08.03.14. Note D—Page 16

Note D—Page 16 Saving Faith Founded on Definite Propositions, Though not Capable, in its Direct Act, of Being Expressed in One.

It might seem unnecessary to guard myself against being supposed to mean, that since faith does not “consist in the belief of any definite proposition at all,” it must consist in the belief of one that is indefinite, were it not that such an interpretation has, strangely enough, been put on this sentence. I need hardly say that it is entirely erroneous. In so far as saving faith has to do with propositions at all, it is with such as are quite definite and precise—clear, exact, and categorical. That God is love—that he so loved the world as to give his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him might not perish but have everlasting life—that Jesus is able to save unto the uttermost all that come unto God by him—these, and many other propositions with which faith is concerned, are not indefinite, if, by indefinite, we are to understand vague, equivocal, or uncertain, statements. But while these definite propositions constitute the warrant or ground of saving faith, and while the belief of them must lie at the foundation of any gracious act or exercise of soul, we cannot but think that saving faith implies in it something more than this belief. The truth is, this belief of these definite propositions, having its seat in the understanding, needs, as it were, to be quickened into warmth and activity, by touch and contact with the more energetic principles of our nature; so that, first carrying the will, it becomes appropriating faith; meeting, next, the conscience, it becomes repentance; entering the heart, it becomes love; and impregnated with the principle of ambition or desire, it becomes high and heavenly hope. This, however, is not the place for discussing the nature of faith, which comes under our notice afterwards. Hut we are anxious to protest, on the one hand, against our being supposed to make saving faith rest on indefinite propositions; and, on the other, against our being required to express the act of faith itself in any definite formula, or, indeed, in any formula whatever. In regard to this latter point, we think an instructive lesson may be learned from the perusal of two antagonist treatises—the one written by Dr Bellamy of New England, against Hervey and Marshall; the other by Dr John Anderson, in reply to Bellamy. Dr Bellamy’s “Treatise on the Nature of True Religion” is a work of great value, especially as searching very deeply the foundations on which our knowledge of God and our obligation to love God, as well under the law as under the gospel, must rest. In his “Letters and Dialogues,” also, in which he assails the doctrine taught by Hervey in his “Theron and Aspasio,” and by Marshall on Sanctification, there are many important cautions, and much useful matter. At the same time, it is to be feared that, in his anxiety to convict the parties whom he assails of Antinomianism, he does injustice to them; and in his dread of all assurance but what might stand the test of self-examination, and an appeal to fruits, he does injustice to himself. In exposing the absurdity which he imagines his adversaries to hold respecting faith—as if it consisted in the mere belief that I am saved already—he seems to infringe upon that act of appropriation by which, on the warrant of the gospel invitation, I take Christ and his salvation to be mine now. It is on this point, accordingly, that Dr Anderson dwells at length, and with remarkable clearness and power. Still, we cannot but think that, as is not uncommon, the disputants have exaggerated the difference between them. The truth is, the chief difficulty in adjusting the matter at issue would seem to arise out of the attempt to translate into a precise formula, and embody in a definite proposition, what is implied in the act or exercise of saving faith. Hence such definitions of saving faith as the following, which give occasion for Dr Bellamy’s strictures:—“It is a real persuasion in my heart that Jesus Christ is mine, and that I shall have life and salvation by him—that whatsoever Christ did for the redemption of mankind, he did it for me.” “It is an hearty assurance that our sins are freely forgiven us in Christ;” and its language is, “Pardon is mine—grace is mine—Christ and all his spiritual blessings are mine.” Yet, if these expressions be weighed in connection with other views set forth by the same writers, they will be found, perhaps, to mean nothing more than that faith, in its very essence, is an appropriating act; and that, consequently, in its direct exercise, it involves a measure of “persuasion,” or confidence, or “hearty assurance;” which, however, it would itself, if genuine, shrink from putting into the bold and naked form of an express and positive deliverance. Nor does this seem to be inconsistent with Bellamy’s own opinion; for he freely uses such scriptural phraseology as “coming to Christ, receiving Christ, trusting in Christ, believing on Christ, flying to Christ,” &c.; which he considers as descriptive, not of any act subsequent to faith, but of faith itself. Now, any exercise of mind such as will suit that phraseology, must surely have in it a measure of directly appropriating assurance, which, if it is to be articulately interpreted at all, must have some voice given to it, very similar to the utterance which Dr Bellamy condemns. But this is the very evil to be complained of—that men should either attempt, or be required, to fix down, in written or spoken words, an affection or movement of the ‘ mind, as yet unable to realize itself. For all language is reflex, whereas faith is direct. It is directly that I believe, and believing, take Christ as mine; it is reflexly that I say that I believe, or that Christ is mine. Thus it is with other mental operations. I love; but my loving is not my saying, or thinking that I love. I take an offered friendship to be my own; but my so taking it and using it is different from my saying, or thinking that it is mine. It is the imperfection of language, after all, that causes any fallacy here. Language cannot catch a direct act of the mind, without instantly making it reflex. The moment I put my faith or feeling into words, it is as if I looked into a mirror, or sat to a painter, to have, not the primary attitude of my soul, but an image of it, presented to my own view, and to the world’s. The mistake of the class of divines whom Bellamy criticises somewhat sharply, would seem to lie in their vainly endeavouring to make language do the office of that magic art which would arrest and stereotype the almost unconscious glance of the eager eye; or, in plainer terms, to reduce into a formula that direct exercise of simple trust, which cannot thus recognise its own reality, without ceasing to be direct altogether, and becoming reflex and inferential. And Bellamy’s error, in so far as he erred, consisted in his making no allowance for this source of misunderstanding, and in his pressing, consequently, too for, his reductio ad absurdum, or the running up of his antagonists into a corner. Two brief quotations from Dr Anderson’s work will illustrate our meaning. The first has reference to a passage in Hervey, and is as follows:—

“Before we conclude this letter, it may be proper to take notice of Mr Bellamy’s remarks on some passages of the 16th Dialogue of Mr Hervey’s ‘Theron and Aspasio.’

“Mr Hervey observes, that ‘this appropriating persuasion is comprehended in all the figurative descriptions of faith which occur in Holy Writ. Faith is styled a looking unto Jesus. But if we do not look unto Jesus as the propitiation for our sins, what comfort or what benefit can we derive from the sight? When the Israelites looked unto the brazen serpent, they certainly regarded it as a remedy, each particular person for himself. Faith is styled a resting upon Christ, or a receiving of him. But when I rest upon an object, I use it as my support. When I receive a gift, I take it as my own property. Faith is a casting ourselves upon Christ. This may receive some elucidation from an incident recorded in the Acts. When those who sailed with Paul saw their vessel shattered—saw the waves prevailing—saw no hope of safety from continuing in the ship, they cast themselves upon the floating planks. They cast themselves upon the planks without any scruple; not questioning their right to make use of them; and they clave to these supporters with a cheerful confidence; not doubting that, according to the apostle’s promise, they should escape safe to land. So we are to cast ourselves upon the Lord Jesus Christ, without indulging a doubt concerning our right to make use of him, or the impossibility of his failing us. Faith is characterized by eating the bread of life. And can this be done without a personal application? Faith is expressed by putting on Christ as a commodious and beautiful garment. And can any idea or any expression more strongly denote an actual appropriation?’

“The unprejudiced will allow these observations to be much to Mr Hervey’s purpose; that is, they clearly prove that there is, in the nature of saving faith, an application of Christ to ourselves in particular.

“And what does Mr Bellamy reply? ‘Why,’ says he, ‘Christ is to be acknowledged, received, and honoured, according to his character, as the promised Messiah. Is he compared to the brazen serpent? We are not to believe that we are healed; but to look to him for healing. Is he compared to a city of refuge? We are not to believe ourselves safe; but to fly to him for safety. Is he compared to bread and water? We are not to believe that our hunger and thirst are assuaged; but to eat the living bread, and to drink the living water, that they may be so.’

“In this reply we observe, first, that Mr Bellamy misrepresents the sentiments of his opponents. For they are so far from saying that faith is a belief that we are healed, or that we are already in a safe state, or that our hunger and thirst are assuaged, that they will not allow that faith, properly speaking, believes anything concerning the state we are already in, excepting that we are miserable sinners of Adam’s family to whom the gospel is preached. And while they tell sinners that the gospel is directed to them, in such a manner as to warrant their immediate reception of Christ as therein exhibited, they at the same time declare that the gospel, without that reception of Christ, will be unprofitable to them. In the next place, it is to be observed, that, in Mr Bellamy’s remark, there is no notice taken of Mr Hervey’s argument; the force of which lies in two things. One is, that it is only true and saving faith which is meant by these metaphorical expressions. The other thing is, that each of them includes the notion of a person’s application of something to his own use, or for the benefit of himself in particular. If these two things hold true (and Mr Bellamy says nothing against either of them), it will necessarily follow, that there is such an application of Christ to ourselves in the nature of saving faith.” In farther explanation, we must refer to the close of this letter of Dr Anderson’s:—

“We conclude this letter with a caution, which may be of use to remove a common prejudice against our doctrine concerning the nature of saving faith. When we say that a real persuasion that Christ is mine, and that I shall have eternal salvation through his name, belongs to the essence of faith, it is not meant that a person never acts faith, but when he is sensible of such a persuasion. There are various degrees of faith; and its language is sometimes more, sometimes less, distinct and explicit. The confidence of faith is, in many, like a grain of mustard seed, or like a spark of heavenly fire amidst the troubled sea of all manner of corruptions and temptations; which, were not this faith secretly supported by the power of God, according to his promise, would soon extinguish it. Hence this real persuasion may be rooted in many a heart, in which for a time it cannot be distinctly discerned; yet it in some measure discovers itself by secret wrestling against unbelief, slavish fear, and all other corruptions.” The other passage is one in which Anderson answers a query of Bellamy; and it is fitted still more clearly to show their difference and agreement:—

“‘Query 1. Did God ever require any of the sons of Adam to believe any proposition to be true, unless it was in fact true before he believed? We are required to believe that there is a God—that Christ is the Son of God—that he died for sinners—that he that believeth shall be saved—that he that believeth not shall be damned—that without holiness no man shall see the Lord. We are required to believe all the truths taught in the Bible. But they are all true before we believe them, and whether we believe them or not.’

“Answer. The occasion of this query is the following words in the explication of the tenth direction in Mr Marshall’s ‘Gospel-Mystery of Sanctification:’—‘The reason,’ says he ‘why we are to assure ourselves in our faith, that God freely giveth Christ and salvation to us particularly, is not because it is a truth before we believe it, but because it becometh a certain truth when we believe it, and because it will never be true, except we do in some measure persuade and assure ourselves that it is so.’ In opposition to this passage, Mr Bellamy asserts, ‘that God never requires us to believe anything but what is true before we believe it, and whether we believe it or not.’ And it is granted to Mr Bellamy, that God never requires us to believe any speculative proposition, such as those recited in the query; or any absolute prediction or historical fact, but what is true, whether we believe it or not. But saving faith, as it is distinguished from other sorts of faith, is not merely a belief of such speculative truths; because there is no such truth but what may be known and assented to by wicked men and devils. When the apostle James says, Even the devils believe and tremble, he undoubtedly admits, that they may assent to all the truths or propositions contained in the Scriptures. In this sense, it has been justly said, that true justifying faith is not simply the believing of any sentence that is written or can be thought upon. So the persuasion, that Christ is mine, which we consider as belonging to the nature of saving faith, is not, properly speaking, a belief of this proposition, That Christ is mine, as if it were formally, or, in so many words contained in Scripture; but it is the necessary import of that receiving or taking of Christ to myself, which is answerable to, and warranted by, the free grant of him in the gospel, directed to sinners of mankind indefinitely. In this believing, however, that Christ is my own Saviour, I am no more chargeable with believing a lie than I am in believing that, when a friend gives me a book, or any other valuable article, I have a right, by virtue of his gift, to consider it, to take and use it, as my own; though it be certain, that, if I finally despise and reject his gift, it neither is, nor ever will be mine. Further: if the gospel be considered as a free promise of Christ and his benefits; then this persuasion, that Christ is mine, is undoubtedly the import of my faith or belief of that promise as directed to me. And yet, though this promise be directed to all the hearers of the Word, none of them, in the event, will find Christ to be theirs, excepting those that believe; because faith is the only way or mean by which God hath appointed them to attain a saving interest in, or the actual possession of, what he hath promised in the gospel. Hence the apostle warns those to whom this promise is left of the danger of coming short of it. Hebrews 4:1. It may be useful to add the words of some ministers of the gospel on this subject. ‘There is a full warrant,’ say they, ‘to believe, or general right of access to Christ by faith, which all the hearers of the gospel have before they believe, and whether ever they believe or not; and, in this respect, the provision of the new covenant is their own mercy; which warrant, or right, faith believes and improves. Yet faith is not a mere believing of an interest which the person had before; but it is also a believing of a new interest in Christ and his blood; or a persuasion, by which a person appropriates to himself what lies in common upon the field of the gospel. All the privileges and blessings of the new covenant are generally and indefinitely set forth by the gospel, upon this very design: That each person who hears it may take it all to himself, in the way of believing; as there cannot otherwise be any proper entertainment given to the gospel. An indefinite declaration is made of God’s name, as THE LORD OUR GOD, and of Christ’s name, as THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS; and all covenant blessings are presented to us in absolute promises; all which is certainly for being believed. But every person is to believe for himself, not for another. It is a mock faith, if a person believes only that some others have a saving interest in God, and Christ, and the promises; as he hath no business about making this particular application to others. So that he is still a rejecter of the whole, if he do not believe with an appropriation of the whole to himself; whilst the revelation of grace is made to him for this purpose, or for none at all.’

“‘Such is the wonderful power and privilege which God bestows on true faith, that he makes all to be personally and savingly a man’s own; just as the man is taking all to himself, and making all his own, by an appropriating persuasion of faith.’”

We cannot close this note, without referring to the late Dr M‘Crie’s correspondence with Dr Watson, as we are tantalized, rather than satisfied, with a brief specimen of it given in his life (p. 323-337), and venturing to ask if the whole is never to be made public? In such a publication we trust Dr Watson will give his concurrence and aid, that his own letters on the subject may be embraced in it. While on this topic, we cannot help referring also to the recent republication of a tract on faith, by the late Dr Stewart of the Canongate, and suggesting that his able biographer might confer a favour on the Church by taking tip the subject.