a prince, but as a minister and steward. Now, indeed, not only Peter, but also the rest of the apostles were appointed stewards by Christ, 1 Cor. 4:1. Therefore the keys here promised Peter were likewise given to the rest of the apostles."
[3] HOLL. (1300): "The inner and essential form of the Church consists in the spiritual union of true believers and saints, who, as members of the Church, are bound together with Christ the Head, through true and living faith (John 1:12; Gal. 3:27; 1 Cor. 6:17), which is followed by a communion of mutual love (John 13:35)."
[4] BR. (742): "Those men whom God, in accordance with His eternal decree, has granted His faith and grace, taken collectively are called the Church."
"Men who are true believers and saints constitute the material of the Church." Hence the Church is defined as "the congregation of saints who truly believe in the Gospel of Christ, and have the Holy Ghost." (AP. CONF., IV, 28.) It is better defined, "the congregation of saints," than "the congregation of the elect," as some define it; "because the title, 'saints and believers,' is broader than elect.' Wherefore since the Catholic Church embraces within its limits, not only the elect, properly and accurately so called, but also saints and believers who afterwards fall away, it is preferable to define the Church as the congregation of saints and true believers, than of the elect, although if the term of the elect' be employed in a correct sense, viz., according to the ecclesiastical and general usage, it ought to offend no one." (GRH., XI, 13.)
The scriptural proof that the Church is the congregation of saints, according to QUEN. (IV, 489): "In Scripture passages (1) the Church is called the mystical body of Christ, Rom. 12:5; 1 Cor. 10:17; 12:27; Eph. 1:23; Col. 1:18; (2) the Church is the mother of true believers, Gal. 4:26, of the sons of God, John 1:12; 3:6, who are led by the Spirit of God, Rom. 8:14, and are the heirs of Christ, Rom. 8:17; (3) the Church is Christ's fold, John 10:1, 27, 28; (4) prophets and apostles frequently ascribe such praises to the Church as cannot be referred to the entire assembly of the called, which embraces good and evil, wheat and tares, Matt. 13:24, good and bad fish, sheep and goats, Matt. 3:12; 13:47, 49; John 10:1." (IV, 490): "Therefore, that must be termed a Church, properly and accurately so called, to which these praises and attributes primarily and immediately belong. For, in the Old and New Testaments, it is frequently called the Bride of Christ, John 3:29; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 21:9; Cant. 4:7, a chaste virgin, 2 Cor. 11:2, one flesh with Christ, Eph. 5:30 (none of these accord with the wicked), the house of the living God, 1 Tim. 3:15, a spiritual house, 1 Pet. 2:5; Tit. 2:14, sq. To this none belong except those who are living stones built upon the chief cornerstone, Jesus Christ, Eph. 2:20, 21; 1 Pet. 2:5."
[5] BR. (742): "Believers, considered with respect to the present life, are called the Church Militant; but with respect to the other life, or the life to come, the Church Triumphant."
GRH. (XI, 10): "That is called the Church Militant, which in this life is still fighting, under the banner of Christ, against Satan, the world, and the flesh. (Here observe that this description pertains only to the Church of the elect, and if indeed it ought to be applied to the assembly of the called, it must be added that the Church Militant has been called and established for the purpose of fighting bravely against these contending powers, an object common to all those called into the Church.)"
"That is called the Church Triumphant, which, being transferred to heavenly rest, and relieved from the labor of fighting and the danger of being overcome, triumphs in heaven against all contending powers."
"The Church is called militant from its spiritual war, or battle against the devil, Eph. 6:10, 11; 1 Pet. 5:8, 9, the world, 1 John 5:4, and the flesh, Rom. 7:14; Gal. 5:17."
"The Church derives the name, triumphant, from the spiritual triumph or victory obtained over its enemies, Rev. 2:10; 4:4; 7:9."
[6] SYMB. NIC.: (I believe) "One Holy Christian and Apostolic Church."
1. GRH. (XI, 35): "The Church is said to be one, because it is gathered by one Lord, through one Baptism, into one mystical body, under one Head, governed by one Spirit, bound together in the unity of the common faith, hope, and love (Eph. 4:5), acknowledges one faith, and is called by one calling to one celestial inheritance." HOLL. (1301): "The Church is (a) one and undivided, because all the members of the Church are united in Christ as a head, through faith in Christ, which is joined not only with love to God, but also with inseparable connection with our neighbor; (b) it is one and no more (a) because it does not acknowledge a plurality of assemblies, of the same nature, existing at the same time, inasmuch as the Church Catholic is the assembly of all believers, united by faith to Christ, as the Head; (b) because it does not acknowledge a Church succeeding it, inasmuch as it never has altogether perished, and never will altogether perish, but, from its first beginning, has continued, by a constant succession of believers, to the present time, and will always continue until the end of time."
2. GRH. (XI, 36): "The Church is said to be holy, from 1 Cor. 14:33; Rev. 11:2; because Christ its Head is holy, Heb. 7:26, who makes the Church partaker of His holiness, John 17:19; because it is called by a holy calling and separated from the world, 2 Tim. 1:9; because the Word of God, committed to it, is holy, Rom. 3:2; because the Holy Ghost in this assembly sanctifies believers by applying to them, through faith, Christ's holiness, working inner renewal and holiness in their hearts, and awakening in them the desire of perfect holiness."
3. AP. CONF. (IV, 10): "And it calls the Church catholic, so that we may understand that the Church is not an external polity of certain nations, but rather the men scattered throughout the entire globe, who agree concerning the Gospel, and have the same Christ, the same Holy Ghost, and the same Sacraments."
HOLL. (1302): "The Church is called catholic (kath olon, according to that which is entire or universal), either with respect to its properties, because of its doctrine and faith, in so far as it professes the faith that the whole body of believers has at all times professed; or with respect to its extent, because of its being spread over the entire globe, not like the Old Testament Church, taken from a particular tribe or nation, but from all nations on the whole globe. That doctrine and faith is termed catholic, which is required of absolutely all who are to be saved." The predicate of catholicity can, therefore, be applied to the Church as the antithesis of heresy. "In this manner it is the same as the true and orthodox Church, and is so called from the catholic doctrine, i.e., the orthodox doctrine of Christ and the apostles, which, inasmuch as heresies grew up here and there, has been called catholic, because it has proceeded from Christ and the apostles, has been intrusted to all believers, and been received and believed by them with unanimous agreement." In this sense, therefore, this predicate can be applied also to a particular Church. It can, however, be also applied to distinguish the Church in general from particular churches. "In this manner it is the same as Church Universal, and in this manner the fact that it embraces the doctrine of Christ and the apostles does not suffice, for a particular church receives this; but, for the Church Catholic there is required, besides, that it includes all believers of all times and places." HUTT. (Loc. c. Th. 555): "Therefore, whatever church be regarded, whether that of Rome, or Corinth, or Jerusalem, or any other, according to this latter signification, it is only particular; although with respect to the preceding significations, it can be called catholic, provided that it preserve and retain, in good condition, the unity of the faith and spirit."
4. HOLL. (1303): "The Church is called apostolic, partly because it was planted by the apostles, and partly because it has embraced and been built upon the doctrine handed down by the apostles, on the foundation of the apostles and prophets,' Eph. 2:20."
[7] GRH. (XI, 39): "It is necessary for every one of those who are to be saved, to be a living member and true citizen of the Catholic and Apostolic Church; and those who are outside of the Church are, necessarily, aliens from God, from Christ, from the benefits of the heavenly kingdom, and the hope of eternal salvation. This is proved (1) by Eph. 2:12, 13; 4:16; 5:8; 1 Pet. 2:9; Rev. 22:15; 21:8; (2) by the peculiar benefits conferred by the Church, such as regeneration, renewal, etc.; for, since these have no place outside of the Church, there also cannot be salvation outside of the Church." The proposition, Extra ecclesiam nulla salus, there is no salvation out of the Church, means, therefore, chiefly, that no one will be saved who does not believe.
[8] CONF. AUG. (VII, 1): "They teach that the one holy Church is to continue forever."
GRH. (XI, 107): "We, in no way, say that the Church Catholic (viz., the invisible Church, and Church strictly so called) can fail or perish, because Christ is the eternal king, and the perpetual husband of the Church, and, therefore, by virtue of His relation, He has an eternal kingdom, and is always collecting for Himself, out of the human race, a Church, which He cherishes, loves, and protects as His bride, Matt. 16:18; Luke 1:33; 1 Tim. 3:15."
[9] GRH. (XI, 143): "The entire Church never errs in such a manner, that there are not some who, following the simple guidance of the Word, by the direction and effectual working of the Holy Ghost, are so sanctified as to retain the foundation of salvation, to persevere exempt from fundamental errors, and be kept by the power of God unto salvation, although these are sometimes few and so concealed by the public prevalence of persecutions and corruptions that they are not recognized publicly by the world, Matt. 16:16; 24:24; 28:20."
Id. (XI, 143): "Concerning the Church of the elect still warring on earth, we must distinctly reply, that, since errors are two-fold, some being fundamental and overthrowing the very foundation of faith, while others are non-fundamental, existing at the same time with the foundation of faith, and since error likewise can occur in a two-fold manner, either for a time or to the end, those who are elect may, for a time, be involved, and some even actually are involved not only in errors of a less grievous character, but even in fundamental errors. Yet these, in the meantime, before the end of life, again free themselves from such errors; for otherwise they would not be elect properly so called. They do not persevere to the end in fundamental errors, but may be involved in the less grievous errors, not only for a time, but even to the end; nevertheless, by the fire of the cross and of trial, these are diminished in them so as not to defeat their salvation."
[10] BR. (759): "The Church of Christ, scattered throughout the entire world, comprehends many particular assemblies, which also have appropriated to themselves the name and title of churches; for, although believers themselves are thus diffused over the earth, they still, being united here and there by certain bonds, grow into certain congregations and establish such, served by one regular and complete ministry, which is nevertheless distinct from the ministries of other congregations."
QUEN. (IV, 479): "The Church is said to be universal, for a double reason: (1) With respect to place. (2) With respect to time. With respect to place, the Church is said to be the general assembly which is collected from different nations throughout the whole world, for church fellowship and participation, through the Word and Sacraments, in the benefits of Christ. With respect to time, it is the assembly which, in different times, from the origin to the end of the world, is collected together through the Word. Therefore, the Church Universal, considered absolutely or with respect to both time and place, is the general assembly of true believers, whom God, from the beginning of the world to its end, has called, and to-day calls, and to the end of the world will call, through the preaching of the Word, out of all peoples and nations, to the actual participation in spiritual and heavenly blessings. The Church Universal, considered relatively, is the assembly of all true believers, who at any one time, e.g., that of the Old or of the New Testament, or even at the present day, everywhere continue in one and the same inner communion of faith, grace, love, and salvation. A particular Church is an assembly, not of all, but of some believers, called in a certain place to partake of salvation, and persevering in inner spiritual communion. A Church is said to be particular in a twofold sense, (a) with respect to time; (b) with respect to place. With respect to time, the Church of the Old Testament is one, and the Church of the New Testament another. With respect to place, one is collected by God throughout an entire kingdom; another, in a city, or even in a house. Hence, the apostles make mention not only of a Church in a house (kat oikou), Rom. 16:5; and the Church at Corinth (ten en Korintho), 1 Cor. 1:2; but also, in the plural, of the churches of the Gentiles (ton ethnon), Rom. 16:4; Gal. 1:2, 22; Rev. 1:4."
[11] The Church in the wider sense is, therefore, named "the assembly of the called," and, as "the Church broadly and improperly so called" ("the entire assembly of the called, in which all those who come together with the outward profession to hear the Word and use the Sacraments are regarded as members of the Church"), it is distinguished from "the Church strictly (properly, accurately, principally) so called (the entire assembly of true believers and saints), who are furnished not only with the outward profession of faith and the outward use of the Sacraments, but also with true faith of heart and inner regeneration." The ecclesia late dicta is therefore termed Church "by synecdoche, viz., of a part for the whole, by which there is ascribed to the entire assembly, composed of good and evil, that which belongs to only a part." To the Church in the former sense, the following passages refer: Acts 20:28; 1 Cor. 12:28; 14:4, 23. In the latter sense: Matt. 16:18; Eph. 1:22, 23; 5:23-26; 1 Tim. 3:15. GRH. (XI, 50): "Those who by the call are brought together into the assembly of the Church, differ in two respects. For by the Holy Ghost some are inwardly regenerated, renewed, endowed with true faith, enlightened, sanctified, and, in this manner, become true and living members of the Church. But others join the assembly of the called, i.e., the visible Church, only by an outward association, which consists in the profession of faith and the use of the Sacraments, while, at the same time, they are without inner regeneration and holiness. The former are true and living members of the Church, deriving life and breath from Christ, their Head; the latter are corrupt and dead members. The former belong to the Church inwardly; the latter improperly. The former, by reason of inner and spiritual connection with Christ; the latter, by reason of outward custom, profession, and association with the assembly of the called. The former, in the heart; the latter, in outward appearance. The former, actually; the latter, according to opinion. The former, according to the judgment of God; the latter, according to the judgment of men. The former, to the Church equally in body and soul; the latter, in body, and not in soul. The former, as true and sound parts of the body; the latter, as the mange and evil humors in the body."
[12] GRH., CONF. CATH.: "We do not affirm that there are two Churches, the one true and internal, and the other nominal and external; but we say that the Church is one and the same, viz., the entire assembly of the called considered in a twofold manner, namely, esothen [from within] and exothen [from without], or, with respect to the call and outward association, consisting in the profession of faith and the use of the Sacraments, and with respect to inner regeneration and internal association, consisting in the bond of the Spirit. In the former manner and respect we grant that even hypocrites and those who are not saints belong to the Church; but in the latter manner and respect we contend that only true believers and saints belong to it." On the other hand, HUTT. (Loc. c. Th., 508): "Although it is by no means sufficient for salvation that you be in the Church, described thus generally, and only with respect to the outward profession of Christian faith, yet salvation itself cannot be found by any one outside of this assembly. And here the comparison of the Church with the ark of Noah is in point. For, as no one was saved outside of this while the deluge lasted, and yet not all who were in the ark were saved eternally, so outside of this Church of the called no one is saved, and yet not every one embraced in this vast assembly of the Church is saved."
[13] HUTT. (Loc. Th., 194): "If you consider the outward fellowship of signs and rites of the Church, the Church Militant is said to be visible, and embraces all those who are within the assembly of the called, whether they be godly or ungodly, whether they be elect or reprobate. But if you consider the Church in so far as it is a fellowship of faith and of the Spirit dwelling in the hearts of believers, it is said to be invisible, and is peculiar to the elect." CF. AP. CONF., IV, 3.
BR. (769): "The Church, properly so called, is, indeed, not distinctly visible (or recognizable, so that we may be able to know distinctly and individually who those are that truly compose it as its members; for faith neither meets the senses, neither can we understand with much certainty what there is in others, 2 Tim. 2:19), but only obscurely (namely, where congregations exist, especially the larger ones, in which the Word of God is correctly taught and the Sacraments rightly administered, it is well understood that there are there some true believers and saints who constitute a part of the Church of Christ). But that which by synecdoche is called a particular church is so visible that it can be recognized as true and with respect to its members, and can be distinguished from false or corrupt churches (for they profess the Catholic faith in its integrity and without corruption, and use the Sacraments aright, and can be perceived without doubt and individually)." The Church is therefore (GRH. XI, 82), "(1) visible with respect to the called, invisible with respect to the elect; for who are truly born again and elect does not appear outwardly, neither can it be perceived by the aid of the eyes; (2) visible with respect to outward fellowship, invisible with respect to inner fellowship; for who belong to the outward fellowship is manifest to men's eyes, but who belong to the inner fellowship of the Church is not likewise manifest, inasmuch as faith and spiritual newness lie concealed under the covering of the infirmities of the flesh; (3) visible with respect to outward means and instruments, through which the Church is collected by God on this earth; as also with respect to the outward exercises of religion, which are the profession of doctrine and Church discipline, the preaching of the Word, and the administration of the Sacraments, as also the remaining outward offices of the Church. On the other hand, it is said to be invisible, primarily indeed and chiefly with respect to faith and the inner gifts of the Holy Ghost in the regenerate, which cannot be perceived by human eyes; secondly, with respect also to the Head of the mystical body, whom now we do not see, and because the discerning of the good, from the hypocrites, with whom they are intermingled in the visible Church, has been left only to the divine knowledge."
The same remarks, moreover, apply to this distinction as to that between the Church as taken in a broader or narrower sense. GRH. (XI, 81): "We by no means introduce two Churches as opposed to each other, as though the visible and invisible Churches were contra-distinguished species; but we say that the visible and invisible are one and the same Church, with a diverse relation." The visible and invisible Churches, therefore, are not opposed to each other as contraries, but as subalterns and subordinates. "For the invisible assembly of the elect is comprised under the visible congregation of the called, because the elect are not to be sought outside of the assembly of the called, and the Church of the called is more comprehensive than that of the elect (Matt. 20:16). Whoever, therefore, belong to the invisible Church, i.e., all who are elect, are also the called, but not the reverse." (GRH., XI, 83.)
Besides, false conceptions of the Invisible Church are guarded against by the following statements (ib.): "That the Church of the elect is said to be invisible, not because the godly scattered through the world do not come under the sight of men with respect to their person, but because faith and the divine election, by virtue of which they belong to the Church as true members, do not appear in them -- they are seen as men having bodies, and not as elect men; nor is the Church of the elect said to be invisible because the godly and elect have no intercourse whatever with the visible ministry of the Word and Sacraments, and with the outward practice of divine worship, but because the inner gifts of the Holy Ghost, by which, in the sight of God, they are distinguished from corrupt and dead members, are in no way manifest to the sight of men." As a secondary reason for distinguishing between the Church visible and invisible, GRH. (XI, 85) states the following: "Because not only do earthly governments surpass the Church in outward splendor, but heretical assemblies also very often excel it in wealth, power, etc.; and therefore that the Church may not be judged from its outward appearance, it is said to be invisible, i.e., that the pitiable, despised, and small assembly, in which are many weaknesses, and which is not only oppressed by persecutions and the cross, but is also disgraced by many causes of offence and stumbling-blocks, is the Church, concerning which we must decide not from its outward form, but from the Word, and of which we must judge in accordance with the norm of the Word. And in this sense, and respect we grant that the Church, in this signification, is not constantly invisible in the same manner, i.e., it does not always lie hidden, oppressed, despised, and degraded, but, like the moon, varies, and increases and diminishes its external splendor; for sometimes it is oppressed by persecutions and obscured by clouds of heresies, and sometimes enjoys true tranquillity, and shines most clearly with pureness of doctrine."
While the distinction between the Church visible and invisible was not expressed, in direct words, in the Symbolical Books, and by the earliest Dogmaticians, as Melanchthon, we nevertheless find the substance of it set forth in the following statements: AP. CONF. (IV, 5): "The Church is not only the fellowship of outward matters and rites, as other governments, but is principally a fellowship of faith and the Holy Ghost in hearts . . . . And this Church alone is called the body of Christ, because Christ renews, sanctifies, and governs it by His Spirit . . . . Although, therefore, hypocrites and wicked men are members of this true Church, according to the outward rites, nevertheless, when the Church is defined, it is necessary to define that Church which is the living body of Christ, and likewise is the Church both in name and reality." But the earliest Dogmaticians do not set out, as we do, with the conception of the Church as an assembly of saints; and they, moreover, employ the expression, visible Church, in a different sense. Thus MEL. (Loc. c. Th., 284): "The visible Church is the assembly of those embracing the Gospel of Christ, and using aright the Sacraments, in which, through the ministry of the Gospel, God is efficacious." Their purpose is to rebuke those who refuse to attach themselves to any visible Church, saying that the Church does not assume a visible form. By the assertion that the Church is visible, Melanchthon means, therefore, only to say, that there are indeed certain marks by which a church can be recognized as the true one. AP. CONF. (IV, 20): "Nor, indeed, are we imagining a Platonic state, as some impiously satirize us; but we say that this Church exists, viz., those truly believing and righteous scattered through the entire globe. And we add its marks, the pure doctrine of the Gospel and the Sacraments."
[14] BR. (761): "The more eminent praises and the promises of perpetual duration, which in the Scriptures are ascribed to the Church, ought not to be referred to any definite, particular church, but to the Church of Christ considered absolutely."
[15] GRH., CONF. CATH.: "The distinction of the Church into visible and invisible is opposed to the opinion of the Papists, that the Church of Christ is so confined to the Pope of Rome and the prelates who are in the regular succession, that whatever they affirm and believe must necessarily be received by all, and that there dare be no dissent from these in any manner or upon any pretext. Likewise, to the belief of those who flatter themselves in their offences, and think that they cannot be damned, as they are members of the visible Church."
[16] GRH. (XI, 13): "But, inasmuch as to the saints and true believers in the Church, those are joined who are not saints, being indeed without inner regeneration and renewal, yet by outward fellowship (which consists in the profession of faith and the use of the Sacraments) joined, in this life, to the assembly of saints, it follows that the Church is sometimes received in a popular manner, for the entire assembly of the called, to which those honorable commendations which are ascribed in the Scriptures to the Church belong only by synecdoche, an ordinary figure in the Scriptures, doubtless because of the elect, who are in this assembly; just as if any one would eulogize a state because of its honorable and excellent citizens, with whom, nevertheless, wicked and perverse persons are intermingled; or, as if any one would adorn a field with praiseworthy epithets, because of the wheat, with which, nevertheless, tares are intermingled."
[17] HOLL. (1317): "Every particular and visible church may be so corrupted by fundamental errors, that the teachers professing false doctrine may prevail, and constitute the public ministry, the small number of true believers lying concealed under the multitude of errorists."
GRH. (XI, 109): "We say that not this and that particular church alone, but absolutely all the particular churches, and, therefore, the entire visible Church, can be obscured by a cloud of corruptions, errors, scandals, heresies, persecutions, etc., and be reduced to such a condition that its outward splendor and glory may fail, and there may no longer remain any manifest and visible assembly to rejoice in the pure ministry of the Word as it sounds forth publicly." Hence, in opposition to the Catholics (ib.): "We therefore deny that the Church has been bound to any fixed seat in such a manner as to continue in it, with visible glory, by any perpetual succession; as our adversaries say of the Romish Church, that that is the only Catholic Church, in which the Pope is the vicar of Christ." Yet, on the other hand (ib. 110): "Nor is the Church ever hidden in such a manner as not to be seen by some, if not by the world and the unbelieving, yet by pious confessors, in exile and concealment; nay even, as in the deepest state of self-renunciation, Christ, the Head of the Church, sent forth some rays of His divine majesty, from which His true divinity could be recognized, so, in the deepest depression of the Church, the confession of some of the martyrs shines forth, and presents the clearest testimony to the perpetuity and truth of the Church."
[18] HOLL. (1306): "The true or pure Church is an assembly of men, in which all things necessary to be believed for salvation, and to be done for attaining holiness of life, are clearly taught from God's Word, without the mixture of any hurtful errors, and the Sacraments are rightly administered according to the institution of Christ, and thus spiritual sons of God are begotten, who, through true faith, are united to Christ the Head, and in Him are made one body."
(1307): "A false or impure church is an assembly of men, in which the doctrine of faith is publicly proclaimed from the Word of God, with a mixture of errors and corruptions, and the Sacraments administered, it is true, yet not distributed in that manner, and for that end, in and for which they were appointed by Christ."
"OBSERVATION. The true and false Churches are here opposed to each other, not by way of contradiction, in accordance with which a church which is clearly not a church is a false church, e.g., an assembly of Mohammedans, treading under foot all of the true religion; but privatively, as a false church is a falsified, vitiated, corrupted, impure church." It is not asserted, however, in reference to the latter, that there may not be some within it who are saved, since even in such a church the Word of God is still preached. HOLL. (1313): "In a church in which the Word of God is publicly read and explained and preached, and, in like manner, Baptism is administered uncorrupt in its essentials, spiritual sons of God, and heirs of eternal life, can be and are born. But, in a corrupted church (the Roman and Greek), the Word of God is publicly read and explained, etc. Therefore, " etc. (1314), "in a false church specifically so called, in so far as in the same the Word of God is publicly read and explained, and Baptism is administered uncorrupted in essentials, regeneration and salvation are granted, yet not without great danger of souls, because these can be so obscured by false dogmas, that either the light of faith is not enkindled, or, being enkindled in Baptism, is overwhelmed and extinguished by errors."
The phrase "Extra ecclesiam nulla salus," which our Church also adopts (comp. Note 7), does not, therefore, directly exclude the members of another particular church from the hope of salvation, since one may be regenerated even in such a church. The phrase is therefore not understood in our Church as it is in the Roman Catholic. That church declares salvation to be impossible for any one who belongs to another particular church, while we maintain by this statement only this, that he who would be sure of his salvation must belong to the assembly of the saints.
[19] HOLL. (1307): "The proper (essential and principal) marks of the true visible Church, from which its truth is recognized in such a manner that it can be distinguished from every false church, are the pure preaching of the divine Word (John 15:3) and the legitimate administration of the Sacraments (Rom. 4:11)." GRH. XI, 195): "The Church is established, brought together, nourished, and preserved by the Word of God and the use of the Sacraments. Therefore, the Word of God and the use of the Sacraments are the proper, genuine, and infallible marks of the Church, and consequently where these are pure, the Church is pure." GRH. CONF. CATH.: "When the pure preaching of the Word is affirmed as a mark of the true Church, the term preaching is received in a general sense for a profession of doctrine common to all the members, pastors, and hearers of the Church, and for the public explanation of Biblical texts, which is also a preaching, Acts 15:21" ("whether this be pure or impure ought to be determined from the public symbols and confessions published in the name of the entire Church, or approved by the entire Church, and not from the opinions or writings of this or that teacher" (HOLL., 1308)). "Preaching, in its narrow sense, is an action peculiar to the pastor, rather than common to the entire Church, and is not purely and absolutely necessary to the Church, as is shown by the times of the most grievous persecutions, in which the Church was able to be preserved by the reading of Scripture alone, without the public preaching of pure doctrine."
Further: "Whole and entire churches are not to be estimated from the pastors alone, nor from some few; wherefore whole churches are not immediately to be condemned if either the pastors or some few depart from soundness and purity of doctrine, because the ears of hearers are often purer than the lips of teachers, and many in a corrupt state of the Church, retaining, after having received Baptism, the fundamental articles of the heavenly doctrine, either do not assent to the errors in reference to them which the false teachers scatter, or cling to these without any pertinacity, or again release themselves from them before the end of life."
Finally: "Yet we must observe that there are certain grades of this purity, because the Word of God is preached in the Church sometimes with greater and sometimes with less purity; nor does a church immediately cease to exist if the teaching on some articles of religion be even for the most part not pure. The more purely and truthfully, therefore, the Word of God is preached in a church, and the more nearly the preaching and doctrine approach the form of Holy Scripture, the purer and truer will be the church; but the farther it departs from the rule of the Word, the more impure and corrupt will be the state of a church. Yet it is not through every corruption that a church ceases to exist, because we have shown above that God begets and preserves for Himself a holy seed and spiritual children, even at the time when the public ministry of the visible Church is corrupt."
In opposition to the Donatists and Montanists, it is very earnestly maintained that the marks above mentioned are the only essential ones; but that, also, where these exist, it is the duty of every one to connect himself with this Church. MEL. (Loc. c. Th., 284): "Neither let us praise the stragglers who wander about and attach themselves to no church, because they never find a church of such a type as that in it something is not wanting in morals or discipline; but let us search for a church in which the articles of faith are correctly taught, and to this let us attach ourselves."
The marks which the Roman Catholic Church assigns as those of a true Church are rejected as deceptive. They are the following: "The name Catholic, antiquity, uninterrupted duration, amplitude or multitude of believers, succession of believing bishops in the Roman Church, agreement in doctrine with the primitive Church, union of the members among themselves and with the head, sanctity of doctrine, efficacy of doctrine, holiness of life of its founders, glory of miracles, light of prophecy, confession of adversaries, unhappy end of enemies, temporal felicity conferred upon those who have defended the Church." Of the mark of antiquity, HOLL. (1312) observes: "By the primitive Church either that is meant which existed indeed many centuries ago, although very corrupt, or the apostolic Church. If the former, the true Church cannot be distinguished from the ancient corrupt Church. If the latter, the mark is indeed correct, but is consistent with our belief. For to agree with the primitive apostolic Church means to embrace the pure doctrine which that Church held." __________________________________________________________________
§ 57. The Church, Collective and Representative.
The entire number of those who are called to salvation in Christ cannot equally participate in all the affairs of the Church by giving counsel, direction, or decision; it seeks, therefore, an instrumentality through which it can be represented, and to which it assigns this business, and it finds this in the Ministry, which is, therefore, not only entrusted with the business of publicly proclaiming the faith of the Church, [1] but also of leading the Church, and of discussing and deciding all the questions that may arise in it. The Ministry we therefore call the representative Church, as distinguished from the collective Church, by which we mean the whole number of the members of the Church. [2] This Ministry, then, assembles in a council, whenever special occasions call for consultation, from which council laymen are not excluded if they prove themselves experienced in ecclesiastical affairs, [3] and the conclusions there adopted serve as a rule for the Church. Such an assembly is called a General or Universal Council, if all, or, at all events, the most of the particular churches are represented in it; it is called a Particular Council if only a few particular churches are thus represented. [4] Due regard for order makes it necessary that each council have a president, but only for the purpose of introducing in proper order the matters to be discussed, and to preside over the deliberations, and not as though in the matters of faith themselves that are discussed he should have a higher authority. [5] Under ordinary circumstances, a council is called by the political ruler under whose outward protection the Church stands; in extraordinary cases, a portion of the members of the Church has the right to call it.
[6] The assembling of a council can have no other purpose than to discuss and decide the matters in question upon the basis of the Holy Scriptures, [7] for even the council can have no other means of forming a decision; the authority of a council is, therefore, not absolutely decisive in all matters of faith, and the council can never demand the submission of the Church to its decrees simply because it has issued them, but only because, and only when, the decision has been made upon the basis of the divine Word, and in accordance with it. [8] The more unanimously adopted the decrees of a council are, and the greater the number of the particular churches that agree in adopting them, the greater weight do they have; although even then they are not infallible and therefore even then not of absolutely binding authority. [9]
[1] HOLL. (1320): "The profession of faith which is announced by the voice of pastors, when they inculcate doctrine in public congregations and declare it for the reception of hearers, is regarded as the common confession of the entire Church and of the individual members."
[2] HOLL. (1277): "The Collective Church (ecclesia synthetica, apo tes suntheseos, from the collection or connection of all the living members, who constitute one mystical body) is the Church taken collectively, consisting of teachers and hearers, joined by the bond of the same faith, and is called the collective Church in distinction from the Representative Church (Matt. 18:16), which is an assembly of Christian teachers formally assembled for the purpose of deciding questions concerning the doctrine of faith and practice" (QUEN. (IV, 478), "inasmuch as they can represent and explain the public doctrine of the Church more fully and correctly than the hearers alone without the teachers."
The question here under consideration is, more generally stated, the following, viz.: "To whom does the government of the Church belong?" To this HUTT. answers (Loc. Com. Th., 568): "We contend that the aristocratic form of government is the best, and belongs most properly to the Church Militant on this earth." More accurately: "It is our belief that it is the best and most advantageous of all forms of Church government, if the Church be united in the unity of the faith and Spirit into one mystical body, under one universal Head, Christ, and under one equal ministry of teachers, or pastors, or bishops of the Church. But the belief of the Romanists is this, that the best and most advantageous of all forms of Church government is, if the Church, in addition to Christ, recognize also a visible Head on this earth, namely, the Pope of Rome." . . . HUTT. then proceeds (581): "The question is, If the monarchical form of government cannot exist, what form, therefore, has a place in the Church?" and answers: "I think that we ought to reply to this question not in an absolutely categorical manner, but we should proceed to it distinctly, according to the threefold relation which the Church sustains. For (1) the Church may be considered with respect to its supreme and only Head, which is Christ Jesus alone. In this respect, we acknowledge that the government of the Church is purely and absolutely monarchical. Again (2) the Church may be considered with regard to its mystical body, which grows together from the entire organism of called believers into one body, and is quickened by one Spirit. Now, in so far as, in the election and calling of ministers, the votes and suffrages of the entire people and all the three hierarchical orders are required; in so far, likewise, as the privileges, benefits, rights, and dignities of the Church are not confined to this or that order alone, or this or that man, but have been handed down and committed by Christ and the apostles to the entire Church; so far, certainly, FLACIUS ILLYRICUS judged not improperly that the government of the Church possessed something in common with a democracy . . . . Finally (3) the Church is considered, also, with respect to its ministers and pastors, but in such a manner that the universal and particular churches differ. For a particular church can have one certain pastor . . . . But the question is not with respect to such a government of a particular church, but only concerning the government of the universal or catholic Church; whether this, with respect to its pastors and bishops, is monarchical, and depends upon one. Where we maintain the negative, . . . and believe and teach that this government is aristocratic, relying upon the following arguments: (1) The Church will at all times be administered in the same manner in which the primitive Church was governed by the apostles. But the apostles governed it in an aristocratic manner. Therefore, (2) That which is administered with equal justice by a few, and by these as the chief persons, is ruled in an aristocratic manner. But the Church is administered with equal justice by a few and these belonging to a higher class. Therefore, (3) A proof can be derived from the practice of the primitive Church, which was governed by bishops . . . . (4) And the last proof can be produced from the agreement of antiquity . . . We therefore conclude our thesis with this general syllogism: Whatever God appointed, whatever was always observed by the apostles, was confirmed by the practice of the early Church, and finally was profitable and advantageous to the Church, that must be regarded as necessary, and be firmly retained in the Church. But such government of the Church, with respect to bishops and teachers, was aristocratic . . . . Therefore it must be regarded as necessary, and be firmly retained, nor must it be changed in any way into a monarchy.'"
[3] HOLL. (1320): "In councils, the teachers and delegates of the Church are assembled" (Br. (773): "Laymen, provided they be experienced and skilful in sacred affairs, godly, and peace-loving"), "to whom the power has been committed, by the entire communion of believers, of examining and deciding concerning the public interpretation of doctrine in doubtful and controverted points."
As in councils the clergy largely preponderate, there is no need in the definition of the Representative Church just given, of any special mention of the laity.
"The subjects with which councils are occupied are questions concerning the doctrines of faith, the practical duties, and the ceremonies of the Church of Christ. Example, Acts 15:29." God is called "the principal and remote cause of a just and legitimate council." QUEN. (IV. 483): "Councils have a divine origin. In the Old Testament, Numb. 11:16; Deut. 17:9; Ps. 122:5. In the New Testament as to genus, Matt. 18:17 (where by the Church is meant the assembly judging. But a promiscuous multitude does not judge. Therefore, a representative Church is intimated, which is the assembly of teachers" (HOLL., 1321)), "having been inaugurated by the renowned apostolic conference at Jerusalem, Acts 15:28."
[4] HOLL. (1324): "There are general councils, to which learned and godly men are called either from all or from very many parts of the Christian world. There are also particular or national councils, to which learned and godly men of a single nation are summoned; or provincial, in which the teachers of a single province assemble; or diocesan, which consist of religious men of a single diocese."
[5] HOLL. (1322): "The invisible President of the council is the Holy Ghost (Acts 15:28, who, by means of the Word comprised in Holy Scripture, speaks, teaches, enlightens, and directs the minds of the Church's arbiters). The visible president is either political or ecclesiastical. The political president is a Christian emperor, king, or prince, or some one delegated by him. The ecclesiastical president is one bishop or more, chosen by the emperor, king, or prince, or by the common vote of the entire council.
"The political president controls the outward order of the councils, affords, to those conferring, security from external violence, prevents tumults, suppresses controversies, approves the decisions of the greater and better part, sanctions them by a public edict, and carries them into execution. The ecclesiastical president controls the internal affairs of the Church, or those particular ecclesiastical actions which pertain to the doctrine of faith, not with coercive, but with ordinate authority, and accurately states, and clearly explains, the questions to be considered."
(1323): "The arbiters and judges in the councils are, in addition to the presiding officers, not only bishops, teachers, and pastors, but laymen also, well versed in sacred literature, godly lovers of truth and peace, delegated by the churches to give their vote concerning the subjects proposed (Acts 15:22, 25)."
[6] HOLL. (1321): "The power to announce and convoke a council, belongs to an orthodox civil magistrate; in the absence of whom believers themselves can, without injustice to the heterodox princes of their domains, appoint an ecclesiastical assembly. NOTE. -- If the magistrate be heterodox and unbelieving, nevertheless the right and power to convoke councils does not cease, if the orthodox earnestly request it. But, if, when it is asked, he do not assent to it, the bishops themselves, in accordance with the example of the apostles, can, by request as it were, assemble councils (Acts 15:2)."
Hence, the antithesis against the Roman Catholic Church: "1. The right and authority to announce councils, especially general councils, does not belong to the Pope of Rome, but to the highest political magistrate. 2. The president (ecclesiastical) is not necessarily the Roman bishop, or his legates, but those who are chosen for this office by the suffrages of the bishops." (QUEN., IV, 516.)
[7] The only principle and norm, by which to decide controverted questions concerning doctrines and morals, is canonical Scripture (Deut. 4:2; Is. 8:20; 1 Tim. 3:15; Gal. 1:8; 6:16).
[8] HOLL. (1325): "Councils possess great authority, and this is both decretory (in establishing good order, and appointing rites, and correcting the morals of the Church, in order that all things may be done decently and in order, 1 Cor. 14:40) and decisive (in doctrines of faith);" but the decision is "not purely judicial, but that of a servant and minister, being bound to a regular method of interpreting passages of Scripture (which they do not possess from the fact that they precisely represent the Church Universal). The authority of councils is not derived from a perfect representation of the Catholic Church (inasmuch as there never is a council that precisely represents the Church Universal, and, therefore, there is no council absolutely universal and oecumenical); but they possess it from their dependence upon Holy Scripture, and from the agreement of their decrees with the same."
[9] HOLL. (1325): "Although some authority is a posteriori given to councils by the consent of churches existing throughout the entire world" ("the councils which are received by a majority of churches, are judged to possess such authority, that from them the doctrine of the true Church may be inferred not obscurely"), "yet, this is not infallible or free from danger of erring (for those who, when out of the council, are liable to mistake, remain the same even when assembled in a council; but teachers of the Church, when out of the council, are liable to mistake . . . . Therefore . . . )." __________________________________________________________________
§ 58. Of the Three Estates in the Church.
Although all the members of the Church have the same heavenly calling, their earthly calling is not the same. On the other hand, they are divided into three estates, of which one (status ecclesiasticus) is called to arouse, maintain, and increase faith in the Church by the preaching of the divine Word and the administration of the Sacraments; the second (status politicus) to care for the outward, temporal well-being of the community; both these estates, therefore, minister, each in its own way, to the third, that of the family (status oeconomicus), for which they are to provide a well-ordered life, and which they are to aid in fulfilling its spiritual calling. [1] __________________________________________________________________
§ 59. 1. Of the Ecclesiastical Estate, the Ministry.
As the Word and Sacraments are the means through which alone a Church can come into existence, God has willed and ordered that these means shall always be employed; thereby He has willed the office of the preaching of the Word and the administration of the Sacraments. [2] This office is, therefore, one of divine appointment, [3] and God has at times Himself immediately called single individuals into it, while now He does it only mediately, [4] namely, through the Church, which has received from Him the right and the authorization to do it. [5] The whole number of those who are intrusted with this office we call the Ministry. Individual teachers now must, therefore, have received their call and authorization from the Church, if they are legitimately to have the right to teach and administer the Sacraments. [6] It confers their office upon them, moreover, by the solemn rite of ordination, [7] an act by which, indeed, not a special supernatural power or gift is imparted to the person ordained, but which, nevertheless, in ordinary cases, dare not be omitted, because order in the Church and the example of the ancient Church, require it. [8] With ordination the Church commits to them the obligation and the right to preach the Word of God and to maintain obedience to it, to dispense the Sacraments and to forgive or retain to individuals their sins (potestas ordinis -- potestas clavium). [9] In all these functions the Minister does not act in his own name, but, as by the authority, so also in the name of Christ; all the effect, therefore, that follows the Word preached and the Sacraments administered by him, proceeds not from him, but from God. [10] Thus he has also, according to Matt. 16:19; John 20:23, the right to forgive the sins of the penitent, and retain those of the impenitent; and he upon whom this right is exercised must recognize in this act not a mere announcement, but can be sure of this, that thereby his sins are really forgiven or retained. But the power to do this, the Minister has not of himself, but from the Lord, and he exercises this power entrusted to him, in each particular case, only as the servant of the Lord. [11] The Church expects from each one to whom she entrusts this power, and to whom she then obediently subjects herself, that he perform all his duties with fidelity, and has the right, if he fail to do this, to discipline him. [12] The Church assigns to individual ministers different ranks, and establishes different grades in the ministry, but this is done only for reasons of outward order; and the essential rights of preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments are possessed by all alike. [13]
[1] GRH. (XII, b. 2): "Three estates or orders appointed by God in the Church are enumerated, viz., the ecclesiastical, the political, and the domestic, which also are frequently called hierarchies. The domestic order is devoted to the multiplication of the human race; the political, to is protection; the ecclesiastical, to its promotion to eternal salvation. The domestic estate has been established by God against wandering lusts; the political against tyranny and robbery; the ecclesiastical against heresies and corruptions of doctrine."
[2] CONF. AUG. (Art. V): "For the obtaining of this faith (of justification), the ministry of teaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments was instituted. For, by the Word and Sacraments, the Holy Spirit is given; who worketh faith where and when it pleaseth God in those that hear the Gospel . . . . They condemn the Anabaptists and others, who imagine that the Holy Spirit is given to men without the outward Word, through their own preparations and works."
BR. (785): "For the collection and preservation of the Church it is necessary that certain men discharge the office of preaching the Word and administering the Sacraments; in order that, through these means, faith may be conferred upon men, and when conferred may be strengthened and increased. And this is the office which is called the ministry of the Church."
GRH. (XIII, 224): "The ministry of the Church is a sacred and public office divinely appointed, and intrusted, through a legitimate call, to certain men, in order that being instructed they may teach the Word of God with peculiar power, may administer the Sacraments, and preserve church discipline, for the purpose of effecting the conversion and salvation of men, and truly advancing the glory of God."
[3] HUTT. (Loc. Th., 186): "The ministry of the Church has been established certainly not by man, but by God Himself, John 20:21; Matt 28:19, 20; Mark 16:15." AP. CONF., XIII, 11: "The ministry of the Word has the command of God, and has glorious promises, Rom. 1:16; Is. 55:11."
[4] HOLL. (1332): "By the divine call is here understood the appointment of a certain and suitable person to the ministry of the Church, with the right to teach in public, to administer the Sacraments, and exercise ecclesiastical discipline, made by God either alone or by the intervening judicial aid of men."
BR. (787): "Moreover, God calls men to the ecclesiastical office, sometimes immediately (as Moses and the most of the prophets in the Old Testament were called, and likewise the apostles in the New Testament), i.e., by no intervening judicial aid of other men; and at other times mediately, namely, through the Church, which, in the name of God, commits this office to certain persons." (HOLL. (1333): "An immediate call is not to be expected in the Church to-day." ) Concerning the difference between the mediate and the immediate call, GRH. (XXII, b. 75): "The difference between the mediate and immediate call consists always and only in this, that the former is effected through ordinary means, divinely appointed for this purpose, but the latter through God Himself, who manifests His will concerning the immediate call of a person, either by Himself or through some representative." The mediate call, therefore, is to be considered no less a divine call. GRH. (XII, b. 79): "For, (1) It is referred to God as its author, Ps. 68:11; Is. 41:27; Jer. 3:15; 23:4; 1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11. (2) It is based upon apostolic authority, Acts 14:23; 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6; 2:2; 1 Tim. 3:2; Rom. 15:18; 1 Tim. 5:21; Acts 20:28; Col. 4:17. (3) The mediate call rejoices in God's saving promises, 1 Tim. 4:16; 2 Cor. 3:6; Eph. 4:12. And, indeed, essentially the same promises belong to those thus called. GRH. (XII, b. 81): "But if the mediate call, therefore, is not less divine than the immediate, it will follow that the promises made by God to those who have been immediately called, concerning the fruit and success of the ministry, concerning protection in dangers, concerning the reward of labors, etc., belong in their own way to those also who have been mediately called by God. We do not deny that the prophets and apostles, as those immediately called, had many and great prerogative, such as the privilege of not erring, the right to teach in a plurality of places, more abundant gifts, peculiar charisms, fuller promises concerning the success of the call and protection, etc.; yet, with respect to the ministry of the Church and the functions of teaching, both the mediately and immediately called sustain one and the same office in the Church, and, therefore, the promises concerning divine aid, and divine virtue and efficacy in the ministry, can be referred in their own way to the mediately called." . . .
The "mixed call, by which God Himself names a certain person, but yet wills that he be called through others, as representatives (thus Aaron through Moses)," is not regarded by most of the Dogmaticians as constituting a distinct species."
[5] HOLL. (1334): "The less principal cause constituting the ministry is the Church, to which the right has been granted by God of electing, ordaining, and calling suitable ministers of the divine Word, nevertheless with the observance of becoming order in the exercise of this right, 1 Cor. 14:33." (Id. (1335): "Therefore the examination, ordination, and inauguration belong to the presbytery; the nomination, presentation, and confirmation of the call, by means of writing, to the magistrate; and the consent, vote, and approval to the people.") Br. (788): "To the Church, after it has been planted, before the right and power to appoint ministers. For she has the keys of the kingdom of heaven, Matt. 16:19; 18:18, given her as a Bride, by Christ, her Husband; and, therefore, as it is her prerogative to open and close the kingdom of heaven, so is it also her prerogative to appoint ministers, through whom she may open and close [the same]. And, if we consider that the Church is a republic, and that the ministers of the Word are, so to speak, the magistrates or conductors of public affairs, upon whom the care of the whole republic rests, it is easily understood that the power to appoint them is vested, per se and in the very nature of the case, in the whole Church; nor does it belong to any one part, unless, by the common consent of all, it be transferred to some one part." (It is not intended, therefore, hereby to lay down the law that, in practice, all the estates of the Church must participate in the choice of the individual teacher. HOLL. (1334): "We must distinguish between the right to call ministers and the exercise of the right. The right to call belongs to the whole Church, and all its ranks and members. But the exercise of the right varies, according to the diverse agreement and custom of the particular Church.") According to the doctrine of the Symbolical Books, also, the Power of the Keys is in the hands of the whole Church. ART. SMALCALD. "Of the Power and Primacy of the Pope," 24: "In addition to these things, it is necessary to confess that the keys do not belong to the person of a certain man, but to the Church, as many very clear and very strong arguments testify. For Christ, speaking of the keys, Matt. 18:19, adds: Where two or three are gathered together in my name,' etc. Therefore He gave the keys to the Church primarily and immediately; just as also, for this reason, the Church has primarily the right to call. 66. Therefore when the regular bishops become enemies of the Church, or are unwilling to impart ordination, the churches retain their own right. 67. For wherever a church is, there also is the right to administer the Gospel. And this right is a gift given only to the Church, which no human authority can remove from the Church . . . . Where, therefore, there is a true church, there there must be the right to elect and ordain ministers . . . . 69. Lastly, the sentence of Peter (1 Pet. 2:9), Ye are a royal priesthood,' also confirms this. These words pertain to the true Church; and since this has a priesthood, it certainly must have the right to elect and ordain ministers." AP. CONF. (XIII, 12): "The Church has the command to appoint ministers, which ought to be most gratifying to us because we know that God approves the ministry and is present in the ministry." In conformity with this, the ART. SMALCALD (ibid. 11) likewise say: "Paul (1 Cor. 3:6) makes ministers equal, and teaches that the Church is above the ministers. Wherefore superiority and lordship over the Church and the rest of the ministers are not ascribed to Peter."
[6] CONF. AUG. (XIV): "Concerning ecclesiastical orders, they teach that no man should publicly in the Church teach or administer the Sacraments except he be rightly called." (HUTT. "(1) On account of God's command, Jer. 23:31; Heb. 5:4; Rom. 10:15. (2) For the sake of good order and the peace of the Church, 1 Cor. 14:40. (3) For the sake of certainty of doctrine, that it may be evident of what nature it is, and by whom it has been received, there is necessity for an examination and testimonials as to the doctrine. (4) For the sake of the conscience of the teacher, that he may be certain that Christ's grace is with him, and that the hearers, also may know that they are hearing an ambassador of God, 2 Cor. 5:20.")
[7] GRH. (XII, b. 145): "Ordination is a public and solemn declaration or attestation, through which the ministry of the Church is committed to a suitable person, called thereto by the Church, to which he is consecrated by prayer and the laying on of hands, rendered more certain of his lawful call, and publicly, in the sight of the entire Church, solemnly and seriously admonished concerning his duty." Concerning the person to be ordained, GRH. (XII, b. 149): "Our churches do not approve of the disorder and anarchy of the Anabaptists, but recognize distinct grades among ministers; yet, meanwhile, we deny that the power of ordaining is, according to divine right, so confined to the episcopal office that it cannot be exercised by presbyters, when the necessity and advantage of the Church especially demand it. The practice itself bears witness that, for the sake of good order, we commit ordination to the bishops or superintendents alone, who are called bishops, not only with respect to the flock intrusted to them, or their hearers, but also with respect to other preachers, viz., presbyters and deacons, the oversight of whom has been intrusted to them; yet, meanwhile, we do not recognize any such distinction between bishops and presbyters, as though the former alone, according to a divine right and the appointment of the Lord, have a right to ordain preachers, from which the rest of the presbyters have been excluded in such a manner that they cannot administer the rite of ordination even when necessity demands, as when bishops are not present or are neglecting their duty; but we say that, according to an ecclesiastical custom, introduced for the sake of good order, the power of ordaining has been left to the bishops, although from this presbyters have not been purely and absolutely excluded."
Of the ceremonies to be observed in ordination, GRH. (XII, b. 163): "In our churches we retain the laying on of hands, and reject the anointing. We make use of the cheirothesia, not as though it were a sacramental symbol, appointed by Christ Himself, and commanded to be employed in this rite, but we use this ceremony according to our freedom, both because it descends to us from the practice of the Apostolic Church (Acts 6:6; 1 Tim. 4:14; 5:22; 2 Tim. 1:6), . . . and because if affords useful admonitions." . . .
Ordination is, therefore, no Sacrament, GRH. (XII, b. 147): "The belief of our churches is this, that ordination may be called a Sacrament, if the word be received in a wide sense; yet, if we wish to speak most accurately, in such a manner that only that be termed a Sacrament which has an outward element or sacramental symbol, appointed in the New Testament by Christ Himself, to which has been attached the promise of grace, for offering, applying and sealing the remission of sins, according to which sense and signification Baptism and the Eucharist are called Sacraments: in such a sense, signification and respect, we deny that ordination is a Sacrament."
On the other hand, APOL. (VII, 11): "But if the word be understood of the ministry of the Word, we should not seriously object to call ordination a Sacrament. For the ministry of the Word has the command of God, and glorious promises . . . . If ordination be understood in this manner, we do not object to call the laying on of hands a sacrament. For the Church has the command to appoint ministers, which ought to be most gratifying to us, because we know that God approves the ministry, and is present in the ministry. And it is of advantage, so far as can be done, to adorn the ministry of the Word with every kind of praise, in opposition to fanatical men, who dream that the Holy Ghost is given, not through the Word, but through their own preparations." (Cf. § 53, note 5.)
[8] GRH. (XII, b. 168): "We do not deny that, in ordination, the gifts of the Holy Ghost, necessary for the discharge of the duties of the ministry of the Church, are conferred and increased. Yet, we make a distinction between the grace of reconciliation, or of the remission of sins, and the grace or ordination, since many receive the grace of ordination who nevertheless do not receive the grace of reconciliation; and we say further that the bestowal and increase of the gifts necessary for the ministry are by no means to be ascribed to the laying on of hands as a sacramental symbol truly so called, and divinely appointed, but to the prayers of the Church and the presbytery, to which the promise of hearing has been divinely made." HOLL. (1342): "The necessity of ordination is ordinate, for the sake of good order or decorum, and because of the divine command (Acts 13:2), although the number and form of the ceremonies vary according to the judgment of the Church; nevertheless, the necessity is not absolute."
GRH. (XII, b. 146): "We deny that ordination is necessary by reason of any special divine command, as this cannot be produced; or by reason of any such effect as the Papists ascribe to it, viz., as though by it any indelible character was imprinted, or as though it conferred, ex opere operato, gifts requisite to the ministry, concerning which no promise can be adduced from the sayings of Christ and the apostles; or by reason of any absolute and pure necessity." . . .
[9] BR. (792): "The ministry of the Church bears with it the power and office (1) of teaching publicly, and administering the Sacraments according to order; (2) the power and function of remitting and retaining sins." The former is termed the power of the order (potestas ordinis); the latter, the power of the keys (potestas clavium, called also potestas jurisdictionis).
CONF. AUG. (Of Church Power, VII, 5): "Now, their judgment is this, that the power of the keys, or the power of the bishops, by the rule of the Gospel, is a power or commandment from God, of preaching the Gospel, of remitting or retaining sins, and of administering the Sacraments. For Christ doth send His apostles, with this charge, John 20:21; Mark 16:15. This power is put in execution only be teaching or preaching the Gospel and administering the Sacraments, either to many or to single individuals, in accordance with their call, for thereby not corporeal things but eternal are granted, viz., righteousness eternal, the Holy Ghost, life eternal; these things cannot be obtained but by the ministry of the Word and Sacraments." GRH. (XIII, 16): "The power of jurisdiction consists in the use of the keys. But the power of the keys is twofold, loosing and binding, Matt. 16:19; John 20:23. For, although the ministry of the Word, by which sins are loosed and bound, is one, wherefore, also, in a generic signification, one key is effectual to open and to close the kingdom of heaven; nevertheless, according to the diversity of objects, means and effects, one key is said to be a loosing key, by which penitents are absolved from their sins and heaven is opened to them, and another binding, by which to the impenitent sins are retained, and heaven is closed against them. The former is called absolution; the latter excommunication. Both are exercised either publicly or privately. Absolution is public, when, to all who truly repent, the remission of sins for Christ's sake is declared from the Gospel; private, when sins are remitted to some penitent in particular. Excommunication is public, when to all the impenitent and unbelieving, the wrath of God and eternal condemnation are declared from the Law; private, when to any obstinately wicked one in particular the retention of sins is announced. With respect to degrees, excommunication is said to be twofold, viz., the less and the greater. The former is exclusion or suspension from the use of the Lord's Supper; the latter is expulsion from the communion of the Church: the former is called kathairesis [purifying], the latter, aphorismos [excommunication in the proper sense]. To the latter extreme degree of ecclesiastical censure we dare not progress hastily, without serious deliberation, and without the consent of the Church, and especially of the Christian magistrate, but the order prescribed by Christ, Matt. 18:15, must be carefully observed." Id. (XIII, 109): "As in the political and the domestic estates, so also in the ecclesiastical estate, a certain discipline is required, without which, just as in the former subjects and domestics cannot be kept in their duty, so also in the latter the hearers. The objects of church discipline are men who have been received into the house of God, and the family of Christ, and who sin, Matt. 18:15; Gal. 5:1, who must be rebuked, chided, and corrected, in order that they may return into the way and perform their duty, according to the requirement of the Word. Such falls are twofold, viz., with respect to doctrine, and with respect to morals." . . .
[10] AP. CONF. (Of the Church, 28): "Nor is the efficacy of the Sacraments destroyed, because they are administered by the unworthy; because they present before us the person of Christ by virtue of the call of the Church, and do not present before us their own persons, as Christ testifies (Luke 10:16): He that heareth you, heareth me.' When they offer the Word of Christ, when they offer the Sacraments, they offer them in the stead and place of Christ." GRH. (XIII, 15): "Ministers do not act except instrumentally (organikos), and, therefore, ought to adapt their actions to the divine judgment and command."
[11] HOLL. (1348): "The power which ministers of the Church have to remit sins is not absolute (autokratorike), or principal and independent (which belongs to God alone, against whom alone sin is committed), but ministerial and delegated (diakonike), by which to contrite and penitent sinners they remit all sins without any reservation of guilt or punishment, not only istorikos, or by way of signification and declaration, but also effectually and really, yet organikos (instrumentally)."
The remission is "delegated, Matt. 16:19; John 20:23. Therefore, the power to remit sins depends upon Christ (1) with respect to form, because it is a delegated power, and therefore such only, as to nature and extent, as God has delegated; (2) with respect to the norm, since the minister of the Church cannot absolve sinners according to his own judgment, but according to the norm of the divine judgment; (3) with respect to exercise, because in the act of absolution God concurs with the ministers and absolves through them; (4) with respect to efficacy, because the minister cannot absolve, except by delegated virtue and power, and, therefore, by that which is subordinated to the principal cause."
Ministers of the Church remit sins not "by way of signification," but "effectively; for they really bind and loose, and do not merely declare the binding and loosing that has occurred in heaven; because he who receives a key to unlock and open does not show that another has opened, but he himself opens. For the key is not the same as the declaration of the act of opening, and to unlock is not the same as merely to declare that another has unlocked. Through the Word of God, ministers really and effectively convert, regenerate, etc.; therefore, they also really and effectively remit sins."
BR. (798): "That which is declared by the voice of the minister is truly presented and offered by means of his voice to the contrite and believing, or is confirmed by God, as certainly as though Christ Himself were to say to the penitent, what He said to the paralytic, Matt. 9:2." HUTT. (Loc. c. Th., p. 765): "This absolution has its dependence upon confession. Therefore, it never errs, nor are the words scattered to the wind. For, inasmuch as absolution always either silently or expressly presupposes a condition of confession, it happens that absolution can, indeed, be invalid or ineffectual, yet it is never false; since it is declared by the minister only under the condition of a confession that has been properly and sincerely made." GRH. (VI, 298): "Neither can any one present this argument in opposition, that in this manner all certainty of absolution is removed, if it be said to depend upon the condition of repentance and faith: for we do not say that the absolution must be judged from the extent of the contrition or of the faith, but we do say that sincere contrition, and faith that is true and not hypocritical, are necessary; and, furthermore, every one can examine himself as to whether he truly recognize and detest his sins, and whether he truly believe in Christ."
HOLL. (1349): "The power that ministers of the Church have to retain sins is not principal and independent, but ministerial and delegated (the right to the key of binding, Christ has intrusted to the Church, as a spiritual mother of a family. The exercise of this right He has intrusted to the apostles and their successors, Matt. 18:18; John 20:23. Since, therefore, the power of the key of binding has been delegated, the ministers of the Church cannot bind impenitent sinners according to their own judgment, but in accordance with the norm of the divine judgment), by which they deny the remission of sins to obdurate, publicly infamous and notorious sinners, or only prohibit them from the use of the Holy Supper; or, by the consent of the church council, actually cast them out of the society of the Church; or, by an effectual declaration, hand them over to Satan, that they may truly repent and be reconciled to God and the Church."
[12] CONF. AUG. (XXVIII, 21): "Again, by the Gospel, or, as they term it, by the divine right, bishops, as bishops, that is, those who have the administration of the Word and Sacraments committed to them, have no other jurisdiction at all, but only to remit sin, and to take cognizance of doctrine, rejecting doctrine inconsistent with the Gospel, and excluding from the communion of the Church, without human force, but by the Word, those whose wickedness is known. And herein, of necessity, the churches ought, by divine right, to render obedience unto them, according to the saying of Christ, Luke 10:16. But when they teach or determine anything contrary to the Gospel, then have the churches a commandment of God, who forbiddeth obedience to them, Matt. 7:15; Gal. 1:9; 2 Cor. 13:8-10." HOLL. (1351): "A minister of the Church should cultivate piety with his whole heart (1 Tim. 3:2), and if his impiety be notorious, the censure of the Church ought to be employed against him, 1 Tim. 5:20. Yet his impiety does not derogate from the efficacy of the doctrine which he presents from the Word of God." ("Efficacy of doctrine does not depend upon the minister, but upon the Holy Ghost, who is inseparably joined to the Word of God. Wherefore, by whomsoever it be preached, the divine Word is and remains the power of God to every one believing, Rom. 1:16.")
GRH. (XIII, 214) under the caption, "Things Hostile to the Ministry of the Word," discusses the chief hindrances to the efficiency of the Gospel ministry. He makes a distinction between the faults of the pastors and the faults of the hearers. Of the former he enumerates: "(1) abuse of the office, and of the power of the keys; (2) corruptions of doctrine, which degenerate into heresies, if obstinacy be added; (3) faults of character and life." Among the faults of hearers, he gives prominence to "(1) the contempt of the ministry . . . (2) kaisaropapia, by which some claim for the political magistracy absolute power over the ministers of the Church. They decide that the regulation of the ministry belongs to regal affairs, and ascribe to the magistracy the power, according to its pleasure and without the consent of the Church, to appoint and reject ministers, and to prescribe laws according to its own discretion. They refuse to submit themselves to Church discipline, and strive to put a muzzle upon the Holy Ghost when He censures their errors and crimes." A heresy he thus defines: "A heresy is any private opinion, which any one selects for his reception in preference to a Christian doctrine and the Catholic faith, and obstinately defends." (Id., 222): "That any one should be a heretic, properly so called, it is necessary (1) that he be a person received into the visible Church by the Sacrament of Baptism; (2) that he err in the faith; whether he introduce an unheard-of error or embrace one received from another, although the former seems to be peculiar to a heresiarch, and the latter to a heretic; (3) that the error directly conflict with the very foundation of the faith; (4) that to the error there be joined wickedness and obstinacy, through which, though frequently admonished, he obstinately defends his error; (5) that he excite dissensions and scandals in the Church, and rend its unity." GERHARD, with AUGUSTINE, thus distinguishes heresy and schism: "Heretics violate the faith itself, by believing false things of God; but schismatics, by wicked dissensions, break away from brotherly love, although they may believe those things which we believe." (221.)
[13] HOLL. (1351): "For the sake of good order it is useful and prudent that, corresponding to the disparity of gifts, there should be among the ministers of the Church, distinct degrees of dignity and influence, 1 Cor. 14:40; Eph. 4:11." QUEN. (IV, 396): "Meanwhile, we say that the same power of the ministry in preaching the Word and administering the Sacraments and power of jurisdiction consisting in the use of the keys, belong to all the ministers of the Church." __________________________________________________________________
§ 60. 2. Of the Political Estate; [1] The Civil Authority.
The civil authority, no less than the ministry, is an estate appointed by God. [2] The power intrusted to it, with all its prerogatives, is derived, therefore, from Him; [3] and through it He desires to promote the temporal welfare of men. [4] Its primary duty, therefore, is to watch over the preservation of outward order and good behavior, [5] and it has the right and the duty of operating in this direction through laws which it is to enact, according to its own judgment, yet without encroaching upon natural or divine right. [6] This mission assigned to the civil authority has, however, as its ultimate aim the promotion of the prosperity of the Church; for the outward welfare aimed at by the civil authority would of itself have no significance. [7] Therefore the civil authority has, at the same time, an immediate calling to fulfil in regard to the Church (officium circa sacra); it is hence also to aid and protect the institutions of Christianity, to ward off all hostile attacks by means of the external power committed to it, and to withstand all injurious influences. [8] It is not to interfere, however, with the internal doctrinal or disciplinary affairs of the Church. [9]
[1] GRH. (XIII, 228): "The term magistratus is taken in a twofold sense: (1) abstractly, for the power and authority themselves, with which those are divinely endowed to whom the government has been intrusted; (2) concretely, for the persons who exercise the magistracy and are endowed with the power to govern."
[2] HOLL. (1353): "The efficient principal cause of the magistracy is the triune God (Rom. 13:1; Prov. 8:15; Dan. 2:21), who intrusts to certain persons the office of magistrate, either immediately (Ex. 3:10; Numb. 27:18; 1 Sam. 9:15) or mediately (John 19:11)."
Id. (1354): "To-day, by God's control, suitable persons attain to the office of magistrate, either by election, or by succession, or by rightfully taking possession of it."
[3] GRH. (XIII, 308): "From Rom. 13:1, etc., it is evident that the magistrate has been endowed with certain power." Yet "the power of the magistrate is not absolute, unlimited, and unconditional, but it is restricted by laws and the norm of a higher power. For, since the magistrate has received his power from God, he is under obligation to recognize God as his superior, and, in the use of his power, to conform to His will and laws. When, therefore, statesmen ascribe absolute power to the supreme magistrate, this must be received not unconditionally nor with respect to the higher power, namely, God, . . . but only with respect to the lower magistrates."
Political power consists "(1) in ordaining in such a manner as to produce honorable and salutary laws pertaining to the advantage of subjects and of the state" (legislative power); "(2) in judging so as, in cases for trial, to make the decision and administer justice to subjects according to the norm of the laws" (judicial power; "(3) in executing so as to adorn those obedient to honorable laws and rewards, and to punish the disobedient and negligent by means of penalties" (executive power). Hence the right of the sword, Gen. 9:6.
[4] GRH. (XIII, 225): "Because of the fall of those first created, the human race has lost not only the spiritual and eternal blessings of the life to come, but also the bodily and outward comforts of this life; yet God, out of wonderful and ever unspeakable kindness, because of the intercession of His Son, has not only restored and renewed the former, but also the latter, and has appointed means for preserving them." "Through the political magistrate, (God) preserves peace and outward tranquility, administers civil justice, and protects our property, reputation, and persons." (Ib., 226.)
[5] GRH. (XIII, 225): "By means of the former" (the civil magistrate) "both outward discipline and public peace and tranquility are preserved."
HUTT. (Loc. Th., 279): "The chief duties of the civil magistrate are: (1) to pay attention to both tables of the Decalogue, so far as they pertain to outward discipline; (2) to make enactments concerning civil and domestic affairs, harmonizing with divine and natural law; (3) to diligently see to it that the laws that have been published be carried into execution; (4) to inflict punishments upon the delinquent, according to the nature of the offence; to assist the obedient and bestow upon them rewards."
HOLL. (1366): "The civil magistrate has been ordained for the public good, and his office if fourfold: (1) Ecclesiastical, for kings are the nursing fathers of the Church, and the bishops outside of the temple. (2) Civil, by guarding the interests of citizens, and repelling foreign enemies from the boundaries of the country. (3) Moral, in so far as he enacts wholesome laws, by which subjects are held to their duty, so as to lead a peaceable life in godliness and honesty, 1 Tim. 2:2. (4) Natural, by which rulers provide for the support and other necessaries of subjects; for example, Pharaoh, Gen. 41:34."
[6] HUTT. (Loc. Th., 285): "Christians are necessarily under obligation to obey their magistrates and laws, except when they command us to sin; when we must obey God rather than men, Acts 5:29."
[7] GRH. (XIII, 225): "The magistracy has been established by God, no less than the ministry, for the collection, preservation, and extension of the Church, inasmuch as by means of it both outward discipline and public peace and tranquility are preserved, without which the ministry of the Church could not readily perform its duty, and the collection and extension of the Church could scarcely have a place, 1 Tim. 2:2."
The magistracy is therefore termed "a wall and shield to the Church, Ps. 47:10. For not only by this most firm wall are our bodies and property surrounded, but a protection is also afforded the Church, while the rage of those is restrained who desire to overturn all sacred things, in order that they may freely indulge their own lusts." Further, it is designated "a nursing father to the Church, Is. 49:23." . . . "Outward discipline is maintained, justice is administered, tranquility and favorable times are protected by the civil estate, to the end that, by the Word of God, through the ministry, a Church may be collected out of the human race. For, since by and since the Fall, the human race had been so miserably and dreadfully corrupted by sin, that, without a public rule, all things in it would be in confusion and disorder, God also established governments for the sake of the Church." . . .
[8] HOLL. (1361): "The magistracy is employed with sacred affairs, by carefully observing and performing those things which ought to be believed and done by all men who are to be saved, Ps. 2:10-12, and by directing the Church and the Christian religion in their external government."
There belong specifically thereto (Br., 809): "The appointing of suitable ministers of the Church; the erection and preservation of schools and houses of worship, as well as the providing for the honorable support of ministers; the appointing of visitations and councils; the framing and maintenance of the laws of the Church, the controlling of the revenues of the Church, and the preservation of Church discipline; the trial of heretical ministers, as also of those of bad character, and all other similar persons belonging to the churches and schools, and the compelling them to appear before a court; providing for the punishment of those convicted of heresies or crimes; and the abrogation of heresies that are manifest and have been condemned by the Church, and of idolatrous forms of worship, so that the Church be cleansed from them."
[9] HOLL. (1362): "The inner economy and government of sacred things, consisting in the doctrine of the Word, in absolution from sins, and the lawful administration of the Sacraments, are peculiar to the ministers of the Church. The magistrate cannot claim them for himself without committing crime."
"The civil magistrate has not the power of a master builder, in regard to sacred affairs, equally with, and without any distinction from, civil affairs." __________________________________________________________________
§ 61. 3. The Domestic Estate.
The family constitutes the third estate in the Church. In this we distinguish the marriage relation, that of children to parents and that of servants to their masters. [1]
1. The marriage relation [2] was appointed and authorized by God; [3] through this the propagation of the human race was to be secured in the manner that was right and well-pleasing in the sight of God. [4] While, accordingly, the Church regards this estate as sanctified, she declares this also by the solemn rite of marriage, by which she publicly sanctions the matrimonial life of those who wish to enter into this estate. [5] As, however, marriage constitutes the closest bond of spiritual and bodily communion, it is also in itself indissoluble, and a divorce of those who have entered this estate can take place only when one of the parties has already practically rendered the continuance of the marriage life impossible by adultery or malicious desertion. [6]
2. "The paternal relation is the natural connection of parents with children, divinely instituted for the education of offspring and the well-being of the entire family." HOLL. (1383.)
3. "The servile estate is the legitimate relation between masters and servants, divinely instituted for mutual advantage." HOLL. (1384)
The last two relations are not further discussed by the Dogmaticians in this connection, as they have treated of them at large in the exposition of the Decalogue.
[1] BR. (816): "The third estate occurring within the Church, and which is as it were the seminary of the ecclesiastical and political orders, is the domestic, which embraces conjugal, paternal, and servile association;" "for from domestic association some come forth who are to be brought into the ministry of the Church, and others who are to be brought into the office of the civil magistrate."
[2] HOLL. (1367): "Marriage is the indissoluble union of one man and one woman, according to divine institution, made by the mutual consent of both, for the begetting of offspring and mutual assistance in life."
HOLL. (ib.): "The primary and supreme efficient cause of marriage is the Triune God, inasmuch as marriage, abstractly considered, and in a general way, as to its nature, was immediately instituted by Him. The second and subordinate causes of contracting marriage, are the husband and wife themselves and their parents, in whose power they are, agreeing to the marriage." (GRH. XV, 67: "The consent is not the form [see Appendix] of marriage. As I correctly infer that the builder is not the form of a house, but its efficient cause, since, if the builder were to depart or to die, the house would not at once fall into ruins; so the consent is not the form of marriage, but its efficient cause, because, if the consent cease, a marriage that has been ratified and consummated is not dissolved.") Id. (386): "We affirm that consent is not the form of marriage, but that, from the consent, the legitimate and indissoluble union of one man and one woman into one flesh originated, or, what is the same, that the conjugal union and relation has itself originated from the mutual consent of both parties to become one flesh."
HOLL. (1371): "The material element, or the subjects, of marriage are the persons who are united in marriage, two in number, one man and one woman (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:4, 5; 1 Cor. 7:2, 4), suitable for attaining the ends of marriage, and placed beyond the prohibited degrees of consanguinity and affinity (Lev. 18:7)."
[3] HUTT. (Loc. Th., 287): "God Himself is the author of marriage. Gen. 2:18."
[4] QUEN. (IV, 453): "The ultimate and supreme end is the glory of God. The subordinate end is (1) the preservation of the human race, by the begetting and education of offspring, Gen. 1:27, 28; 1 Tim. 2:15; (2) mutual assistance, Gen. 2:18; (3) a remedy against wandering desires, 1 Cor. 7:2."
[5] GRH. (XV, 396): "The blessing of the ministry is necessary for rightly entering upon marriage, not from any special divine command, nor because of the nature of marriage, as though it were not complete without the consecration of the ministry, but on account of the ecclesiastical and civil arrangement introduced with reference to the public advantage and honor. The blessing, by the ministry, of those newly married, is not required for the essence of the thing itself, viz., of marriage, but for a public witness of it, so that it may be evident to all that the marriage is contracted lawfully and honorably . . . . In the forum of conscience and before God, a marriage is true and valid which has been entered upon with the legitimate and matrimonial consent of both parties, even though the blessing of the ministry be not added; but in the outer forum, a marriage is not considered true and valid, which has not been confirmed in the sight of the Church."
HOLL. (1371): "The solemn blessing or union, made according to a usual rite, by the minister, pertains not to the contraction, but to the consummation of Christian marriage: (1) That the lawful marriage of those making the contract may be openly manifest. (2) That those making the contract may be admonished concerning the holy and indissoluble bond of marriage, the divine blessing, conjugal duties, and the endurance of troubles. (3) That newly married persons may be commended to God, the author of marriage, by means of earnest prayers."
[6] HOLL. (1380): "The conjugal bond between husband and wife, as long as they remain alive, is in itself indissoluble, both on account of mutual consent, and especially on account of the divine institution, Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:6." BR. (835): "Meanwhile, in two cases, divorce, or the dissolution of legitimate and valid marriage as to the conjugal bond itself, may occur. Without doubt, in the case of adultery, where, by the law itself, marriage both can be and is dissolved, and the innocent party is permitted to enter into another marriage (Matt. 19:9; 5:32); and in a case of malicious desertion (1 Cor. 7:15), where the deserter himself actually and rashly sunders the conjugal bond, and where to the deserted party, when a competent judge makes the declaration, the power belongs to enter into a new marriage." The reason why a divorce may be granted under these two conditions, lies in the very nature of the case. HOLL. (1381): "From the nature of marriage, adultery of itself and directly conflicts with unity of the flesh, and, therefore, also with the substance of marriage, through which two become one flesh, Gen. 2:24. For he which is joined to a harlot is one body with the harlot,' 1 Cor. 6:16, and, therefore, is no longer one flesh with his wife." (1382): "Whatever immediately interferes with conjugal fidelity itself and the usus thori, dissolves the marriage bond, and, therefore, by its own right, opens the door of a second marriage to the innocent party. But malicious and incorrigible desertion, etc. Therefore, . . . "
GRH. (XVI, 176): "Our churches, having followed the most clear declaration of our Saviour Christ, recognize no other cause of a divorce that is truly and properly so called but one, viz., adultery . . . . In case of malicious desertion, the apostle grants the innocent and deserted party the power to enter into a new marriage, because the injuring and deserting person has, in fact and indiscreetly, made the divorce on his or her own authority without sufficient and just cause." Ib., p. 214. "Since it has been proved, from the words of Christ and the Apostle Paul, that there are only two causes of divorce, viz., adultery and malicious desertion, . . . it will be manifest, at first sight, to every one, that the remaining causes of divorce, which are mentioned in addition to adultery and malicious desertion, are not just, legitimate, and sufficient causes." As such other causes, GRH. enumerates: "unbelief, heresy, a solemn vow of continence, crime, danger of life, sterility, supervening impotency, incurable diseases, madness, relationship to a harlot, flight or banishment because of an offence." He denies the right of divorce in all these cases, excepting only the "danger of life," which he places in the category of malicious desertion; p. 260, "that, if the husband persevere in obstinacy, and distinctly testify that he is unwilling at any time to take her back, or to admit a reconciliation, or to desist from his former habits, it cannot be doubtful that he is to be regarded a malicious deserter, and, therefore, the deserted one can be dealt with otherwise." The Dogmaticians are not, however, altogether agreed in regard to this point. SARCERIUS allows divorce in the case of leprosy and incurable disease, and HEMMING: "In case of flight and banishment on account of an offence;" but this he does upon the ground "that every offence that is to be compared with adultery, is determined by Christ as a cause of divorce." (GRH. 266.) In a different way CHMN. justifies divorce "on account of cruelty, poison, and plots laid for the life." He says (Loc. Th., III, 210): "Since the text, Matt. 19:19, makes mention only of adultery, some earnestly contend that divorces cannot occur on account of cruelty and plots laid for the life. But, in the code, the law of Theodosius . . . grants divorce even in such cases. But, although some reject this law and contend that it disagrees with the Gospel, yet they do not understand aright the distinction between Law and Gospel. And since the Lord says expressly, that in the Mosaic polity divorces were granted because of hardness of heart, he signifies that the mode of governing men who can be cured, who are members of the Church and desire to obey the Gospel, is entirely a different matter from the government of the impious and contumacious, who are unwilling to endure the restraints of the Law . . . . In a cruel person, not belonging to the Church, the civil magistrate seems to be able to use the law of Theodosius. God wishes civil government to be an honor to the good, and a terror to the evil . . . . Neither are there wanting in governments obstinate and unjust persons and those without natural affection, exercising their unjust cruelty over their own families, such as the Lord, in this discourse, calls hard-hearted."
There are still two points to be considered, in the matter of actual divorce. BR. (836): "1. When persons unlawfully united (in degrees of consanguinity prohibited by the law of nature, or where a mistake of person, or impotency of one or the other party has intervened) are separated, this is not properly divorce, but rather a declaration that in the union there was not a conjugal bond (namely, because the one person could not contract it with the other, as for example, with a blood relative; or, that one of the two was utterly incapable of intercourse, and, therefore, also of the contraction of the marriage union)."
"2. In like manner, when husband and wife are separated, only as to bed and board (for example, because of severe enmity, which appears incorrigible, and even joined with danger to the life of one or the other), it is not divorce properly speaking; but a suspension of the acts of cohabitation and conjugal duty (the conjugal bond remaining unimpaired, so that neither husband nor wife can enter into another marriage; yea, sometimes the husband is bound to afford the wife support)." __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________
PART V.
OF THE LAST THINGS. __________________________________________________________________
§ 62. Preliminary Statement.
MAN attains his final aim, not in this life, but in that which is to come. What lies between the two, and what must take place in order to secure for individual men, and for the entire Church, final completion, constitutes the subject of this article. [1] It bears the title -- of the Last Things (de novissimis) -- because it discusses what is the last, viz., that with which the present world comes to an end. [2] We treat of the separate features in the order in which they will occur, viz.: (1) of death; (2) of the resurrection of the dead; (3) of the final judgment; (4) of the end of the world; (5) of eternal damnation and eternal life. [3] __________________________________________________________________
§ 63. (1.) Of Death.
"Death (in the strict sense) is the deprivation of natural life, occurring through the separation of soul and body." BR. (354). [4] It is a consequence of the fall of our first parents, and therefore all men are subjected to it (Rom. 5:12.) [5] In death the natural life of man ceases, it is true, as this was conditioned by the peculiar connection between body and soul [6] but the soul does not cease as does the body, but lives on with all the attributes and powers that belong to its essential nature. [7] For the immortality of the soul, reason has from time immemorial set up an array of proofs, but we become incontrovertibly certain of it through the positive declarations of the Holy Scriptures. [8] From them we learn also this much concerning the condition of the soul after death, that its lot, immediately thereafter, is a happy or unhappy one, just as its possessor in this life embraced salvation through Christ or not. [9] The doctrine of an intermediate condition of the soul, in which it is neither happy nor unhappy, as though asleep, is therefore erroneous;
[10] as is also the Roman Catholic view, according to which not two, but five different places are to be assumed, where we are to suppose the souls of the departed to be, viz., hell, purgatory, the abode of infants, the abode of the fathers, and heaven. [11]
[1] BR. (353): "Inasmuch as the highest or ultimate blessedness is not in this life, but in the life to come, and, in like manner, the lowest misery to which it is opposed occurs only after this life; we must now consider those things which, according to divine revelation, pertain to the end of this life, and to entrance into the life or state to come."
QUEN. (IV, 534): "We have thus far considered the means of salvation, properly so-called, both those for bestowing (dotika), on the part of God, namely, the Word and Sacraments, and that for reception (leptikon) on our part, namely, faith. The means, called so in a less accurate sense, now follow, viz., the four Last Things: death, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and the end of the world, which are not so properly means to obtain salvation, as the way through which we reach the goal or limit. For the passing over of the godly from the Church Militant to the Church Triumphant occurs through death, for which reason Gregory of Nyssa compares it to a midwife bringing us to life truly so-called. Following death is the judgment, whose forerunner is the general resurrection of all men, and whose following attendant is the end of the world."
[2] BR. (353): "They are otherwise called the Last Things (novissima), in Greek ta eschata; because some both are, and are called, last, with respect to men as individuals; and others, with respect to men collectively and to the whole world. To the former class belong death and the state of the soul after death. To the latter, the resurrection of the dead and the corresponding change of the living, the final judgment, and the conflagration of the world."
[3] The later Dogmaticians treat, under this head, only of death, the resurrection of the dead, the final judgment, and the end of the world, because they had previously (immediately after the doctrine of Providence) discussed eternal life, as the formal end of theology, and had appended to that the topic of eternal condemnation, as the opposite of eternal life. We here follow the arrangement of the earlier Dogmaticians. In regard to the division of the novissima, GRH. (XVII, 8): "The last things are those either of the macrocosm or of the microcosm. [31] The last things of the microcosm are of a twofold class. For they are either a way leading to the last limit or the goal terminating the way. The former passes through a twofold valley, namely, of death, Ps. 23:4, and of Jehoshaphat or of judgment, Joel 3:12, which judgment the general resurrection precedes. There is a goal, attained either by the soul of man when released from the body, or by the entire man after the resurrection. And this goal is of two parts, directly opposite each other, viz., for the wicked, hell, for the godly, life eternal. From all these enumerations, taken together, it becomes clear that there are six Last Things pertaining in general to man and the world: (1) The temporal death of man, to which belongs the separation of the soul from the body, and the reduction of the body to ashes in the sepulchre. (2) The general resurrection of all men. (3) The administration of the final judgment. (4) The conflagration of the world. (5) The eternal damnation of the wicked. (6) The eternal glorification of the godly. Since it is customary to state only four Last Things, we can, therefore, proceed in this manner: The Last Things, taken generically, are twofold, with respect to a twofold object: (a) of the macrocosm; (b) of the microcosm. The last thing of the macrocosm is the end of the world. The last things of the microcosm are four: (a) death; (b) resurrection; (c) judgment; (d) eternal state, viz., of the godly in heaven, and the damned in hell."
[4] QUEN. (IV, 535): "Death, properly speaking, signifies the separation of the soul from the body, and its deprivation of animal life; to this ordinarily all are subject, the good as well as the wicked, and this is the signification in this article." Id. (ib.): "The names of death are sweet; it is called a gathering to their own people, Gen. 25:8, 17; 35:29; 49:33; Numb. 20:24, 26; Deut. 32:50: a departure in peace, Luke 2:29; a turning away from the evil to come, Is. 57:1; resting on a couch; v. 2, a sleep, Dan. 12:2; Matt. 9:24; 1 Thess. 4:13." GRH. (XXVII, 15): "The term death is taken, in Holy Scripture and by the Church writers, either literally or figuratively. Literally, for natural death, which is the separation of soul from body . . . . In this signification it is received in this article, when death is enumerated among the Last Things of man. Figuratively, it is used by way either of metaphor, or of metonymy. Metaphorically, for temporal or eternal death. Temporal death, metaphorically so termed, is likewise twofold, either bodily or spiritual. Bodily death, metaphorically so termed, embraces calamities of every class endured by man in this life because of sin, which are the heralds and messengers of death, Ex. 10:17 . . . . Spiritual death, is twofold, that of believers and of unbelievers; the former is glorious and profitable, the latter detestable and destructive. The spiritual death of believers is that by which, to their welfare, they are said to die (1) to sin, Rom. 6:22; . . . (2) to the Law, Rom. 7:4; . . . (3) to the ceremonies of the Law, Rom. 7:4, 6; Gal. 2:19; (4) to the world, Gal. 6:14 . . . . The spiritual death of unbelievers is that by which they are said to have died and to have been separated from the true life of the soul, which is in God, Matt. 8:22; Luke 9:60 . . . . The eternal death of the damned is the final and entire loss of divine fellowship, and the horrible torture of soul and body resulting therefrom, the never-ending misery dreaded by the damned in hell, which is called by John the second death, Rev. 2:11; 20:14, in referring to both the natural and the spiritual death peculiar to unbelievers."
[5] GRH. (XVII, 30): "From the divine Word it is evident that there are three principal and primary causes, on account of which man is subject to death. The first is the malice of the devil leading him astray. The second is the guilt of man in sinning. The third is the wrath of God, as an avenger. These causes follow each other in a certain order."
HFRFFR. (650): "If man had remained in the nobility of the integrity in which he was first created, when the period of his earthly life had been completed he would have been transferred to the eternal and heavenly happiness without death, whose precursors are evils and calamities of every kind. But because he transgressed God's command, through sin death entered into the world, to which all men stained by sin remain subject. And although, through Christ, our Restorer, we have been regained for life eternal, yet this is the way of all flesh; and while we who believe pass, it is true, through death to life, the wicked are cast, by bodily death, into death and damnation eternal."
The Dogmaticians further distinguish the physical or proximate causes from the principal (in other words, remote or moral). HOLL. (1225): "Of the physical causes of death, some are natural, others preternatural, and others violent. The natural cause is the consumption of radical moisture and the extinction of native warmth. Preternatural causes are the severer diseases. Violent causes are outward objects bringing such violence to the body that the bond of natural union, by which body and soul are joined, is broken."
[6] HOLL. (1225): "The death of the body formally consists in the deprivation of natural life." GRH. (XVII, 51): "Scripture describes the form of death: Ecc. 12:7; 2 Cor. 5:1, 4, 8; Phil. 1:23; 2 Tim. 4:6; 2 Pet. 1:14. For, since man consists of soul and body, united to each other by an essential bond, the death of man is nothing else than the analusis, or release, of the soul from the body. Since, as long as man lives, the soul sojourns in the body, just as in an earthly dwelling-place, man's death is nothing else than the katalusis (dissolution, 2 Cor. 5:1) and apothesis (putting off, 2 Pet. 1:14) of this earthly dwelling-place and tabernacle, and the epanachoresis (return) of the soul to God from its long pilgrimage. Since the body is, as it were, the covering and garment of the soul, man's death is nothing else than the ekdusis, or the taking off, of this garment. Since life is an act of the soul in the body, to zen esti sunthesis kai sundesmos psuches somati," "life is the composition and bond of the soul with the body." Aristotle's Metaphysics, Book VIII).
[7] BR. (363): "When the dissolution of the soul and body has occurred, and death therefore happens, the soul nevertheless survives and performs its operations separately, outside of the body; for example, in those things which pertain formally to the intellect and will, as essential powers of the human or rational soul, which themselves also survive and are not inactive. The intellect retains the intelligible forms which it had in the body, and therefore can also call forth acts of knowledge; to which, then, it is correctly believed that some acts of the will, with respect to objects presented by the intellect, correspond. And to this is generally referred the statement of Rev. 6:10, that the knowledge of a former condition and a certain longing are ascribed to the souls of the martyrs. But we do not say that the souls of the deceased know distinctly and definitely the actions and affairs of each of the living, which have occurred since the departure of the former from the body, and especially the various prayers and rites of worship directed to them."
GRH. (XVII, 149): "In life, they (body and soul) are connected to each other by the closest bond, whence the affections and sufferings of the body flow over into the soul, and in turn the affections and sufferings of the soul flow over into the body; the soul does nothing whatever outside of the body, nor does the body do anything independently of the soul. But in death the soul is separated from the body, and returns to God, to whose judgment it is committed, from which it is either borne by holy angels into heaven, or is delivered to evil spirits to be cast into hell; the body is turned back again into the dust of the earth, from which its first and earliest origin proceeded, and by the putrefaction and incineration is reduced to its primitive elements. After this dissolution and separation, the affections and sufferings of the soul no longer flow over to the body; and, in turn, the affections and sufferings of the body no longer flow over into the soul. The soul no longer acts through the body as an instrument, but lives and subsists apart from it; neither is it dissolved nor does it fall apart as the body that is resolved into its own elements, but, subsisting outside of the body, it spends an immortal life, and, removed from all intercourse with the body, is preserved somewhere (pou) until, on the appointed day of the general resurrection, the body raised up by divine power will be joined again to the same, and man will afterwards experience the righteous sentence of the judge."
[8] QUEN. (IV, 537): "That human souls are immortal, and that they do not perish with the bodies, can be clearly and firmly established alone from the Holy Scriptures." GRH. (XVII, 150) produces the scriptural proof: "(1) From the distinct assertion of our Saviour, Matt. 10:28. (2) From the opposition of soul and body. That in which soul and body are opposed to each other antithetically cannot in like manner be predicated of both. But in mortality, soul and body are opposed to each other in such a manner that mortality is affirmed of the body, but denied concerning the soul. Therefore mortality cannot be predicated of both in like manner, cf. Ecc. 12:7. (3) From the original creation of the soul. The souls of brutes were produced from the same material as their bodies, whence, when their bodies perish, the souls themselves likewise perish, Gen. 1:20. But into man He breathed a soul, Gen. 2:7; whence we thus infer: "A soul whose origin is different from that of the souls of brutes, does not have the same end with the souls of brutes. But now the primeval origin of the human soul is different from that of the souls of brutes, because it was made not of an elementary material, as the souls of brutes, but divinely breathed into the body formed from the earth. Therefore, to the body there is ascribed plasis (the being moulded) from the dust of the earth, but to the soul the immediate empneusis (inspiration) of God. (4) From the name itself . . . . The human soul is called spirit, Ecc. 3:21; Acts 7:59; Heb. 12:23. (5) From the continuation of life after man's death, Matt. 22:32; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37; Hab. 1:12. (6) From the description of death, Gen. 25:8; 35:29; 49:33; Dan. 12:13; Acts 26:18; Col. 1:12, etc."
But concerning the immortality of the soul, GRH. still adds (XVII, 150): "Add the fact that the soul is not immortal in the same manner as God, viz., essentially (ousiodos) and independently (for in that sense God alone is said to have immortality, 1 Tim. 6:16), but through the grace of creation, because it was so fashioned by God as not to have in itself an inner principle of corruption, but to be incorporeal, invisible, and immortal. Yet God could, if He wished, reduce the soul to nothing, and altogether extinguish it; but because He wished it to be immortal, it continues through and because of the will of the immortal Creator. That is immortal which either can be destroyed by absolutely no power, not even by divine power (and in this manner God alone is immortal), or which has been so framed by God as not to perish, although by God's absolute power it could be destroyed; in the latter manner the souls of men and the angels are immortal." Concerning the force of the evidence in "the arguments sought from the light of nature," GRH. (XVII, 159): "We make a distinction between antecedent and subsequent modes of reasoning. Thomas: A mode of reasoning is employed with regard to any subject in a twofold manner: in the first place, to give sufficient proof to a statement; in the second place, when the statement has already been established, to show that the effects that follow correspond.' In this latter manner, the immortality of the soul can be proved from the light of nature, after it has been shown from Holy Scripture that the same consequence has been fully established. Again, we make a distinction between conclusive and probable modes of reasoning. The arguments produced from the light of nature can induce a persuasion of probability concerning the immortality of the soul, but can in no way present a firm, immovable, and irrefragable foundation of faith." GRH. (XVII, 147) produces as such proofs: "(1) A rational soul is a substance subsisting of itself and spiritual, as is manifest from its operation, because there are in us some spiritual acts of knowledge, i.e., neither consisting of matter, nor depending upon matter or a subject, but inorganic in the cognizing of immaterial, universal, and eternal things; therefore it is also immortal. (2) The human soul is in essence simple, invisible, immaterial, most like unto God, and independent of matter. (3) It is an essence primarily self-moving. (4) By a natural longing it desires eternal things, and it is not probable that this desire would be born within it for no purpose. (5) It contemplates eternal essences, while, nevertheless, nothing can rise to the contemplation of that from which it entirely differs in essence. (6) In abstraction from objects of sense it is more and more perfected, and therefore, when it shall be separated from the body, will become most perfect. (7) It has not originated from elements, because it has knowledge naturally implanted, which no elementary material can acquire. (8) It has the distinction between the Honorable and the Base implanted, from which it derives this rule of justice, viz., that it ought to be well with the good, and ill with the wicked. But now, in this life, more frequently neither the good receive their rewards, nor the wicked their merited punishments; therefore another life remains to which the immortal soul aspires: otherwise this distinction would have been implanted in the mind in vain. (9) To men self-conscious of evil because of crimes, it occasions fear; therefore it is naturally anxious concerning the condition that will follow death, and is certainly self-conscious of its immortality: for if the soul would not survive after death, men self-conscious of evil would have no reason to dread future punishments. (10) The state of ecstasy, i.e., when, without any employment of the senses, it naturally undergoes an intense application of its rational portion to sublime affairs, and therefore can also naturally subsist of itself, because anything which is not of itself dependent upon another in working, is not so in existing. (11) Finally, they urge the agreement of the sounder philosophers, who prove that the immortality of the soul belongs to the number of those things which are prolepseis (presuppositions), or certain preconceived notions admitted by all."
[A modern classification of the various arguments that have been used, is as follows:
I. THEORETICAL (speculative) ARGUMENTS:
1. Metaphysical Proof. Since the soul is immaterial and simple, it is also indissoluble (Plato, Cicero, Mos, Mendelssohn, the Herbartians and the new school of Leibnitz).
2. Teleological Proof. The rich capacities of the human spirit cannot be satisfactorily developed in this earthly life; its destiny, therefore, must extend to a future life (Cicero, Leibnitz, Riemarius, Lotze).
3. Proof from Cosmical Plurality. As the heavenly bodies stand in communion with one another, so also their inhabitants must have a moral communion. But this can be realized only in a future world. (Wilkins, Fontenelle, Huyghens, Derham, Kant, Bonnet, Herder, Jean Paul, J. P. Lange, Chalmers, etc.)
4. Analogical Proof. From the succession of germ, plant and fruit in vegetable life (Cf. John 12:24; 1 Cor. 15:36 sqq.); from the metamorphosis of the Phoenix (Clement of Rome, Theophilus, Irenaeus, Tertullian), of the butterfly (Basil the Great, Swammerdam, Bossuet, Paley); or from the law of the conservation of force, (Teichmüller, Lilienfeld, Schlesinger, etc.).
5. Moral Proof:
a. Arg. Ethonomicum. Man strives after virtue, as well as after happiness. But this life affords no satisfaction (Kant, Sintenis, Schaarschmidt).
b. Arg. Juridicum. It is only the promise of a life beyond death that can inspire one with love for his country (J. G. Fichte).
II. HISTORICAL ARGUMENTS:
1. Empirical attempts at proof. The exhibitions and arts of the older necromantic superstition; the visions of Swedenborg; the experiments of Spiritism.
2. Traditional Proofs:
a. Arg. e consensu gentium (already in Homer, Virgil, Cicero).
b. The proof from New Testament history, from the testimony of Jesus to His resurrection (especially John 14:2 sqq.; 11:25), and the miracles of Himself and His apostles in raising the dead.
Proper demonstrative force pertains to these arguments only so far as they are sustained by religious faith; and even where this presumption occurs, the various speculative attempts at proof have only uncertain value. Complete firmness of conviction concerning personal progress in a blessed hereafter is afforded only by surrender to the Redeemer in loving obedience of faith, viz., the last of the above mentioned arguments appropriated in the life. (Zöckler's Handbook, Dogmatik).]
[9] HUTT. (Loc. Th., 297): "The souls of the godly, or of believers in Christ, are in the hand of God, awaiting there the glorious resurrection of the body, and the full enjoyment of eternal blessedness, Wis. 3:1; Luke 16:22, 23." BR. (364) "Yea, we believe that the souls of the godly attain essential blessedness immediately after they have been separated from the body (Phil. 1:23; Luke 23:43; John 5:24; Rev. 7:4, 15); but that the souls of the wicked undergo their damnation (1 Pet. 3:19)." GRH. (XVII, 178): "Of receptacles and habitations. Scripture, by a general appellation, speaks of a place, John 14:2; Luke 16:28; Acts 1:25. Not that it is a corporeal and physical place, properly so called, but because it is "a where" (pou), into which souls separated from the body are brought together. Scripture enumerates only two such receptacles, habitations, guardhouses, and promptuaries of souls, one of which, prepared for the souls of the godly, is called by the most ordinary appellation heaven, and the other, intended for the souls of the wicked, is called hell."
[10] QUEN. (IV, 538): "The souls of men, separated from the body, do not sleep, neither are they insensible."
[The chief arguments of the Psychopannichists are stated and refuted by GRH., XVIII, 26 sqq.:
"1. The dead are said to sleep, Matt. 9:24; John 11:11; Acts 7:60; 1 Cor. 15:18; 1 Thess. 4:13.' Answer: As sleep hold only the members and outward sense, while the soul exercises its inner operations, as is inferred from dreams; so in death, the body alone perishes, while the soul of the godly is transferred to Abraham's bosom, Luke 16:22, and enjoys consolation, v. 25 (XVII, 20).
2. In the Psalms, it is often said: The dead shall not praise Thee, etc., Ps. 6:5; 115:17.' Answer: These passages refer to the proclamation and propagation of true doctrine, and the celebration of divine blessings through which, in this life, others may be invited to true conversion and the glorification of the divine name.
3. The Lord of the vineyard gives his laborers hire at evening time, Matt. 20:8. But by evening, is meant the time of resurrection and judgment.' Answer: Parables do not apply in every part, but only the principal scope must be regarded; by evening here is indicated not only the time of universal judgment, but that of the particular judgment which occurs at death.
4. Heb. 4:3: We which have believed, do enter into rest.' Answer: The rest of souls must be understood with respect to the terminus a quo, i.e., they rest from labors and troubles, to which the godly are subjected in this life, as is explained in Rev. 14:13, but not with respect to the terminus ad quem, as though the souls of the godly rest after death in the stupor of sleep; for, in this respect, it is said of the angels and the blessed in Heaven, that they rest not day nor night, but incessantly praise God, Rev. 4:8. God is said, Gen. 2:2, to rest, and yet: He that keepeth Israel, shall neither slumber nor sleep,' Ps. 121:4. The souls of the martyrs are commanded to rest, Rev. 6:11, and yet they cry with a loud voice, v.10. Their rest, therefore, is a patient expectation of final liberation and union with the bodies which are to be raised, Is. 26:20; Dan. 12:12.'"
On the knowledge of the dead: "It is a pious and good thought to hold that they have a general knowledge of what is occurring to the Church Militant here on earth, and therefore they beseech Christ, with whom they are present in heavenly glory, for some good for the Church, especially since they are members of the same mystical body, of which Christ is the Head. Meanwhile it must not be inferred from this, that they have in full view the individual circumstances and calamities of the godly."]
QUEN. (IV, 538): "Neither, after death, do the souls of the godly live in a cool and tranquil place, and possess only a foretaste of heavenly happiness, but they enjoy full and essential happiness. Neither, after death, do the souls of the wicked feel only the beginning of tortures, but perfect and complete damnation."
[Nevertheless this must be qualified by his statement (I, 564): "The beginning of infernal torments, with respect to the soul separated from the body, is the first moment of its departure from the body. The torture of the entire composite being will follow, when sentence of final judgment is given." (560): "The beginning of the plenary perception of ineffable blessings and joys, is, with respect to the soul, the end of this life. But the fullest perception will occur after the reunion of body and soul."
GRH. (XVIII, 21): "The pains of hell, which the condemned experience immediately after death, are graphically described, in >Luke 16:23 sq.: 1 They are in hell, en to ade. This expresses every kind of torture, since in hell there is the presence of all evil, and the absence of all good. 2. They are en basanois, i.e., they feel such pains as criminals experience, who are subject to most exquisite tortures. 3. odunontai, they feel the anguish belonging to those who endure the pains of child-birth, under which figure Scripture expresses the most severe tortures. For they are burned en te phlogi, not lightly and superficially, but in the midst of flames penetrating ad medullas.
5. They can obtain not even a drop of water to cool their body, much less the least consolation for their soul. 6. They see the elect in glory, and hence, from envy, are seized with horror and indignation. 7. Their sorrow is increased by the remembrance of former good. 8. They know that their punishment will be eternal, that there is a gulf fixed between them and the godly, viz., God's immutable decision that none of the godly can relapse to the state of the damned, and, on the other hand, that none of the damned can be drawn to the state of the blessed.
9. They will be tortured by the pains of their kindred; for when the rich man wants his brethren to be warned, he does this, not from love and desire for their salvation, but from fear and terror, lest his pains may be increased by the sight of those prepared for them. 10. They resist and contend against God. Nay, father Abraham,' says the rich man. Here is the gnashing of teeth,' Matt. 13:50, whereby, from impatience, indignation and constant despair, they contend against God. Although the souls of the godless do not immediately after their egress from the body receive these punishments in full measure, yet they will be subjected to them in every part, when, on the day of judgment, they shall be reunited to their bodies; nevertheless, it is clearly seen, from the text, that the beginning of these tortures is experienced immediately after death."]
(Ib., 540) Metempsychosis is entirely rejected. GRH. (XVII, 171): "Before all things, the absurd and senseless opinion must be removed, which states that souls migrate from bodies worn out by disease and death, and insinuate themselves into those that are new and recently born; and that the same souls are always being re-born, sometimes in a man, sometimes in a domestic animal, sometimes in a wild beast, sometimes in a bird, and in this manner are immortal, because they are frequently exchanging habitations of various and dissimilar bodies, in which words Lactantius describes the transmigration and transanimation of souls, called by the Greeks metempsuchoris kai metensomatosis."
[11] GRH. (XVII, 183): "The Papists fabricate five receptacles of souls: (1) Hell, to which they consign the souls of extremely wicked men, who depart from this life in unbelief, hardness of heart, and the more serious offences against conscience, or mortal sins. (2) Purgatory, next to hell, to which they consign the souls of those who have not yet been fully purged of venial sins, and have not given full satisfaction for the temporal punishments of sins, but who, nevertheless, have departed from this life in the faith of Christ; these, they state, must labor in purgatory until, with their stains purged away, they soar pure and cleansed into heaven. (3) The limbus puerorum, to which they consign the souls of unbaptized infants; who, because of original sin, in which they have departed without the remedy of Baptism, suffer in this subterranean prison the punishment of loss, although not with respect of sense, having been excluded from the joys of heaven, and yet not subjected to the pains of hell. It is called a limbus, because it is, as it were, the border and extremity of hell, just as the edge (limbus) of a garment. (4) The limbus patrum, into which they introduce the souls of the patriarchs, and of all the saints of the Old Testament who died before the descent of Christ ad inferos, which, they assert, bore, in this apartment, the temporal punishment of loss, until, by the payment of the debt of original sin through the death of Christ, they were delivered from this and introduced to the fruition of heavenly blessedness, when Christ descended ad inferos. (5) Heaven, into which they admit the souls of the saints together purged of all sins. The order of these stories, according to the Papists, is such as this: Hell is placed in the very centre of the earth; next this, purgatory, which is, as it were, a second story; bordering upon this is the limbus infantum, to which the limbus patrum immediately succeeds, which at the present time is altogether empty, because of Christ's translation of the fathers to heaven." The doctrine of purgatory was rejected especially by the Lutheran Church as conflicting with that of reconciliation by faith alone. HFRRFR. (667): "Everything that is ascribed to the satisfactions either of purgatory or of the intercession of the saints, is detracted from the merit of Christ, which alone cleanses us from sins."
[GRH., XVII, 189 sqq., rejects the limbus puerorum: "1. It is based upon the false hypothesis of the absolute necessity of Baptism. 2. Infants departing without Baptism, either believe or do not believe. If the former, they are in the grace of God, and obtain the remission of their sins; if the latter, they remain children of wrath, under condemnation, exiles from the heavenly Jerusalem, and are cast into the lake of fire. There is no tertium aliquod between faith and unbelief, the state of grace and of wrath, the kingdom of God and of the devil: so also there is none between life eternal and the eternal fire. Matt. 26:46; Mark 16:16; John 3:18, 36; Rev. 20:15; 21:27. 3. If the infants of Christians departing without Baptism were to be cast into a peculiar limbus bordering upon the infernal fire, how would this be consistent with the promise of Gen. 17:7? 4. Not even in the Old Testament were infants of Israel, departing before circumcision, absolutely excluded from the kingdom of God. 5. If infants departed without the forgiveness of original sin, they would be subject not only to the punishment of loss, but also to the punishment of sense, not only excluded from the kingdom of God, but also tortured by the infernal fire of eternal damnation. For the wages of sin is death and eternal damnation; not only the punishment of loss, but also of sense. 6. If infants neither rejoice nor grieve, nor know or feel aught, they undoubtedly cannot be said to sustain the punishment of loss, since, being ignorant, insensible and sleeping, they cannot be said to be punished."
Against the limbus patrum, he urges: "1. Scripture mentions no such limbus, separated from Heaven, in which the souls of the patriarchs were enclosed until the death of our first parent was paid for by Christ's death. 2. On the other hand, Scripture enumerates only two receptacles after this life, as well in the Old as in the New Testament, viz., Heaven and Hell. 3. Of the souls of the godly in the Old Testament, it is said, 1 Sam. 25:25, and of the soul of Lazarus before Christ's passion and death, that they were carried by the angels, who always see God's face, Matt. 18:11, into Abraham's bosom, Luke 16:22. Of the soul of the converted robber, it is said that it was taken into Paradise. Unless then we wish to confuse Paradise with hell, we cannot affirm of the Old Testament saints, that they descended into any infernal limbus. 4. Although the Epistle to the Hebrews testifies that the patriarchs of the Old Testament had not yet received the completion of the promises concerning the possession of the land of Canaan (Ex. 11:13, 39), yet their souls were not for this reason excluded from the kingdom of Heaven, v. 10, 16. 5. The examples of godly patriarchs and prophets of the Old Testament. Enoch, Gen. 5:24; Heb. 11:5; Abraham, John 8:56; 3:36; Rom. 4:11; Luke 16:22; Elias, 2 Kings 2:11; Moses and Elias, Matt. 17:6; Luke 9:31 . . . . 7. It is based on the false opinion, that, before Christ's death, the gate of Paradise was not open to the godly . . . . 9. It detracts from the merits of Christ, as though their efficacy did not abound to the fathers of the Old Testament, while yet He is said to be the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world, Rev. 13:8, not only with respect to decree, promise and types in sacrifices, but also with respect to fruit and efficacy, Jesus Christ being the same yesterday, to-day, and forever,' Heb. 13:8." Against purgatory: "1. It is without scriptural foundation. 2. It directly contradicts Scripture: (a) Scripture divides all men into only two classes, believers and unbelievers, good and evil, sheep and goats; heaven being assigned to the one class, hell to the other. (b) It teaches that only in this life is the time to labor, to run, to strive, i.e., to repent, believe, attain the grace of God, the forgiveness of sins and eternal life, but that after death there is no time for repentance and faith, Ecc. 9:4, 5, 10; 11:3; 12:5; Matt. 25:10; John 9:10; 1 Cor. 7:29; 9:24; Eph. 5:16; Gal. 6:8, 10; 2 Tim. 4:7; Heb. 12:1; Rev. 2:6; Is. 55:6. (c) It teaches only two purgations of sins: one external and Levitical the cleansing of the heart. The former is assigned to Levitical ceremonies, Lev. 12:8; 13:6; 14:9; the latter to Christ as the efficient cause, Is. 43:25; John 13:8; Heb. 1:3; to the blood of Christ, as the meritorious cause, Heb. 9:13, 14; 1 John 1:7; Rev. 1:5, 7, 14; to the Word of the Gospel and Baptism, as the instrumental cause on God's part, Mal. 3:3; John 15:3; Eph. 5:26; Tit. 3:5; and finally, to faith, as the instrumental cause on our part, Rev. 15:9; 1 Cor. 6:11. But there is no mention of any purgation to be expected after this life. (d) The precepts, promises and examples of the blessed death presented in Scripture not only give no dread of future torments to believers in Christ, but also offer matter for hope, confidence, and exaltation, Job 19:25: Ps. 31:5; 27:13; 116:7, 9; Luke 2:29; Acts 7:59; 2 Cor. 5:1, 2, 8; Phil. 1:23; 1 Thess. 4:13; 2 Tim. 1:12; 4:6, 7; 1 Pet. 4:19; Rev. 2:10. Especially, the example of the converted robber, Luke 23:43. For if any one needed purgation after death before entrance into Paradise, the robber seemed especially to need it; and yet Christ introduces him immediately into Paradise. (e) All believers in Christ immediately after death are happy and blessed, their souls without any interval or delay being transferred to Paradise, Gen. 5:21; Heb. 11:5; 2 King 2:11; Luke 16:22; Ps. 31:6; Acts 1:58, etc.; John 5:24; Rev. 14:13. (f) Scripture knows but two receptacles, and is ignorant of a third, 1 Sam. 25:29; Matt. 3:12; 7:13; 25:46; Mark 16:16; Luke 16:22; John 3:36. (g) Scripture restricts the attaining of forgiveness of sins, the grace of God and salvation, to this life, Ps. 39:13; 95:7; Matt. 9:6; 16:19; 18:18; 2 Cor. 6:2. Pertinent to this topic, are the passages which testify that the good done in this life is brought into judgment, but not those things which either we ourselves, or others for us, have suffered in purgatory, Matt. 25:35; 1 Cor. 3:8; 2 Cor. 5:10; Gal. 6:5; Rev. 14:13. The Scripture circumscribes temporal punishments only by the limit of this life, and those which are required after death it teaches will be eternal, 2 Cor. 4:18; Rev. 10:7; from which we infer that, if there were a purgatory after this life, it would be temporal, not eternal. (h) It denies that after this life, the dead can be aided by the voice of the living, Ps. 49:8, 9, 10; Eccl. 9:5, 6.
3. It is contrary to the analogy of faith: (a) The article concerning the mercy of God. For this is described in Scripture as earnest, sincere and perfect. That, however, for which a satisfaction is still demanded, or punishment still inflicted, is not perfectly forgiven. (b) The article concerning the justice of God. For this does not allow guilt already forgiven to be punished. (c) The article concerning the merits of Christ. If we still had to make satisfaction for our sins, the satisfaction of Christ would be insufficient. If we could make satisfaction for the penalties of our sins, a part of Christ's redemption would be transferred to us. (d) The article concerning the Gospel, which is a joyful message concerning the gratuitous and full forgiveness of sins because of Christ. It is the peculiar doctrine of the Gospel to offer to believers the forgiveness of sins, and not a commutation of eternal into temporary punishment. (e) The article concerning the saving fruit of repentance, its fruit being the forgiveness of sins, Ps. 32:5; Jer. 36:3; Mark 1:4; Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31, and where there is forgiveness of sins, there is no longer need of punishment for sins. The Holy Spirit not only before the reception of Baptism and in Baptism, but after Baptism, leads those who have fallen into sin to the only satisfaction of Christ offered for us on the altar of the cross, but never presents such a difference as to slay that in Baptism the remission of sins is purely gratuitous and perfect, but that, for the sins which have been committed since Baptism, it requires satisfaction from the sinners themselves, or commutes their eternal into temporal punishments. Let a single passage of Scripture be quoted, in which such difference is stated. (f) The article concerning justification. For sins are forgiven so as to be no longer remembered, Ps. 25:7; Jer. 3:34; Ez. 18:22, etc. (g) The article concerning the state of the justified, Rom. 5:1, 2; 1 Cor. 1:30; Rom. 8:1, 24, 33, 34, 38; John 3:36; Rom. 12:12; Heb. 4:16; Luke 1:74; 2:29; 2 Cor. 5:8. (h) The article concerning the final judgment. If at the final judgment there will be no longer a purgatorial fire, there can be none now; for the grounds of justification and salvation, viz., the mercy of God, the merit of Christ, the Word of the Gospel and true faith in Christ, are of the same and equal virtue before as in the judgment itself. It it do not conflict with divine justice, that they by whom the last day finds alive be transferred into Paradise, without the intervention of purgatorial fire, undoubtedly it will not conflict with the same that they who die in the Lord before the judgment, go into Heaven free from the flames of purgatory.
4. It contradicts even the hypotheses of the Papists.
5. It is without support from the Church nearest the Apostles.
6. It is based upon many false assumptions: (a) That some sins are by their own nature venial. (b) That for venial sins, man himself must make satisfaction; if not in this life, after this life. (c) That, even when the guilt is remitted, the debt of punishment remains to be discharged. (d) That the application of Christ's merit for removing temporal punishment occurs through works of satisfaction. (e) That sins are remitted in a different way in Baptism, from that in which they are remitted in true repentance. (f) That man is his own redeemer and saviour. (g) That submission to the penalty inflicted by God, when it proceeds from love, is a virtual repentance, and avails for the remission of sins. (h) That souls in purgatory are neither on the way, nor at the goal."] __________________________________________________________________
[31] ["Macrocosm, the universe, or the visible system of worlds; opposed to microcosm, or the little world, constituted by man." -- WEBSTER.] __________________________________________________________________
§ 64. (2.) Of the Resurrection of the Dead.
The separation of the body and soul, which is occasioned by death, is not one of permanent continuance, but the time will come, as we are most positively assured in the Word of God, in which God will awaken the body and reunite it with the soul that belonged to it before death.
[1] This will be, in substance, the same body with which the soul was united in this life, but endowed with new attributes, adapted to the nature of the circumstances then existing. [2] But, just as the condition of souls after death is different, according as they were godless or godly in this life, so will also the bodies of those who are raised receive different attributes, according as a happy or a miserable life is their portion. [3]
[1] BR. (367): "Just as the soul of man survives after death, so also the body which has been destroyed by death will rise again and be restored to life, as is most clear from the Scriptures (Job 19:26; Is. 26:19; Dan. 12:2; John 5:28; 11:23; 1 Cor. 15:12; 1 Thess. 4:16); but this certainly cannot be discovered from natural reason, although not opposed to it. When Scripture reveals the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, then reason, which recognizes God as the avenger of crimes and rewarder of the good, discovers that it is rather harmonious with itself than opposed to it, that the bodies, the instruments of good and evil deeds, should be raised for participation in punishments or rewards. And, although reason does not discover how bodies, the same in number as were resolved into ashes can be raised again; yet, so far from showing its impossibility by an invincible argument, it is compelled rather to leave this to divine power."
HOLL. (1245): "The resurrection of the dead consists formally (a) in the reproduction or restoration of the same body which had perished by death, out of its atoms or particles which had been scattered thence and dispersed; (b) in the reunion of the same with the soul."
[2] QUEN. (IV, 582): "The subject of the resurrection is the entire man that had previously died and been reduced to ashes. The subject from which, is the body, the same in number and essence as we have borne in this life, and as had perished through death (Job 19:26; Is. 26:19; Ps. 34:21; Rom. 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:53; 2 Cor. 5:4; Phil. 3:21), yet clothed with new and spiritual qualities (1 Cor. 15:42). (Observe: The body which will rise again will be spiritual, not as to substance, but as to qualities and endowments.)" Of these new attributes, HOLL. (1243): "The bodies which we bear about with us in this life differ from the risen bodies not with respect to substance, but (1) with respect to duration: the former are subject to corruption, and perish; the latter are free from corruption, and always endure; (2) with respect to outward form: the former become unsightly, colorless, offensive corpses; the latter will be glorious, brilliant, most beautiful; (3) with respect to vigor: the former are sown into the earth, feeble and destitute of sense and motion; the latter will be active, vigorous, abounding in extraordinary senses, subject to no defect; (4) with respect to activity and endurance: the former are subject to generation, nutrition, growth, local progress, and feel the need of food, drink, marriage; the latter will be entirely at leisure for spiritual actions, and will not need nourishment or conjugal intercourse."
[3] GRH. (XIX, 38): "These very qualities of the revived bodies, by reason of which they are distinguished in this life from animal bodies, must be accurately distinguished form each other. For some are common to all the revived, the wicked as well as the godly, the unbelieving as well as the believing. Such are aphtharsia kai athanasia, incorruptibility and immortality, because the souls and bodies of the wicked are to be lost (not by being annihilated, but by being tortured) in gehenna, Matt. 10:28; for the worm gnawing them will not die, and the fire burning them will not be quenched (Is. 66:24; Mark 9:44, 46, 48), and therefore their bodies will likewise rise again incorruptible and immortal, never to be separated from the souls, but to be reserved for eternal and never-ending tortures. From this it is also understood that the incorruptibility and immortality in the bodies of the wicked are very different from the incorruptibility and immortality of the godly, both with respect to the rest of the connected qualities, and with respect to the end . . . . But some qualities are peculiar to the godly alone when raised again for everlasting life, which the apostle, 1 Cor. 15, recounts in this order, vs. 43-49; Phil. 3:21. From which it is inferred that the bodies of the godly men raised to life eternal will be not only incorruptible and immortal, but also: (1) glorified, glorious, because they will be clothed, as with a mantle, with ineffable honor, splendor, and glory, and therefore, with divine light, lustre, and brilliancy, Matt. 13:43; Dan. 12:3; 1 Cor. 15:41; (2) powerful, because they will be altogether free from mortal difficulties and former infirmities, pains and diseases, to which they were subject in this life, and therefore, will be strong, vigorous, incapable of suffering, agile, subtle, which neither weight nor gravity will be able to prevent from being caught up into the air to meet the Lord, 1 Thess. 4:17; (3) spiritual, not indeed with respect to essence; for they will not be spirits, but spiritual bodies. They will be isangeloi (like the angels), not angels, not equal to, or the same as angels, Matt. 22:30; but, by reason of spiritual qualities, their bodies will no longer be natural bodies [animalia, Vulgate translation, 1 Cor. 15:44, of Gr. psuchikon], standing in need of food, drink, sleep, and other supports, but spiritual, in which there is no strife of the flesh and spirit, but which are perfectly subjected to the control of the spirit, are entirely ruled by the Holy Ghost, and need no food or other means for their support [CHEMNITZ, De duabus naturis, p. 175: "Bodies in this life are called psuchika, not because they are transmuted into soul, or of the same substance with the soul, which is a spiritual substance, but because they are moved to action and governed, not by themselves or their own bodily conditions, properties and faculties, but by the power of the soul. So in the resurrection, the bodies will be pneumatika, spiritual, not because they will be transmuted into spirit, or be of the same substance with the Holy Spirit, for they will have and retain their nature or bodily substance, as Job says: In my flesh, I shall see God,' and in the Creed we confess that we believe the resurrection of this flesh. But they will be spiritual, because what the soul is now to the body, the Spirit will be to body and soul. For the body will without means be sustained and preserved by the Spirit. And the body with the soul will be most perfectly subject to the direction and control of the Spirit. For in this life the regenerate are led in things pertaining to God by the Spirit of God, but only partially and imperfectly. In the resurrection, however, both body and soul shall, without any resistance, be perfectly subject to the guidance and control of the Spirit, who will use both bodies and souls of saints, according to His omnipotence, for whatever movements and operations He wishes; and the bodies and souls of saints in glory will use the virtue of the Spirit for all movements and operations the Spirit wishes, and will have no longer psychical, but most perfect spiritual conditions and faculties"]; (4) heavenly, likewise, not with respect to substance but with respect to qualities, because they will shine with heavenly light and glory, will no longer be subject to earthly infirmities, but will be distinguished by their heavenly lustre, and no longer be disfigured, corrupt, imperfect, maimed, and unsightly, but most beautiful, pleasing to the sight, perfect, handsome, and complete in members, etc. An example of these qualities is presented to us in the body of Christ, as raised from the dead and placed at the Right Hand of God, to which our body is to be made like. But although the bodies of the wicked and the damned will be incorruptible and immortal, yet they will not be impassible, but will be subject to eternal tortures, and will be adorned by no honor, no glory, no power, no spiritual excellence, but will be marked by perpetual foulness and ignominy, destined to eternal disgrace, and oppressed by infernal darkness. They are vessels made unto dishonor and disgrace, Rom. 9:21; 2 Tim. 2:20. According to the characteristics imparted to those raised from the dead, as the saved or lost, their resurrection is termed: "The resurrection to life, which is peculiar to the godly and true believers, and the resurrection to judgment, which is peculiar to the wicked and unbelieving."
[A question to which the Dogmaticians give much attention is as to whether the godless will rise by virtue of the merit of Christ. On this, GRH., XIX, 13: "The virtue whereby Christ will raise the godless, properly speaking does not belong to the merit of Christ, but to the divine power, communicated to His human nature by means of the personal union and exaltation to the Right Hand of God. This power extends farther and to more objects than does the merit of Christ, because, by means of this power, Christ also, as man, sustains, rules and governs all things in Heaven and earth, in His general kingdom, called the kingdom of power. The resurrection of the godless pertains rather to His functions as Judge, than as Mediator and Saviour; as may be inferred from the end of the resurrection."] __________________________________________________________________
§ 65. (3.) Of the Final Judgment.
Upon the resurrection of the dead there follows the final judgment, and then the end of this world will have been reached. [1] There will, therefore, still be men living upon this earth when the final judgment comes, and these will not experience a reuniting of soul and body, as no death has preceded; the change, however, that takes place in the bodies of those raised from the dead, will take place in theirs also, but in a different manner, viz., by transformation. [2] The precise time when the final judgment will take place is not known to us, [3] but signs will precede it from which the approach of that day may be inferred. Such are, especially, the most extreme development of Satan's power, and the like extraordinary security and ungodliness of men. [4] When all this shall have reached the highest degree, God will cause judgment to break forth, and thus become for the godly the helper in the highest need. The judgment will be held by Christ, [5] who will appear to all, visibly and in glory, to the longed-for consolation of the godly, and to the fearful terror of the ungodly. [6] Then, in the case of all, everything will be revealed that they have done, the good and the evil; all will then be judged according to the norm of the revelation given to them upon earth, [7] and judgment will be executed upon them all in such a manner, that the godly will be admitted to the kingdom of glory, and the ungodly will be driven out into the kingdom of eternal darkness. [8]
[1] QUEN. (IV, 605): "The general judgment is, with respect to order, subsequent to the resurrection of the dead, 1 Thess. 4:16. For the general judgment will immediately succeed the general resurrection of the dead. The resurrection will occur on the last or latest of all days, and will place an end to the vicissitude of worldly things, and therefore to time itself, John 11:24."
HOLL. (1246): "The final general judgment is a solemn act, by which the triune God, through the Lord Jesus Christ, appearing in a visible form and with the highest glory, will place all angels and men before His judgment-seat, for the purpose of judging all thoughts, words, and deeds, of the godly, indeed, according to the norm of the Gospel, but of the wicked, according to the precept of the Law,; and will assign to the former, and confer upon then, eternal joys, and, to the latter, eternal tortures, to the glory of His retributive and vindicatory justice." A distinction is also made between this general or final judgment and "the particular judgment by which, at the hour of death, a state of glory or of ignominy is awarded every man."
[GRH. XVIII, 35): "There are five reasons, because of which the general, universal and public judgment ought to occur, even though a particular and private judgment precede:
1. The manifestation of divine glory, viz., that the justice and mercy of God may be displayed. For since, in this life, it seems to be well with the wicked and ill with the good, and, on this account, divine Providence is attacked by malevolent critics, God will appoint a day, in which, in the presence of the whole world, He will display His supreme justice against the godless, and His supreme mercy towards the godly, and in the sight of all angels and men declare, that, in connection with supreme mercy towards the godly, He uses no cruelty or injustice towards the godless, and in connection with supreme severity towards the godless, He uses no respect of persons or unjust liberality towards the godly.
2. The glorification of Christ: "We see not yet all things put under Him," Heb. 2:8, "but then He shall come in His majesty," Matt. 25:31. As, at His first advent, He was unjustly condemned as a culprit before all; so, at His second advent, He shall judge all, as a just and glorious Judge.
3. The exaltation of the godly. As in this life, the godly "are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men," 1 Cor. 4:9, so, in the final judgment before the whole world, all angels and men, it is right that they be pronounced and crowned as victors.
4. The completion of rewards and punishments. The souls of godly and ungodly, separated from their bodies, receive only the beginnings of blessedness and condemnation; but then the entire man, consisting of body and soul will be judged, and will receive in his body the completion of rewards and punishments.
5. The continued consideration of good and evil works. For the good and evil works of the dead are not yet finished. Prophets and Apostles still serve the Church by their writing and example; heresiarchs still corrupt the minds of men by their writings; when, then, on the day of judgment, the good and evil deeds of the dead shall be finished with the world itself, the ultimate and decisive sentence will be given."]
[2] QUEN. (IV, 585): "The circumstance most closely connected with the resurrection of the dead, is the change of those whom the last day will find alive, which is to take place in a moment and in the twinkling of an eye, 1 Cor. 15:51, 52; 1 Thess. 4:15, 17." The order of the resurrection is the following, HFRFFR. (682): "When the last day shall dawn, Christ (while, by means of fire, heaven and earth are passing away with a great noise) will come in the clouds in the same visible form in which He ascended into the heavens, with many thousands of angels, with the greatest shout or thunder, in the voice of the archangel and the trump of God; and then the dead, hearing the voice of the Son of God, will first rise, each one in his own body; then we, whom that day will find alive, will be changed in a moment, so as to be placed before the judgment-seat, 1 Thess. 4:15."
[3] GRH. (XIX, 226): "The time of the final judgment can be regarded as twofold, of the beginning and of the continuance. The time of the beginning we define as precisely that point of time in which Christ will return from heaven to judge the living and raise the dead to life, and, by means of the ministry of angels, to assemble both before His judgment-seat for the purpose of hearing a decisive sentence. The Holy Scriptures testify that this will occur on the last day, in which also the resurrection of the dead will precede the judgment, and the end of the world will follow, Matt. 24:30; 25:31; 1 Cor. 15:52; 1 Thess. 4:16; Rev. 20:11; but what day will be the last and latest, and, therefore, on what day or what hour Christ will come to judgment, we believe that no man can know exactly and precisely, and, therefore, we ought to abstain from bold and anxious inquiry concerning it, Acts 1:7."
[5] HOLL. (1248): "By the will and appointment of God, divinely revealed signs will precede the last day, from which it can be known in a general way that that great day is approaching." The signs are distinguished as remote or general signs, and near or peculiar signs. HOLL. (ib.): "The former occur not merely in one age, and frequently recur, or are continued. The latter are those which are to be seen only as the judgment approaches nearer, but not likewise in former ages. The general and more remote signs, although they do not seem to indicate the time of judgment, yet, according to God's appointment and intention, indicate and ought to admonish Christians, from the force of divine justice and the truth of the predictions, that an appointed judgment is to be expected. Moreover, among the nearer or peculiar signs, there is this difference, that some precede the judgment by a longer, and others by a shorter interval; and, for this reason, not even these indicate precisely a certain time." Among the former are enumerated (according to GRH. XIX, 246): "1. The multiplication of heresies, Matt. 24:5." (Concerning this passage GRH. says (ib.): "The apostle asked, at the same time, both when those things would take place which He had predicted concerning the destruction of the temple, and what would be the sign of His coming, and of the end of the world. Matt. 24:3; Mark 13:4; Luke 21:7. For they thought that it would not be until the second coming of Christ for judgment, that Jerusalem would be destroyed, and the temple, and with it the entire world; and that thus there would be an end of all things and that then only, when all things should have become new, the Messiah would enter upon His new reign. Christ, therefore, distinctly replies to both members of the question; and first, indeed, discourses concerning the devastation of Jerusalem, indicating by this itself that they would be not of the same, but of diverse times. Although, therefore, the matters presented by Christ in the first part of His reply pertain properly and principally to the times preceding the destruction of Jerusalem, yet the matters which are predicted in the same place, concerning the coming of false prophets and the rest of the evils that were to precede the devastation of Jerusalem, can be properly referred, secondarily and by way of consequence, to the state of the times that precede the final judgment, because the destruction of Jerusalem was a type of the general destruction destined for the entire globe. Whence, those things also which are here said by Christ concerning the times that were to precede the destruction of Jerusalem, are adapted in other passages of Scripture to the times that were to precede the end of the world. Compare Dan. 12:1 with Matt. 24:21, and 2 Pet. 3:9 with Matt. 24:22).
2. Seditions throughout the entire world, arising from wars, and the disquiet arising from earthquakes, Matt. 24:6-8; Luke 21:9-11. 3. Dreadful persecution of the godly, Matt. 24:9: Mark 13:9; Dan. 11:44; Rev. 11:7; 12:4, 13; 13:7; 17:6; 18:24; 19:2; 20:4. 4. An inundation of careless security and defiant wickedness, and extreme depravity of life, Matt. 24:12, 37-29; Luke 17:28-30; 18:8; 2 Thess. 2:7; 2 Tim. 3:1-5; 2 Pet. 3:3. 5. The universal preaching of the Gospel throughout the entire world, Matt. 24:14; Dan. 11:44; Mal. 4:2. As near and peculiar signs, the following are cited: (1) The overthrow of the distinguished fourth monarchy (Dan. 2:31, sq.). (2) The overthrow of Antichrist, (for since, in the Church of the Thessalonians, the report had been spread under the name and pretence of apostolic doctrine, that the last day was immediately at hand, Paul advises the Thessalonians to have no faith in this false opinion, for Antichrist must be revealed before the Day of the Lord will come, 2 Thess. 2:3. Of this revelation of Antichrist, and his conquest by the preaching of the Gospel, other prophecies of Scripture also speak, Dan. 8:25; 11:44; Jer. 51:58; Mal. 4:5; Rev. 14:6; 18:2); (3) the observing of various signs, in all parts of the entire universe, Matt. 24:29; Mark 13:24; Luke 21:25." BR. (377): "Remarkable eclipses of the heavenly bodies and their fall to the earth," "for although the mode and precise nature of the heavenly signs, and especially of the fall of the stars to the earth, have not been revealed; yet it is better in these matters to retain the letter of Scripture, and to leave the manner of the occurrence to divine wisdom and power, than, the literal sense being deserted, to seek or embrace a metaphor, especially since in other connections express mention is made of heavenly signs, as contradistinguished from earthly, Luke 21:25." HOLL. (1148): "There are some who explain the words of Christ mystically, as referring to a remarkable change of the Church, the obscuring of the heavenly doctrine, and the apostasy of the Church's teachers; others advise that the literal sense be not abandoned." As to the purpose for which these scripturally foretold signs were intended, GRH. (XIX, 274): "Christ made the predictions to the end that they might be: (1) Indicative of His love towards us. To advise any one beforehand of coming evils is the office of a friendly and kind mind. (2) A means of driving away security. (3) Antidotes against over-anxiety. Christ predicted signs of the judgment, by which it could be recognized beforehand, but was unwilling to determine a definite day of judgment. This avails to drive away security from our minds, lest we should think that the decisive and judicial day were still far off; but it also avails for the removal of curiosity, lest we should boldly dare to search into that which God has placed in His own power and knowledge. Just as death is certain, but the hour of death is uncertain so it is certain that the final judgment will at some time follow, but the hour of judgment is uncertain and unknown to men, Matt. 24:44; Luke 10:46. (4) As remedies for pusillanimity. Just in the proportion that numerous and terrible evils befall the godly, do they hasten the more rapidly the day of redemption and refreshing" (apolutroseos kai anapsuxeos). GRH. (XX, 95): "The Millennarians teach that, before the last day, Christ will return from heaven to earth, to raise the godly dead, and, with them, together with those also whom He will find alive, all the godless being suppressed, to pass on this earth for a thousand years a life abounding in corporeal pleasures, an earthly, corporeal and visible reign being begun; and that then, when the thousand years of this reign shall have been finished, the end of the world and the general resurrection of all shall follow."
In regard to Antichrist, we remark that the word is used in a twofold sense by the Dogmaticians. HOLL. (2070): "(a) Generically, for all heretics who disseminate doctrines that are false and conflict with the doctrine of Christ, and who obstinately defend these. Concerning those who are commonly called little Antichrists, 1 John 2:18. (b) Specifically, and by pre-eminence, for that remarkable adversary of Christ, described in 2 Thess. 2, whom, for the purpose of making a distinction, we call the great Antichrist." A distinction is made also between the Eastern and the Western Antichrist. QUEN. (IV, 522): "The Eastern is outside of the Church, and is called, Ez. 38:2; Rev. 20:7, 8, Gog and Magog. The Western sits in the very lap of the Church, and of this we are here treating. Some of the fathers thought that this would be a Jew springing from the tribe of Dan, and the Papists also generally follow this opinion; but we are certain that Antichrist has his origin not from the Jews, but from the assembly of Christians, or from those who make a Christian profession, 2 Thess. 2:3, 4 sq."
Of Antichrist it is held, BR. (783): (He is) "not any one particular human individual. For (1) Antichrist was to come, when that which hindered the erection of his government (viz., the ancient Eastern Roman empire, whose seat was at Rome) would be removed; but he was to continue until the glorious advent of Christ; now, this duration, for so many ages, altogether exceeds the life of one man. (2) The Scriptures describe the origin or planting and the progress or growth of Antichrist in such a manner that it is impossible for all to occur in the life of one man; that is, if we consider that the power was to have been derived from hidden beginnings, not so much by means of arms and open violence as by insidious arts by which the minds of men are gradually occupied and brought over to its side, and that, too, not in one nation or people, but throughout the greatest part of the earth; and that kings and nations were to make use of his society to satiety and nausea, and to avail themselves of his aid for persecuting the saints, etc., according to "Rev. 13:14, 17, concerning the beast and the great whore." Thereupon the Pope was declared to be Antichrist. QUEN. (IV, 526): "These marks of Antichrist are to be taken here not apart and separately, but unitedly and together, and thus taken they exactly coincide with the Pope of Rome, whence the conclusion emerges, that the Pope of Rome is the great Antichrist, predicted by the Holy Ghost."
Among the events that are to occur before the final judgment, (1) some, even among Lutheran theologians, enumerate the general conversion of the Jews. By the great majority, however, this opinion is rejected. HOLL. (1263): "Although access to repentance and faith in Christ has not been debarred the Jews by an absolute decree of God, and many of them, in the course of time from the apostolic era downward, have returned into favor with God, yet their universal, or their certainly manifest and solemn conversion about the time of the end of the world, is not to be expected." The passage, Rom. 11:25, 26, which seems most distinctly to teach such a general conversion, is thus explained by HOLL. (1269): "(a) The proposition of Paul is universal, not absolutely, but with limitation. The limitation exists in this very