Conclusion Of The Second Book.
Book III.
Preface To The Third Book.
Chapter I.
Chapter II.
Chapter III.
Chapter IV.
Chapter V.
Chapter VI.
Chapter VII.
Chapter VIII.
Chapter IX.
Chapter X.
Chapter XI.
Chapter XII.
Chapter XIII.
Chapter XIV.
Chapter XV.
Chapter XVI.
Chapter XVII.
Chapter XVIII.
Chapter XIX.
Chapter XX.
Chapter XXI.
Chapter XXII.
Chapter XXIII.
Book IV.
Preface To The Fourth Book.
Part I.
Chapter I.
Chapter II.
Chapter III.
Chapter IV.
Chapter V.
Chapter VI.
Part II.
Chapter I.
Chapter II.
Chapter III.
Chapter IV.
Chapter V.
Chapter VI.
Chapter VII.
Chapter VIII.
Chapter IX.
Chapter X.
Chapter XI.
Chapter XII.
Chapter XIII.
Chapter XIV.
Chapter XV.
Chapter XVI.
Chapter XVII.
Chapter XVIII.
Chapter XIX.
Chapter XX.
Chapter XXI.
Chapter XXII.
Chapter XXIII.
Chapter XXIV.
Chapter XXV.
Chapter XXVI.
Chapter XXVII.
Chapter XXVIII.
Chapter XXIX.
Chapter XXX.
Chapter XXXI.
Chapter XXXII.
Chapter XXXIII.
Chapter XXXIV.
Chapter XXXV.
Chapter XXXVI.
Chapter XXXVII.
Chapter XXXVIII.
Chapter XXXIX.
Chapter XL.
Conclusion.
Index.
Footnotes
INTRODUCTION BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.
Both the general purpose of the venerable Johann Arndt in writing his
“TRUE CHRISTIANITY,” and also his own character and spirit, will be best
exhibited by submitting to the reader a statement referring to his
personal history. He was born, December 27th, 1555, in Ballenstädt, a town
in the Duchy of Anhalt, where his father, Rev. Jacob Arndt, long labored
as the chaplain of Duke Wolfgang, and the pastor of one of the Evangelical
Lutheran congregations of the place. The latter was a devout and faithful
minister of the Gospel, and a wise and affectionate father. He had, from
the earliest period, devoted much attention to the religious education of
his son, in the performance of which holy duty he was faithfully sustained
by his excellent wife. Their efforts were abundantly blessed. The son,
even in his early years, took great pleasure in reading the writings of
Luther, and also acquired a fondness for those of Thomas á Kempis, of
Tauler, and of others who breathed the same spirit of devotion. That this
feature of his religious character did not undergo any essential change in
his riper years, appears from the circumstance that he was one of the
first who collected, arranged, and republished the religious tracts of
Stephen Prætorius, a Lutheran divine of an eminently devout spirit. These
were subsequently re-edited by Martin Statius, who prefixed the title:
_Spiritual Treasury_ (Geistliche Schatzkammer), to the collection. This
book of devotion was highly prized by Spener, has often been reprinted, is
found in many German households, and well deserves to be translated, and
thus made accessible to the English religious public.
§ 2. In his tenth year Arndt lost his father, but the orphan soon found
friends who, in the good providence of God, enabled him to continue the
studies which he had commenced with distinguished success under the
guidance of his father. After completing his preparatory education in the
schools of Halberstadt and Magdeburg, he proceeded, in the year 1576, to
the university of Helmstedt, which had recently been established. In the
course of the following year, 1577, he went as a student to the university
of Wittenberg, soon after the official recognition of the principles
embodied in the Formula of Concord (published in 1580), by which that
institution received a strictly Lutheran character, and every tendency to
any other doctrinal system was successfully arrested. It was here that he
formed a very close union, first as a student, and then as a personal
friend, with the eminent Polycarp Leyser, the elder of that name, whose
firmness and devotion in sustaining the distinctive features of
Lutheranism have assigned to him a high position in the history of his
Church.—After Arndt had, even at this early age, acquired distinction as
an accomplished private lecturer on Natural Philosophy, etc., as well as
on the Epistle to the Romans, Leyser furnished him with an unusually
favorable recommendation to the professors in Strasburg. This city, the
government and population of which were exclusively Lutheran, had not yet
been subjected to that great calamity which afterwards befell it, when the
despot and bigot, Louis XIV., incorporated it with the French monarchy,
and by assigning undue privileges to papists, and adopting other
tyrannical measures, opened an avenue for the introduction, not merely of
an inferior Romanic language, but also of the errors and superstitions of
the Church of Rome.
§ 3. Arndt continued his theological studies in Strasburg, under the
direction of Prof. Pappus, who was also distinguished for his devotion to
the genuine Lutheran faith. In the year 1579 he proceeded to Basel, where,
under the gentle sway of Sulcer, the Lutheran faith had acquired influence
and authority. In this city he was temporarily engaged as the tutor of a
young Polish nobleman; the latter, on one of their excursions, when Arndt
had accidentally fallen into the Rhine, succeeded in seizing his sinking
preceptor by the hair of his head, and thus became the means, in the hands
of God, of saving a life of incalculable value, designed to prove an
ever-flowing source of blessings to the Church.
§ 4. During this whole period Arndt occupied himself with the study of
medicine, in connection with his strictly theological studies; it is
possible that he would have ultimately chosen the practice of medicine as
the business of his life, if a severe illness had not intervened. After
his recovery, he believed it to be his duty to renounce his personal
tastes, and he thenceforth consecrated himself entirely to the service of
the Church. His medical and chemical occupations, although not abandoned,
were afterwards regarded by him only as a recreation.
§ 5. He returned, in 1581 or 1582, to his native place, and labored for
some time as a teacher, until he was called by his prince, Joachim Ernest,
to be the pastor of the congregation in Badeborn, a village in the Duchy
of Anhalt; he was, accordingly, ordained in the month of October of the
same year. It was here, too, that he was married, October 31, 1583, to
Anna Wagner, the daughter of an eminent jurist, with whom he passed the
remaining thirty-eight years of his life in unclouded domestic happiness.
She was a devout Christian woman, who cheered and encouraged Arndt amid
his many cares, alleviated every burden to the extent of her ability, and
was always regarded by him with tenderness and gratitude. They were
childless; but many an orphan found that their hearts could overflow with
love towards the young and destitute—a love as full of warmth as beloved
children have ever experienced parental love to be.
§ 6. In this first pastoral charge of Arndt, the unhappy state of affairs
subjected him, particularly during the latter part of the seven years
which he spent in it, to a “Lutheran martyrdom,” as Tholuck expresses
himself (Herzog. Encyk. I., 536). The duke, John George, who now reigned
(a relative of the palsgrave, or count palatine, Casimir, a zealous
Calvinist), after various inward struggles, abandoned the Lutheran faith,
and, in the year 1596, publicly adopted the Reformed faith, a few years
after the transactions to which we now refer. Even Protestant rulers, who
had not yet learned the theory that a union of church and state can
operate only perniciously, perpetually interfered in the internal affairs
of the church.—At this period it was the custom of Lutheran pastors, when
they administered the rite of Baptism, to follow the liturgical form which
prescribed “exorcism.” This feature of the whole baptismal form, which was
introduced as early as the third century, or even earlier (before the days
of Tertullian and Origen), consisted simply in a sentence adjuring the
evil spirit to depart from the subject of Baptism. The early practice had,
like others, been gradually associated, after the rise and development of
popery, with superstitious ideas, such as was also the case with the
Lord’s Supper, until it assumed an absurd and even revolting form. At the
period of the Reformation, Zwingli and Calvin (Inst. IV., c. 15, 19; c.
19, 24) rejected the whole form of exorcism. Luther and Melanchthon, on
the other hand, after discarding the popish excrescences, believed that
the scriptural doctrine which the early form involved or suggested,
authorized the retention of the practice, when restricted to a very plain
and simple formula, expressive of a scriptural truth.—Now, at that period,
as it is well known, unfriendly feelings, engendered by various causes,
existed to a certain extent, between the heads respectively of the
Reformed and the Lutheran churches, in consequence of which even harmless
customs which none would, under ordinary circumstances, either advocate or
condemn with partisan feeling, assumed a confessional character. Such was
the case with the purified and simple Lutheran baptismal sentence
containing the “exorcism.”
§ 7. Arndt’s course in this matter has often been misunderstood; as it,
however, demonstrates him to have been alike a very firm and conscientious
man, and also an uncompromising supporter of the distinctive doctrines and
usages of the Lutheran Church, the following details may be appropriately
furnished.—The language which Luther retained in his form for Baptism
(_Taufbüchlein_), after omitting all popish and superstitious practices,
was the following. Between the prayer and the reading of Mark 10:13-16,
the pastor says: “I adjure thee, thou unclean spirit, in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, that thou go out and depart
from this servant of Jesus Christ, Amen.”—Luther understood the form to be
a declaration or distinct confession of the doctrine of Original Sin, and
a renunciation of Satan. Still, the Lutheran Church, as such, never
recognized the _necessity_ of this ancient form, and its confessional
writings never allude to it. After the excitement of feeling peculiar to
Arndt’s age, had been allayed by time, the Lutheran Church regarded the
whole as a mere _adiaphoron_, that is, a “thing indifferent,” not
essentially involving any principle whatever, inasmuch as the doctrine of
Original Sin had already been very explicitly set forth and confessed in
her Symbolical Books. Such was the opinion of the eminent Lutheran
dogmatical writers, Gerhard, Quenstedt, Hollaz, etc.; and men like Baier
and Baumgarten even advocated the discontinuance of the practice. It is no
longer retained in any prominent manner in the Lutheran Church.—But in the
age in which Arndt lived, who was not a man that would obstinately cling
to a mere form, the _rejection_ of the formula of Exorcism _did_ involve a
principle; for, under the peculiar circumstances, that rejection might be
understood to be, first, a rejection of the doctrine of Original Sin, and,
secondly, an affirmation that the children of believing parents were in
the kingdom of heaven, even before they had received Baptism. But all this
seemed to conflict with the Pauline doctrine that all are “by nature the
children of wrath.” Eph. 2:3. While, then, J. Ben. Carpzov, the
distinguished interpreter of the Symbolical Books, who died in 1557,
decides that the “Exorcism” is in itself a matter of indifference, and may
without scruple be dropped, he nevertheless holds that if the omission of
it should be understood as a denial of the Scripture doctrine of the
corruption of human nature (Original Sin), it becomes, in such a case, a
matter of principle to retain the formula. (_Isagoge_, etc., p. 1122
_ff._; 1608.) Walch, the other eminent interpreter of the Symbolical Books
(_Introductio_, etc.), does not refer to the matter at all, as it is no
essential part of the Lutheran Creed. But Arndt, who was a calm,
sagacious, and conscientious observer, and who may justly be considered as
claiming that, in forming a judgment respecting him, we should not
overlook the spirit of his times, apprehended that the suppression of the
“exorcism” was secretly designed to be the forerunner of the suppression
of the entire Lutheran faith, which constituted the life of his soul; he
could not, under such circumstances, consent to endanger his most precious
treasure.
§ 8. Now the duke, John George, after his virtual adoption of the Reformed
faith and practice, issued a peremptory order that the formula of Exorcism
should no longer be employed in his dominions at the baptism of any
infant. Arndt, who was characterized by a childlike submission to those in
authority, as long as matters of principle were not involved, could not
renounce his faith in God’s word, and, especially, his personal conviction
of the natural depravity of the human heart. He might have consented to
drop a mere form; but he saw here an entering wedge, which justly alarmed
him. His apprehensions were subsequently proved to have been only too well
founded, when, soon afterwards, Luther’s Catechism was suppressed, and
another substituted in its place. Hence, as he could not renounce a
prominent feature of the Lutheran creed, he firmly and positively refused
to obey the ducal command. He remarked, in the written statement which
embodied his reasons for refusing to obey, and which was submitted to the
civil authorities, that his conscience would not allow him to comply with
such a demand of the secular authority—that the orthodox fathers, who had,
during thirteen centuries, connected “exorcism” with Baptism, understood
it in accordance with the mind and true sense of the Scriptures (_ex mente
et vero sensu Scripturæ_)—that it was, therefore, by no means “an impious
ceremony” (as the civil ruler, a layman, had thought proper to designate
it),—that he must necessarily abide by the decision of his conscience—and,
that he would humbly submit to any sentence which his prince might
pronounce in the case. The date which he affixed to the document, is Sept.
10, 1590. That sentence, which was soon afterwards proclaimed, deposed
Arndt from his office, and banished him from the ducal territories. The
reader of Book I. of the “True Christianity,” will now understand, after
observing the earnestness with which the author insists on the doctrine of
Original Sin, or the depravity of human nature, that he could not
conscientiously take any step which would, even indirectly, involve a
denial of that sad truth of the Bible,—a truth to which his knowledge of
his own heart daily testified.
§ 9. But the Divine Head of the Church did not depose this faithful
minister. At the very time when Arndt seemed to be homeless and
friendless, two important posts were offered to him—one in Mansfeld, the
other in Quedlinburg, an important city, which, after belonging to various
rulers, has at last been incorporated with the monarchy of Prussia. The
city adopted the Lutheran faith in 1539. Arndt decided to make this place
his home, and he labored here with eminent success, during a period of
seven years, as the pastor of the church of St. Nicholas. However, he also
endured much affliction in this new charge, and his holy zeal and devout
spirit, while fully appreciated by intelligent and enlightened believers,
were misunderstood and even hated by others, so that he longed to be
transferred to another field of labor.
§ 10. He was at length permitted to depart, and removed to the city of
Brunswick, situated in the territory of the duke of Brunswick; it aspired
at that time to become a “free city,” subject directly to the German
emperor. The warfare between the duke and the city, during Arndt’s
residence in the latter, subjected him to many sore trials. His abode in
it, extending from 1590 to 1608, is specially interesting, as he then
presented to the religious community Book I. of his “True Christianity.”
Dr. A. Wildenhahn, who has, in recent times, furnished us with various
charming volumes, descriptive of the times, respectively, of Luther,
Spener, Paul Gerhardt, etc., in which he combines “fiction and truth,” has
selected this period of Arndt’s history, as the one to which he dedicates
his two delightful volumes, entitled “Johannes Arndt” (Leipzig, 1861).
This author complains that he found it a difficult task to collect full
and authentic accounts of Arndt’s life. Still, he obtained access to
various documents in the archives of the city of Brunswick, and in the
royal library in Dresden, which had not been previously examined even by
Arndt’s best biographer, the Rev. Frederick Arndt, of Berlin; and these
materially assisted him in preparing his own work.(1)
§ 11. During the earlier years of Arndt’s residence in Brunswick, as a
co-pastor of the church of St. Martin, his life was comparatively peaceful
and happy. The purity of his character, the soundness and power of his
doctrine, and the diligence and fidelity manifested in his pastoral
labors, could not fail to command the respect, and attract the love of all
candid persons. But he was at length subjected to trials of a new and
painful character, and became the victim of the hostile and persecuting
spirit of men from whom a very different course of conduct might have
reasonably been expected. The origin of these new difficulties has not
always been clearly understood; while some have regarded Arndt as worthy
of the censures of those who assailed him, others are disposed to condemn
those assailants in unqualified terms. It is strange that, even at this
comparatively remote period, such judgments are sometimes expressed in
language which betrays personal feeling rather than it announces the calm
judgment of a later and disinterested generation.
§ 12. It is here necessary to cast a glance at the history of the times
which preceded and followed the eventful year 1555, in which Arndt was
born, a year ever memorable as the one in which the signing of the
articles of the Peace of Augsburg secured a temporary external repose for
the Lutheran Church. This “Peace” terminated at least the horrors which
had followed the introduction, in 1548, of the _Augsburg Interim_, by
which the newly-established Protestant doctrine was seriously endangered.
The provisions of this _Interim_ were enforced with such merciless tyranny
by popish authorities, that in South Germany alone about four hundred
faithful Lutheran pastors, who could not conscientiously accede to an
arrangement which might possibly restore the full authority of the errors
and superstitions of Rome, were driven, as exiles, with their families,
from their homes. The spirit of the Christian martyrs of the early ages of
the Church revived in these heroic men, and they clung with undying
tenacity to their holy faith.
§ 13. That faith now encountered new enemies, who did not resort to fire
and the sword, but who adopted more insidious means for corrupting divine
truth; and again, assaults like theirs, only increased the jealousy with
which the genuine Lutherans guarded the purity of their doctrinal system.
It was the only gift of heaven, which sin and Satan could not touch, and
which retained all its unsullied holiness. The soul of man had become
corrupt; the body was subject to disease and death; the world, fair as it
was, and rich in the gifts of God, had nevertheless been made by sin to
bring forth thorns and thistles. But the Gospel truth, which conducted men
to Christ and heaven, remained in all its purity and power. These men were
willing to suffer and die, but while they did live, they could not relax
the grasp with which they held fast to evangelical truth. Now, amid the
political and religious commotions of that stormy age, could we expect
that devout men should say, “Peace, peace;” when there was no peace?
(Jerem. 6:14.)
§ 14. Let us illustrate this subject. Schwenkfeldt, for instance (born in
1490; died, 1561), an opponent of both the Lutherans and the Reformed, as
well as of the Papists, and, accordingly, constantly engaged in
controversies with all parties, declared that Luther’s uncompromising
determination to maintain the authority of the written word of revelation,
the Bible, was equivalent to a worship of the letter. He assigned, in his
fanaticism and morbid mysticism, a rank to an inner and direct word of the
Divine Spirit, which he asserted that he received, far above that of the
written word of God. He refused to make any distinction between the divine
act of the justification of the believer, on the one hand, and the
progressive sanctification of the believer, on the other. He taught that
the two natures of Christ, the divine and the human, were so fused
together, or, rather, that the flesh of Christ was so absolutely deified
or converted into God himself, that no distinction between them
remained,—that the regenerate could live without sin, etc. He succeeded,
in spite of the crudeness, one-sidedness, and unsoundness of his
doctrines, in attracting many disciples. His death, which occurred in
1561, a few years after Arndt’s birth, did not terminate the widespread
confusion which he had created in the Protestant Church; the dread of that
sickly form of mysticism which he attempted to establish, long remained.
The fear was naturally entertained that it might lead many astray, who,
while they did not otherwise fraternize with Schwenkfeldt in his wild and
absurd course, might be deluded by his claims to superior religious
intelligence and holiness.
§ 15. The disastrous influences of the demagogue Thomas Münzer (born in
1490), and of his fanatical party, the Zwickau prophets, on sound doctrine
and sound morals, as well as the blood which they had shed, were still
vividly remembered.—Servetus, the Unitarian, had perished, but he left a
seed behind; the doctrine of Christ’s deity still remained a point of
attack. And besides these false teachers, several others, who were
originally connected in various modes with the Lutheran Church,
promulgated at various times opinions which seemed to be subversive of all
Scripture doctrine.—Agricola, who had originally been an active adherent
of Luther, gradually departed from the faith. He unquestionably betrayed
the interests of Protestantism by sanctioning the Augsburg Interim of
1548. He engaged in a controversy, at first with Melanchthon, and then
with Luther himself, on the subject of the proper “Use of the law”—the
Antinomistic controversy—maintaining that the law was no longer of
importance to the believer, and that the Gospel alone should be preached.
He died in 1566, when Arndt was about eleven years old. The confusion in
the church, which he created by his dangerous sentiments on several
points, was long painfully felt.—The Osiandrian controversy, respecting
Justification, and its relation to Sanctification, began in 1549, and
closed only when Arndt was already a student.—The Majoristic controversy
originated in the public declaration made by G. Major, that “good works
are _necessary to salvation_.” The fears which such a doctrine, that
savored of popery, produced among orthodox and devout Lutherans, were
excessive. Those who opposed Major, were alarmed by his unguarded
expressions, and apprehended that the Gospel doctrine of _Justification by
faith in Christ alone, without human works or merit_, would be endangered,
unless they silenced him. The controversy, in its most energetic form,
terminated about seven years after Arndt’s birth, but the indirect effects
of the misconceptions connected with the great topic of this controversy,
were deeply felt by him.—The Synergistic controversy, relating to the
question whether man could co-operate with the Holy Spirit in the work of
his conversion, began in the year in which Arndt was born, and was
maintained with great energy during several years.—The so-called
Cryptocalvinistic controversy, referring mainly to the doctrine of the
Lord’s Supper, and involving certain important questions respecting the
Person of Christ, commenced about three years before Arndt’s birth, and
agitated the church during many years.—These, and other subjects on which
also controversies had arisen, were, in the good providence of God, at
length calmly considered by learned and devout Lutheran theologians,
conscientiously examined in the light of the divine Word, impartially
decided, and set forth, in the year 1580, in the FORMULA OF CONCORD, the
last of the special Lutheran creeds, all the doctrines of which Arndt
cordially received, as he repeatedly declared in an official manner on
various occasions, in his writings, in his last will and testament, and on
his death-bed. (See below §§ 24, 25.) The very great reverence with which
he regarded this noble creed, and his attachment to it, are to be ascribed
not only to the spotless purity of the doctrines which it sets forth, but
also to the good work which it performed in successfully and permanently
deciding several very important questions which had latterly arisen, and
on which the preceding creeds had not authoritatively and fully
pronounced. It is, however, obvious, that even after these storms
subsided, the waves would long remain in commotion, and it was precisely
in these troublous times that Arndt labored in the ministry.
§ 16. The catalogue of the difficulties which awaited him, is not yet
exhausted. We have to add, as a part of the history of the times, when an
extraordinary number of political and ecclesiastical contentions
prevailed, the excitement of feeling which certain differences of doctrine
between the Lutherans and the Reformed engendered, and which would never
have risen to the fearful height in which history now exhibits it to us,
if political power, controlled alternately by the two religious parties in
some of the German principalities, had not been invoked by them. The awful
death by fire, which terminated the career of Servetus (Oct. 27, 1553, two
years before the birth of Arndt, and more than six years after the death
of Luther), was decreed by the civil authorities of Geneva, but was
sanctioned by Calvin and even the gentle Melanchthon—a sad example of the
clouded views of men at that time respecting religious liberty and the
right of civil rulers to punish men for their errors in the faith.
§ 17. In the Palatinate (the ancient _Pfalz_, the territories of which are
now distributed among Bavaria, Prussia, etc.) the Lutheran Church had been
established, and popery ceased to exist. But in 1560, a few years after
Arndt’s birth, the Elector, Frederick III., withdrew from the church, and
adopted the Reformed faith and usages. His successor, Lewis VI.,
endeavored to restore the ascendency of Lutheranism; but after his brief
reign, the authorities which succeeded, established “Calvinism” (the term
employed in Church History) on a permanent basis. A similar
ecclesiastico-civil revolution occurred in Bremen in 1562; fourteen
Lutheran pastors and the Lutheran members of the City Council were
expelled, and the city became Reformed. Such changes occurred elsewhere.
Both parties were undoubtedly more or less honest in adhering to their
doctrinal views; and both claimed the right to depose and exile those of
an opposite faith, whenever the civil and political power was, in either
case, directed by them.
§ 18. Let it now be remembered that these contending Protestants, Lutheran
and Reformed or Calvinistic, were led by men respectively, who were
confessedly intelligent, learned, and endowed with great abilities, many
of whom were not only honest in expressing their convictions, but also
conscientious in their conduct, whether they were governed by an erring or
an enlightened conscience. That the latter is historically true, is
demonstrated by their readiness, when they lost power, to submit to
imprisonment or exile, rather than to renounce their respective creeds.
They were all too well acquainted with Bible truth to look with other
feelings than with horror on the popish creed. But while their own
Protestant creed was very precious to their souls, they could not tolerate
any departure from it, even if that departure was _not_ in the direction
“towards Rome.” That departure must, as they judged, necessarily be
equivalent to a denial of God’s truth, as they believed that they had
found it in the Bible. Thus all were alike sensitive—all seemed to feel
that if they tolerated any error, _that_ error could not be trivial—it
was, as far as it extended, a denial of God’s truth. Could they safely
assume the shame and guilt of such a sin? We may add, that we are here
speaking only of the _honest_ leaders of the Lutherans and the Reformed,
of whom each man judged and acted for himself, as one who was accountable
to God. No honest Reformed theologian would have screened a Reformed
heretic from condemnation; and no honest Lutheran would, for a moment,
have tolerated a nominal Lutheran, who rejected any part of the creed of
the church.
§ 19. At the same time, all these men were fallible creatures, subject to
all the errors of judgment, and to all the passions and infirmities
incident to fallen man. They often supposed that their intentions were
pure, when selfish motives governed them, and their jealous guardianship
of God’s truth was combined with a jealous love for their personal
opinions. It was under these circumstances, when each party watched with
extreme jealousy over the purity of the faith, as adopted by it, and when,
besides, many private interests—personal, political, and
pecuniary—exercised vast influence, that Arndt entered on his labors.—We
have introduced the above details, in order to explain his declarations in
the preface to Book I. § 8, that he rejects the Synergistic, Majoristic,
etc., errors, and entertains no other views except those which are set
forth in the Lutheran Symbolical Books.
§ 20. When he commenced his labors in Brunswick, he was the youngest
member of the “ministerium” of the city, that is, of the college composed
of the pastors of the several city churches, all of which at that time
strictly adhered to the Lutheran creed. He had long lamented that, in
consequence of the infelicity of the times, which caused endless doctrinal
controversies, the parties of which were many, Papists, Mystics,
Unitarians, Reformed, Lutherans, etc., the attention of many persons was
diverted from the practical duties of a Christian life, and directed
exclusively to controversies on points of doctrine; the result was, that
the understanding was actively exercised, but the heart was not properly
affected. Such considerations induced him to write Book I. of his “True
Christianity.” It was his object to show that God demands a holy life,
proceeding from faith in Christ, and that no jealousy concerning the
purity of the creed will atone for the absence of the fruits of the
Spirit, as exhibited in the life and conduct of the individual. Hence he
insists with a warmth unusual in that excited and controversial age, on
repentance, on faith in Christ, and on a holy life. Possibly, the
apparently sweeping assertions which occasionally occur in his writings,
to the effect that the majority of his contemporaries lacked a heavenly
spirit, acquired their sombre hue in consequence of the publicity given to
human frailties, and the retirement and shade in which vast numbers of
holy men preferred to dwell. His Book I., which constitutes the principal
part of the work, was first published in Jena, in the year 1605; a second
and improved edition appeared in 1607.
§ 21. It consisted principally of the matter which he had introduced in a
course of practical sermons previously delivered by him on week-days. It
attracted great attention, and was rapidly circulated throughout Germany.
The modest and retiring author, without expecting such a result, at once
became a celebrity. Nevertheless, new trials now commenced. An envious
feeling seems to have been engendered in the hearts of several of his
colleagues in the “ministerium” of the city, when they noticed the honor
which the author had undesignedly gained. Perhaps, too, the controversial
spirit of the times, and the jealousy of good men respecting the faith,
which was assailed on all sides—by Papists, Calvinists, Unitarians,
fanatics, etc.,—may have led them to scrutinize the book with too
suspicious eyes. All held firmly to the Gospel doctrine of Justification
by faith alone, without works. Now, when they found that Arndt insisted
with such earnestness on the evidences of faith, as furnished by a holy
life, they were morbidly affected, and apprehended that the doctrine of
justification by faith _alone_, which their bitter enemies, the Papists,
denounced, had not been guarded with sufficient care by Arndt. Other
expressions, again, which they did not interpret impartially, led them to
fear that he was introducing mysticism and other morbid religious systems
into the Church. The reproaches which he was compelled to hear, deterred
him for some time from fulfilling his promise of adding three other
“Books” to Book I. The complete work may be regarded as consisting of
_Four_ Books, as published in 1609. At a considerably later period a
fifth, and then a sixth book, were added. The former was designed as an
explanation and recapitulation of the Four Books, and the latter,
consisting in part of letters addressed to various eminent theologians,
besides having the same object in view, was intended also to defend the
doctrinal and ethical positions assumed in the Four Books. As they partake
of the nature of an appendix, and refer, to some extent, to
misunderstandings belonging to an earlier age, the Latin versions omit
them, and this example was followed by the English translator.
§ 22. Arndt was freed from the unpleasant relations in which he stood to
his colleagues in Brunswick, in which city he had spent about ten years,
by a call which he received in 1608 to enter a new field of labor in
Eisleben. This city, which, as in the days of Luther (who was born and
baptized, and who also died there), still belonged to the territory of the
Counts of Mansfeld, is at present incorporated with the kingdom of Prussia
(Province of Saxony). It was here that Arndt ventured to publish the whole
of the Four Books of his “True Christianity.” In this new position, his
admirable character and spirit were justly appreciated alike by his
patrons, the Counts of Mansfeld, by his colleagues, and by the people. The
fidelity with which he remained at his post during the prevalence of an
epidemic that carried off many of the inhabitants, his self-sacrificing
spirit in the discharge of his pastoral duties, and his judicious course
as an assessor of the local consistory, demonstrated the true nobility of
his soul—the spirit of the divine Redeemer. However, even though his
relations with all who surrounded him were of the most friendly character,
he did not remain longer than about two years and a half in Eisleben. He
had been repeatedly invited to assume important charges, which he declined
to accept; for while he had often found opponents, his great personal
merit, his eminent services, both as a preacher of the Gospel and as an
author of devotional works, and his godly spirit, had secured for him the
respect, confidence, and love of the whole religious public. Duke George
of Brunswick-Lüneburg, who at that time resided in Celle (Zelle), invited
him, in the year 1611, to accept the two offices of court-preacher and of
General Superintendent of ecclesiastical affairs in the principalities of
Brunswick and Lüneburg. (Celle was subsequently attached to the kingdom of
Hanover, but has, in the most recent times, been absorbed, with the
contiguous territories, by Prussia.) The Count of Mansfeld very
reluctantly consented to Arndt’s removal; the latter, however, believed
that it had become his duty to enter the wide and inviting field of labor
which Providence had opened to him. The reigning duke, who was deeply
interested in the welfare of the Lutheran Church, judiciously and
vigorously sustained his new court-preacher in all his labors. The latter,
in addition to his ordinary pastoral duties, visited the congregations of
the whole territory, introduced various ecclesiastical reforms, and
continued till his death, which occurred May 11, 1621, to enjoy the divine
blessing himself, and to be a blessing to all whom his influence reached.
If he was born during a stormy period, and lived in an age of
controversies which wounded his soul, he was, nevertheless, like Luther,
very happy in being permitted to terminate his labors precisely at the
time when he was called away. For, as Luther closed his eyes in peace
during the year which preceded the disastrous battle of Mühlberg (April
24, 1547), so Arndt fell asleep soon after the Thirty Years’ War began,
before the world saw those horrors which language fails to describe in
their awful extent. He had contracted a disease of the throat, which was
subsequently aggravated by a violent fever; and his exhausted frame at
length yielded to the assault of disease. He sent for his friend and
brother, the Rev. William Storch, early in the morning of May 9. After
being placed on a chair, he humbly made a general confession of his sins,
declared once more that he adhered as heretofore to the pure doctrine of
God’s word and rejected every error, and then, with all the cheerfulness
of Christian faith, received the Lord’s Supper. Dr. Morris, in the work
referred to, in a note above, quotes from his authorities the following:
“Mr. Storch then addressed him (in language similar to that which Dr.
Jonas used in speaking to the dying Luther) as follows: ‘I do not doubt,
that as you have never entertained any doctrine contrary to God’s word,
but have always continued firm and steadfast in the pure, unadulterated
word, the Scriptures of the prophets and apostles, the Augsburg
Confession, and other Symbolical Books of the Lutheran Church, and most
heartily and sincerely despised and rejected all contrary doctrines, so
you will also by God’s grace maintain to the end the same doctrines and
faith which you have publicly preached and professed.’ Arndt replied
several times, in a weak but intelligible voice, most decisively, ‘Yes,
yes, that I will, even to the end.’ ” On the 11th of May he began to sink
rapidly, but was still able to repeat many of his favorite texts, such as
Ps. 143:2, and John 5:24. After having slept a short time, he awoke,
looked upward, and exclaimed with a comparatively loud voice: “We beheld
his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth.” John 1:14. His wife asked him when he had seen that “glory.”
He replied: “I saw it just now. O what a glory it is! It is the glory
which eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath entered into the
heart of man to conceive of. This is the glory which I saw.”—When he heard
the clock striking at eight in the evening, he asked what the hour was.
When it struck again, he repeated the question. On being told that it was
striking nine, he said: “Now I have overcome all.” These were the last
words of this “good soldier of Jesus Christ.” 2 Tim. 2:3. He lay perfectly
still until after midnight, when he breathed his last. God had given him a
peaceful death. The serenity of his soul in his last hours seemed to
linger on his features, even after the spirit had departed.
§ 23. Two dukes of Brunswick-Lüneburg followed him to the grave (May
15th), as a testimony of their sense of the great worth of their revered
spiritual guide. The text of the funeral sermon, delivered by Rev. Mr.
Storch, consisted of the words, “I have fought a good fight,” etc. 2 Tim.
4:7, 8. His remains were deposited in the church at Celle. The tomb
exhibits the following inscription:
Qui Jesum vidit, qui mundum et daemona vicit,
Arndius in scriptis vivit ovatque suis.
(That is: _Arndt, who saw Jesus, and conquered the world and the devil,
lives and triumphs in his writings_.)
§ 24. Nothing could be more unjust than any charge affecting the purity of
the faith of Arndt as a Lutheran Christian. His general orthodoxy was
always readily admitted; a few unreasonable and prejudiced men, however,
who suspected that mysticism and other errors were concealed in the “True
Christianity,” although the existence of such matter could not be
established, nevertheless alleged, with a certain morbid feeling, that
Arndt did not adopt the entire creed of the Lutheran Church, as set forth
in “all her symbolical books.” This circumstance accounts for the
frequency and earnestness with which he declares his _unconditional_
acceptance of, and hearty belief in, _all_ the details of the Lutheran
faith. Thus the reader will find, at the close of the Preface to Book I.,
an emphatic declaration of his recognition of the doctrines of _all the
Symbolical Books_, the names of which he enumerates in full. See, also,
the conclusion of Book II., and the conclusion of the Preface to Book IV.,
where similar declarations occur. He repeats them in his Preface to Book
VI., where he employs the following language: “My dear reader, inasmuch as
our holy Christian faith, the pure evangelical doctrine, has, for about
one hundred years, been elucidated, purified, and sufficiently explained,
in accordance with the rule of the holy Word of God, and also been
cleansed from many errors through the means of two glorious and
praiseworthy confessions of faith, namely, the Augsburg Confession, and
the Formula of Concord, which have hitherto been, and still continue to
be, my own confession of faith; and, inasmuch as some have, at the same
time, uttered complaints respecting the ungodly manner of life of the
present world, with which the Christian faith cannot coexist; therefore, I
wrote, some years ago, Four Books on TRUE CHRISTIANITY, in which I have
depicted the internal, and, also, the external Christian life. For
although the pure _doctrine is the foremost point of true Christianity_, I
have, nevertheless, not wished to treat of it in a special manner, as this
has been copiously and superabundantly done by others, and is still daily
done; and I have taken only the Christian _life_ as my subject.” This Book
VI. appeared somewhat less than a year before his death, and gives special
prominence to the last of the Lutheran confessions of faith—the FORMULA OF
CONCORD—in which the doctrines concerning the Person of Christ, the Lord’s
Supper, etc., are set forth in all their details; he thus repeats anew his
cordial acceptance of the doctrines contained therein. In a letter of
thanks addressed to Dr. Mentzer, of Giessen (Book VI., Part II., Letter
7), he expressly rejects the serious doctrinal errors of Schwenkfeldt
respecting the Scriptures, the Person of Christ, the two Sacraments, etc.,
and adds: “These errors have been publicly condemned and rejected, partly
in the Augsburg Confession, and partly in the Formula of Concord, after
the pure doctrine was firmly established.” He concurs, of course, in the
condemnation of such errors.—In Letter 8, of the same Book, addressed to
Dr. Piscator, of Jena, he says: “I call on the great God, the Searcher of
hearts, as my witness, that it was not in my mind, in anything which I
have written, to depart from the true religion of the Augsburg Confession
and the Formula of Concord, and that I had no intention to disseminate
erroneous opinions, much less to defend any which conflicted with the
Symbolical Books of our Church.”
§ 25. On his death-bed he repeated anew, as we have seen, that he
continued, as heretofore, to adhere faithfully to the pure evangelical
doctrine. In the two copies of his last will and testament, of the years
1610 and 1616, he solemnly declares that he had always held with full
consciousness and understanding the doctrines of the Augsburg Confession
and the Formula of Concord, and never departed from their contents either
in his public teaching or his private views, that he never would adopt any
other faith, and that he prayed that the grace of God might sustain him in
this frame of mind until his last hour should come. The singularly
emphatic manner in which, on every appropriate occasion—and many of such
occurred—he declared his sincere belief in the peculiar and distinctive
doctrines of the Lutheran Church, in all their details, as set forth in
her SYMBOLICAL BOOKS, by no means proceeded from a narrow-minded sectarian
feeling. “Christ is all, and in all” (Col. 3:11)—these apostolic words
indicate the spirit of Arndt’s religion. He could not sympathize with the
Papist, who robs Christ of the glory which belongs exclusively to his
atoning work—not with the Unitarian, who attempts to dethrone Him—not with
the fanatic, who, even when honest, is misguided by passion and spiritual
pride—not with the unbeliever, who flees from the shame of the cross—not
even with his Reformed fellow-Christians, whose merits he readily
acknowledged, but whose rejection of the Lutheran doctrine respecting the
Person of Christ and the Lord’s Supper, as set forth especially in the
Formula of Concord, grieved his soul. He had found the precious Gospel
truth, which constituted his life, to be identical with the creed of his
Church, and with _that_ creed alone, in all its glorious fulness. He could
not consent to sacrifice one jot or one tittle of the Augsburg Confession,
nor could he assign to it an isolated position, even though Zwingli and
his associates readily adopted it, with the single exception of Article X.
Nor did his heart or his conscience allow him to ignore the other Lutheran
Symbols. The _Augsburg Confession_ undoubtedly contained the pure truth of
the Gospel, without any admixture of errors; but, owing to the
circumstances and the times in which it originated, when it was the great
object of Luther and his associates to justify their course in withdrawing
from antichristian Rome, it confined itself to those principles which were
then specially debated. Hence Calvin, who differed so widely on some
points from the fully developed Lutheran creed, readily adopted and
subscribed it at Strasburg.—The _Apology_, or Vindication of the Augsburg
Confession, set forth, among others, the cardinal doctrine of the Lutheran
faith, namely, Justification by faith alone, with extraordinary power and
purity. Its full, lucid, and strictly scriptural character has never been
successfully controverted. For this very reason the Apology was rejected
by Papists, as it now is practically by Rationalists and others who depend
on human merit, and are unwilling to give all honor to the Saviour
alone.—The _Smalcald Articles_, which Luther prepared in order to set
forth the points on which no Protestant or Bible Christian could make any
concession to Popery, are also offensive to Papists, to Rationalists, and
to the unbelieving and impenitent generally, as they contain the pure
evangelical truth, which humbles man, while it exalts God.—_The Two
Catechisms (the Large and the Small)_ furnish materials for popular
instruction in revealed truth, which have never been equalled by other
manuals, in their adaptation to the object, their fulness, and their
purity. Hence, a friend of divine truth, like Arndt, who took so deep an
interest in the religious education of the young, could not do otherwise
than regard them as of inestimable value. An enemy of the truth would
naturally disavow them.—The _Formula of Concord_—the last of the series of
Lutheran Confessions of Faith, and the one which Arndt appears to have
prized most highly—was intended, as we have shown above, to determine
various important points involved in the controversies which had arisen in
the bosom of the Lutheran Church before or at the time when he was born.
The very circumstance that this Symbol was demanded by the exigencies of
the Church, demonstrates that the Augsburg Confession was _not originally
designed to be a full and complete confession of faith_, but only a
statement of points discussed during the infancy of the Reformation. While
it excludes every error which might dishonor God, and confirm the
impenitent sinner in his evil course, it completes the previous Symbols,
and forms with them an undivided and harmonious whole, exhibiting with
brilliancy, power, and spotless purity the Person of the God-Man, Jesus
Christ, and glorifies God alone. A confession of faith which so
unreservedly unveils the fearful character of Original Sin, while it so
fully explains and establishes the true doctrine of the Lord’s Supper,
would naturally be unwelcome to an impenitent heart; whereas, the devout
Arndt found nothing in it but animating and heavenly truth. Hence he
desired to be regarded as simply an Evangelical Lutheran Christian,—an
adherent of the Formula of Concord.
§ 26. Religion assumed an unusually attractive and beautiful form in
Arndt, and is strikingly shadowed forth in his “True Christianity;” this
work is an admirable portraiture of his inner man. He was naturally of a
grave, but not by any means of an unsocial or gloomy disposition; he would
not otherwise have been styled “the Fenelon of Protestantism.” Dr.
Wildenhahn, whose charming work (entitled _Johannes Arndt_) embodies
strictly accurate historical notices, and derives only subordinate matter,
such as incidents in domestic life, conversations, etc., from analogy and
a fruitful imagination, exhibits him in the true light, as an affectionate
husband, a cheerful companion, a generous and self-sacrificing friend of
the sick and the poor—in short, as a model in all the relations of life.
There is no exaggeration in this language. He possessed great firmness of
character; indeed, a truly heroic spirit dwelt in him. He manifested this
trait on many trying occasions—not only when he preferred poverty and
exile to a denial of a single Gospel truth or Lutheran usage, but also in
many other scenes of conflict. The ravages of the pestilence could not
alarm his heroic soul; the open and violent denunciations of enemies he
always encountered in the spirit of Him who said: “If I have spoken evil,
bear witness of the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?” (John 18:23.)
There was a certain calmness or gentleness in his manner of treating his
enemies, which, combined with his earnestness and candor in repelling
their calumnies, invariably subdued them. Love—love, not to the amiable
and good, or to the poor and sorrowing alone, but also to his enemies—was
too often and too variously manifested, to leave the spectator in doubt
respecting its true source—a genuine faith in Christ, and deep, ardent
love to Him. In truth, it is here that the peculiar type of his religion
is seen; he lived more in heaven than on earth. The sacerdotal prayer of
Christ (John, Chap. 17) was an unfailing source of light, of hope, of
peace and joy to his soul. Expressions like these, “As thou, Father, art
in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us” (ver. 21)—“I in
them, and thou in me, etc.” (ver. 23), and language like that of Paul:
“Christ in you, etc.” (Col. 1:27), furnished him virtually with the
formula: “Christ in me, and I in Christ.” Such was his faith in Christ,
and such was his love to Him, that he was always calm and hopeful. Hence
features appeared in his religious character which his worldly-minded
contemporaries could not fully appreciate; they were formed by two
different series of Gospel doctrines, which cannot come in conflict, but
which relate to two entirely different objects—Christ, the Saviour, and
fallen man. No one more sincerely embraced the doctrine of Original Sin,
as held by the Lutheran Church, than Arndt did; of this his writings
furnish the evidence. His own searching self-examination, constantly
maintained in the light of Scripture, revealed to him the utter corruption
of his own heart by nature; he found nothing in himself but sin. He was
conscious that he could do nothing without Christ, and deeply felt that
grace—nothing but grace—could renew his nature, and save him. These
convictions induced him to insist with such earnestness, in his Four
Books, on the true and genuine repentance of the sinner. At the same time,
there was nothing like sternness, gloom, or despondency connected with his
sincere and profound self-abasement. For he received with equal strength
of faith another series of truths—he believed with all his heart that
“after the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not
by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy
he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy
Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
that being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to
the hope of eternal life.” Tit. 3:4-7. Here a new tide of emotions flowed
through his soul. Wonder, joy, gratitude, love, took possession of him.
His large heart was full of happiness that the lost could be found and
saved—that “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.” Rom. 5:20.
And now, when these two distinct principles appear in him in their
practical union, the type of his religion is clearly developed. He was
grave and earnest, humble, and free from all confidence in himself, for he
was “by nature a child of wrath.” Eph. 2:3. But, on the other hand, God
had, in pity and in love, given him a Saviour, engrafted him in that
Saviour through Holy Baptism, bestowed on him the fulness of grace, and
invited him, as a repentant, believing, pardoned child of Adam, to enter
heaven. If sin abounded through the first Adam, grace did, through the
second Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), much more abound. His writings, therefore, now
assume a very cheerful character—_love_ is the prevailing theme. Nothing
morose appears in them—sorrow for sin and repentance—faith in Christ and
love to him, are his soul-inspiring themes, and a cheerful spirit, a sense
of fervent, joyful gratitude to God, a heavenly calm, pervade alike his
heart and its language as uttered in the “True Christianity.”
§ 27. The essential features of vital godliness are always the same; yet
“there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.” 1 Cor. 12:4. Paul
insists on faith; John, on love. Luther’s religion was, like that of
Arndt, earnest, and yet cheerful. Both were enabled by their personal
experience to understand the nature of these Christian virtues, and also
the distinction between them. Luther dwells with wonderful power on
_faith_. Arndt delights to speak of God’s _love_. There is something very
beautiful in these different developments of true godliness in the
servants of Christ, while the influences of the same divine Spirit
controls them alike.
§ 28. It would be an error to suppose that the whole world had risen up in
arms against Arndt, after he had assumed his position as an humble and
devout Christian. Vast numbers received his First Book on True
Christianity with gratitude and joy. It enlightened their minds; it
controlled the conscience; it diffused the warmth of life through their
souls; and they thanked God that such a book, so full of love, had been
given to the world. A comparatively small number of men rose up against
him. Certain individuals, such as his colleague, Denecke, a co-pastor of
the same congregation in Brunswick, were, no doubt, influenced by envy and
personal dislike. But others who opposed him, were by no means governed
solely by unworthy personal considerations. Some of them were so much
concerned about “questions and strifes of words” (1 Tim. 6:4), that they
overlooked and misconceived the heavenly-mindedness of Arndt. Others, who
did him injustice, were led astray by the infelicity of the times. We have
already referred to the disastrous influences of the mysticism and
fanaticism which, in addition to other corruptions of the true faith, had
appeared about, and after, the period of the birth of Arndt. For instance,
the Swiss physician, Paracelsus (who died as a Roman Catholic in 1541),
had published various fantastic and mystical writings, in which he
professed that he understood both mundane and supermundane mysteries. Now
a certain Lutheran pastor in Saxony, named Weigel, who died in 1588, and
who had been confessedly a man of an upright walk and conversation, had
yielded to a tendency to the mysticism and theosophy of Paracelsus. He was
thus led theoretically to undervalue the doctrines of the church, and to
represent them as merely allegorical forms, involving truths not known to
ordinary men. The natural results of his theory, if its folly had not been
exposed, would unquestionably have seriously affected the authority of the
written Word. Before his writings were published, a friend had
communicated to Arndt a short extract from them, which contained none of
his errors; the author’s name had been withheld. Arndt, in his innocence,
inserted the passage in his book, and was thus burdened with the odium of
all the Weigelian errors; but he was subsequently released from all
censure, and his freedom from anything like the mysticism of Weigel was
generally conceded.
§ 29. Another ground of the charge of mysticism which his opponents
advanced, was found in his repeated references in the “True Christianity”
to Tauler. Here, too, Arndt made a brilliant defence, by quoting the great
Luther as his authority. The latter had obtained possession of a
manuscript without a title or an author’s name, which deeply interested
him. It dwelt entirely on the communion of the soul with God, and on
kindred topics. Luther, whose godliness was healthy and sound, was so much
charmed with the work, that he published a part of it at Wittenberg in
1516, and prefixed the title: “A spiritual, noble little work, explaining
the distinction between the old and the new man; showing, also, who are
the children of Adam and the children of God, and how Adam must die in us,
and Christ live in us.” During the course of the next year he published
the whole work, with an extended Preface of his own, and adopted the
title: “A German Theology”; this general title it has since retained. It
was received with unbounded favor, and circulated rapidly throughout
Europe, for instance, in three English, seven Latin, four French, etc.,
translations, besides numerous editions of the original German. It was
supposed to have been written by Tauler, a very devout man, who was born
in the year 1290. His religious tendencies led him, like Luther, to enter
a monastery. The sermons and other writings which he left behind, while
their general character assign to him a place among those who are
denominated “Mystics,” nevertheless abound in holy and devout aspirations,
and were dictated by a spirit that sought and found peace in the grace of
God alone.—Arndt entertained the opinion that the “German Theology” was a
production of his pen, and so represents the case in his “True
Christianity.” It is now, however, generally conceded, in consequence of
an allusion in the work itself to Tauler as a religious teacher of an
earlier day, that another person, belonging to a later period, was the
writer; his name is still involved in impenetrable darkness.—So, too, it
is by no means certain that Thomas á Kempis (born in 1380), was the author
of the popular book “On the Imitation of Christ,” of which more than two
thousand editions in the original language, more than one thousand in
French, besides innumerable others in German, English, etc., have been
published. The historical arguments, adduced chiefly by French writers,
intended to support the claims of the eminent Gerson (born in 1363), as
the author, although not entirely conclusive, are still possessed of great
weight.—Arndt incidentally remarks in a brief statement respecting the
“German Theology,” that his copy, printed at Wittenberg in 1520, contained
simply the remark that the book had been written by a devout priest of the
city of Frankfort, for devotional purposes, but the author’s name was
withheld. If Luther sanctioned the publication of the “German Theology,”
Arndt could calmly listen to those who censured him for adopting a similar
course. Those extracts at least, which he furnishes in the “True
Christianity,” are, unquestionably, evangelical and truly edifying.
§ 30. It will, perhaps, gratify the reader to observe the skill with which
Wildenhahn, to whom we have already referred, illustrates the childlike
simplicity of Arndt’s character, by combining fiction with truth. During
his Brunswick pastorate, the City Council of Halberstadt sent him an
urgent call to become the successor of the deceased Rev. D. Sachse, as
pastor of the church of St. Martin in that city. After he had consulted
with his intelligent wife, who, like himself, was anxious to withdraw to
any spot where peace could be found, he resolved to accept the call; and,
in accordance with custom and law, applied to the Brunswick City Council
for letters of honorable dismission. When the question was to be decided,
Arndt appeared in the presence of the burgomaster, Kale, the syndic, Dr.
Roerhand, and other members of the Council, and renewed his request. These
details are historically true. Wildenhahn now subjoins the following:
“Tell me honestly,” said the syndic to him, “have you really, as you
allege, taken no steps whatever, in order to obtain this call from
Halberstadt?” “Not a single step,” said Arndt, in a solemn manner, with
his right hand on his heart, “the whole is altogether and exclusively a
work of God.” But at the moment when he pronounced this solemn
declaration, it became evident to those who were present, that a sudden
thought had startled him; he changed color; he began to tremble; he
suddenly covered his eyes with his left hand. Then, with a voice betraying
deep emotion, he added: “Gentlemen, I have borne false witness! I really
did do something to obtain this call.” “Ah!” said Kale quickly, delighted,
as it seemed, to find an opportunity for displaying his official dignity,
“You did? Pray, tell us what it was.” “I prayed to the blessed Lord with
tears, that he would assign to me some other spot in his vineyard, no
matter how insignificant, if I could only there preach his word in peace.”
“And was _that_ all?” inquired the burgomaster, much surprised, and
speaking in more gentle tones. “That was all,” replied Arndt, “and this is
true, as God lives! But, doubtless, I erred here, in impatiently
attempting to dictate to God, etc.” Such simplicity of character, such
perfect ingenuousness, such a wonderful freedom from artifice and
disguise, completely disarmed the members of the Council. They now
understood better than previously the artlessness and spirituality of the
man before them, and, after that scene, they accorded to him entire esteem
and confidence.
§ 31. The great work of Arndt—the “True Christianity,” has probably never
had its equal as a popular book of devotion. Tholuck relates the following
anecdote as an illustration of the manner in which even Papists could
appreciate the merits of the work. When Prof. Anton, of Halle, visited
Madrid in 1687, he examined the library of the Jesuits, and incidentally
inquired of the librarian respecting the ascetic writer whom they esteemed
more than other authors of devotional works. The latter exhibited a Latin
book, the title-page and last leaves of which were wanting, and declared
that it was the most edifying work which they possessed. When Anton
examined it, he discovered that it was a translation of Arndt’s “_True
Christianity_”! It is only common justice to allow the author to state the
objects which he had in view, in preparing the work. The following passage
occurs in a letter which he addressed in the last year of his life to Duke
Augustus the Younger, of Brunswick: “In the first place, I wished to
withdraw the minds of students and preachers from an inordinate
controversial and polemic theology, which has well-nigh assumed the form
of an earlier scholastic theology. Secondly, I purposed to conduct
Christian believers from lifeless thoughts to such as might bring forth
fruit. Thirdly, I wished to guide them onward from mere science and
theory, to the actual practice of faith and godliness; and, fourthly, to
show them wherein a truly Christian life consists, which accords with the
true faith, as well as to explain the apostle’s meaning when he says: ‘I
live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me,’ etc.” (Gal. 2:20.)
§ 32. The Rev. Dr. Seiss, the author of “Ecclesia Lutherana, etc.,” to
whose endeavors the religious public is mainly indebted for the appearance
of the present edition, remarks in a recent notice of the work: “This is
one of the very greatest and most useful practical books produced by
Protestantism. Though written more than two hundred and fifty years ago,
it is still unsurpassed in its department. It stands out with marked and
superior distinction in the modern ages. Next to the Bible and Luther’s
Small Catechism, it has been more frequently printed, more widely read,
and more influential for good, than any other book, perhaps, that has ever
been written. Boehm has not exaggerated, when he says that its effects, in
the conversion of souls, has been such, that an account of them would make
a history in itself. Nor can any one candidly read it, without finding on
every page, scintillations of the sunlike splendors of a mind bathed in
the purity, wisdom, and love of heaven.” Mr. Boehm, in the Preface to his
translation (which is the basis both of the revision of Mr. Jacques, and
of the present edition), remarks, that among the learned men in Great
Britain, who had read the Latin translation, the distinguished Dr.
Worthington had assigned the first rank among devotional writers to Arndt,
and quotes the enthusiastic terms in which he extols that “faithful
servant of God, John Arndt.” And Mr. Jacques closes the Preface to his
revision with the following words: “Divines of all communions and
persuasions, have united in their admiration of this delightful
production. The late learned Dr. Edward Williams has inserted it in his
valuable Appendix to the Christian Preacher: and the Rev. John Wesley made
a most copious extract from it, comprised in Vol. I. and II. of his
Christian Library.”
§ 33. And truly God did not design this great work solely for the comfort
and aid of the German nation during the Thirty Years’ War (1618-1648), but
for all nations and all times. It has been translated into the Latin,
Danish, Swedish, Bohemian, Polish, Low Dutch, English, French, Turkish,
Russian, Malabar, Tamul, etc., languages. At least two editions of the
work in a Latin translation were published in England; the last appeared
in 1708, with the following title: “Joannis Arndtii, Theologici, etc.: De
vero Christianismo. Libri IV. Cura et studio A. W. Boemi. Lond. 1708.” 2
vols. 8vo.—Another Latin edition was published in Germany in 1624. The
Tamul translation had the following Latin title: “De vero Christianismo,
in Tamulicum convertit Benjamin Schulzius, Missionarius Evangelicus.”(2)
§ 34. The work had made so deep an impression on learned British
Christians, who read it in Latin, that the wish was repeatedly and
earnestly expressed that it might be made accessible to English readers.
At this period, that is, during the reign of Queen Anne of England (who
died in 1714), large numbers of German emigrants from the Palatinate
passed through England on their way to the provinces of New York and
Pennsylvania. The Rev. Anthony William Boehm, a German Lutheran clergyman,
had previously been appointed as the court chaplain of Prince George of
Denmark, the consort of Queen Anne. His enlightened zeal and devout heart
led him to take a deep interest, not only in the temporal, but also in the
spiritual welfare of these pilgrims, who were on their way to the wilds of
North America. He accordingly supplied them, by the aid of certain
like-minded friends, with German Bibles and Hymn Books, and also with
German copies of Arndt’s “True Christianity,” as well as with other books
of devotion. This interesting fact is mentioned in the letters of Dr.
Muhlenberg, published in the well-known _Halle Reports_ (_Hallische
Nachrichten_, pp. 665, 793). But Mr. Boehm also resolved to furnish the
people, in the midst of whom he lived, with the great work of his favorite
author, in their own language, and accordingly prepared an English
translation, which was first printed in London in 1712.
§ 35. It would be unjust to the memory of this excellent man, if we should
fail to refer to his literary labors. His high office at the royal court
of England, is an evidence of his personal merit. He was not only a devout
and faithful preacher of the Gospel, but also an author who acquired
distinction. In 1734 he published a very valuable work in the German
language, entitled: “Eight Books, on the Reformation of the Church in
England, extending from the year 1526, under Henry VIII., to the reign of
Charles II.” In a very beautiful eulogy, in manuscript, found in the
volume before us, the writer refers to the successful efforts of Mr. Boehm
to provide for the education of the children of the poor in his vicinity.
He died May 27, 1722, in his fiftieth year, after having faithfully
labored in the service of Christ. He sustained, with eminent success, the
Danish Lutheran missionaries in Tranquebar, by sending pecuniary aid
obtained in London, as well as religious publications. Besides his great
German historical work, which is the complement of Burnet’s “History of
the Reformation of the Church of England,” he also published several
English compositions, such as a “Sermon on the doctrine of Original Sin,
Eph. 4:22,” printed in London, 1711, and a “Sermon on the Duty of the
Reformation (Jubilee), Rev. 18:4,” London, 1718, besides various religious
works in the German language.
§ 36. About the beginning of the present century, the Rev. Calvin
Chaddock, who resided in Hanover, Massachusetts, obtained a copy of Mr.
Boehm’s translation, “accidentally,” as he says, and found it to be so
valuable, that he resolved to issue an American edition, which accordingly
appeared in 1809, Boston. In his short Preface he remarks, with great
truth, that the language of the translation “appears to be somewhat
ancient, and the sentiments in some few instances obscure.” He adds, in
reference to his own agency: “The only alterations which have been made,
are such as respect redundant and obsolete words, orthography, the
addition of some words, and the transposition of some sentences; that the
ideas of the translator might appear more conspicuous.” He might have,
with great advantage, been even more liberal than he was, in correcting
the style; it still remained in numerous passages heavy and obscure. As
the style, even of the original German, is somewhat antiquated, and as,
besides, occasional obscurities and repetitions occur, a later successor
in one of Arndt’s pastoral charges, the Rev. J. F. Fedderson, assumed the
task of revising and abridging the whole of the original German, improving
or modernizing the style, and occasionally adding new matter. The result
of his labors does not appear to have received the entire approbation of
the German religious world; the original and unaltered work continues so
popular, that no permanent place has been secured for the substitute. A
portion of Fedderson’s production was translated and published in
Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, in 1834, by the Rev. John N. Hoffman, Pastor
of the Evangelical Lutheran congregation of that place. The translation
was never completed. The part which was given, consisting mainly of Book
I., has long since been out of print.
§ 37. In the year 1815, a new edition of Mr. Boehm’s English translation
was issued in London (evidently without any reference to Mr. Chaddock’s
American edition), by William Jacques, A.M., who had already distinguished
himself by his translation, from the Latin, of A. H. Francke’s “Guide to
the Reading and Study of the Holy Scriptures,” of which a reprint, in a
very unattractive form, and with omissions, appeared in Philadelphia, in
1823. He took Mr. Boehm’s translation as the “ground-work,” which, as he
states in his Preface, he did not “edit either hastily or negligently.
There is not a single page, nor a single paragraph,” he continues, “which
has not been subjected to scrutiny,” etc. Nevertheless, Mr. Jacques, who
does not appear to have compared the translation with the original German,
made only verbal changes, which, as it is evident, materially improve the
style. But he allowed all the additions of Mr. Boehm, which are generally
quite tautological, and various inaccuracies in thought and expression to
remain. So many antiquated expressions were retained, that it would have
been inexpedient to reprint the work precisely as Mr. Jacques allowed the
text to remain. Besides, he curtailed the full titles of the several
chapters, and, with very few exceptions, omitted the important and
appropriate texts which Arndt had prefixed respectively to the latter.
These circumstances, in connection with others, such as numerous
typographical errors, especially in the Scripture references, plainly
indicated that a revision of the whole was necessary, before the present
edition could be presented to the public.
§ 38. The editor of the present American edition took that of Mr. Jacques
as the basis of the translation, but compared every sentence with the
original German. He found some cases in which valuable matter had been
omitted, and was occasionally required to supply sentences that had been
mutilated or suppressed. But he erased all the verbal additions, and the
clauses, or sentences, inserted by Mr. Boehm, where it seemed to have been
the object of the latter only to explain remarks that were already
perfectly lucid, or to add emphasis by the insertion of adjectives, etc.,
or else to impart beauty by the adoption of poetical terms or phrases,
which were inconsistent with the severe simplicity of Arndt’s style. He
even represents the author, on one occasion, as quoting from the
“Homilies” of the Church of England, which Arndt undoubtedly never read,
and certainly does not mention in the original. The American editor has,
also, at the request of several friends, who took an interest in securing
the publication of the present edition, prepared a somewhat copious INDEX.
One of the Latin editions (London, 1708) contains an index, adapted only
to its own pages. Another, in German, is found in some of the German
editions, for instance, in that of Nuremberg, 1762, also adapted to the
pages of the particular edition only. As the American editor found none in
English, and preferred to adapt the new Index, prepared by him, to the
work itself (specifying the Book, Chapter, and Section), he accordingly
completed his task on this plan, after a considerable expenditure of time
and labor. It is somewhat difficult to prepare an Index for a work which
is so exclusively devotional in its character as the present, and in which
the author does not intend to discuss subjects in a strictly scientific
manner. Arndt, for instance, employs terms which, when defined with
precision, indicate different shades of thought, almost as if they were
synonymous (_e. g._, the _grace_, _mercy_, _goodness_, _love_, etc., of
God), and often repeats the same thought in different language. For this
we can easily account, when we recollect that the materials of the work
were taken from a series of popular sermons of the author, delivered at
intervals. The editor allows himself to hope that the Index which he has
prepared, may occasionally be of service to the reader.
§ 39. But even after having made numerous changes on _every page_ of the
old translation before him, the American editor is conscious that a
critical eye will discover many imperfections in the style. It is often
antiquated and heavy, and sometimes even quaint. Nevertheless, in all
these instances he allowed the English text to remain as he found it,
contenting himself with the correction of orthographical and syntactical
inaccuracies, the rectification of Scripture references, the errors in
which he found to be unusually numerous, the correction of quotations in
accordance with the authorized English version of the Bible, in the many
cases in which Mr. Boehm, or one of his assistants, translated from
Luther’s German version, or quoted the English version from memory, etc.,
etc.
§ 40. It is eminently proper that a new edition of Arndt’s “True
Christianity” should appear during the present Jubilee year of the
Evangelical Lutheran Church, and that it should be undertaken and
conducted to a successful issue by members of the Evangelical Lutheran
Synod of Pennsylvania. The deep spirituality of Arndt, and his active and
pure faith, can be fully understood and appreciated only when we reflect
on the doctrinal system to which he had given his heart, and to which we
have referred above. This orthodox system found no favor, at a later
period, among the Rationalists; they rejected the doctrines of the Bible
respecting the depravity of human nature, the divinity of Christ, the
efficacy of the divinely appointed means of grace, and similar truths, and
grievously complained of the violence which, as they treacherously
alleged, was offered to their conscience, when the demand was made, that
if they claimed to belong to the Lutheran Church, to occupy its pulpits,
and to receive their support from it, they ought also to adopt its faith.
Their influence is happily decaying in Europe, and the restoration of the
doctrines of the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church to
authority, is coincident with the new and healthy religious life of the
Lutheran Church in Germany, Hungary, Scandinavia, and Russia. The sincere
Christian, John Arndt, whom we heard protesting before God, with his last
breath, as described above, that he believed only the doctrines of the
Symbolical Books of the Lutheran Church, and _all_ those doctrines, little
thought that more than two centuries afterwards, in the remote Western
continent of America, men would arise who would not only reject with scorn
“all the other Symbolical Books,” which he revered, but also speak
contemptuously of the Augsburg Confession and its holy doctrines.
§ 41. The doctrinal system which Arndt so sincerely revered, was brought
to this country by the Lutheran pastors who visited our shores at a very
early period. Dr. Henry Melchior Muhlenberg, an eminently enlightened and
holy man, was enabled, by his well-disciplined mind and great
administrative powers, to create order among the scattered Lutherans whom
he found in this country. He was exceedingly zealous in maintaining the
purity of the Lutheran faith, to which he owed all his peace and his
hopes. He gave unusual prominence to the Symbolical Books—to _all_ of
them, mentioned by name—in the various constitutions of congregations
organized or influenced by him, and very properly claimed that none who
rejected them could honestly bear the name of _Lutherans_. We will give
only one illustration, of many which might be adduced, to show the
fidelity with which he held to the Lutheran Symbolical Books, as
enumerated by Arndt in the last paragraph of his Preface to Book I., in
this volume. Dr. Muhlenberg states in an official Report for the year
1747, which he transmitted to Halle (_Hall. Nachr._, pp. 234, 235), that
he had visited a congregation in Maryland, in which great dissensions
prevailed at the time, occasioned by efforts made by certain individuals
to alienate the Lutherans from their faith and church. He says, “Before we
commenced public worship, I asked for the Church Record, and wrote certain
propositions and articles in it in the English language, and among other
statements, made the following: That our German Lutherans held to the holy
Word of God, in the prophetic and apostolical writings; further, to the
unaltered Augsburg Confession, and the other Symbolical Books, etc.(3) I
then read the same publicly to the congregation, and explained it to them
in the German language, and added, that every one who desired to be, and
to remain, _such_ a Lutheran, should subscribe his name.” He informs us
that the genuine Lutherans readily subscribed; the rest, who had
unlutheran sympathies, withheld their names.
§ 42. An unhappy change occurred after Dr. Muhlenberg’s day. The
Symbolical Books, which he and his contemporaries received, believed, and
sustained in their whole extent, with religious veneration, existed at
that time only in Latin and German. They gradually receded from the view
of many pastors of the church; individuals were received into the ranks of
the ministry, who had never studied them; doctrines and usages, hitherto
unknown to the church, were introduced into many Lutheran congregations.
At one period several of the most intelligent pastors yielded, to a
certain extent, to rationalistic influences; then, the opposite extreme,
of fanaticism, gained adherents; both rationalism and fanaticism were
alike hostile to “the unaltered Augsburg Confession and the other
Symbolical Books,” and a strange combination of elements, derived partly
from rationalism, and partly from fanaticism, temporarily held sway.
Dependence was now placed on human measures and inventions, designed for
the conversion of sinners and the edification of believers, rather than on
the divinely appointed means of grace, which men like Arndt and Muhlenberg
recognized as the only channels through which the Divine Spirit exercises
his influence. If they had lived among us during the second, third, and
fourth decades of this century, when their doctrines, and their mode of
preaching, were regarded by many as antiquated, or unsuited to a supposed
higher grade of religious development, they would have readily predicted
the results—fanaticism, latitudinarianism in doctrine, an evanescent
emotional religion, and, by consequence, the rejection, in whole or in
part, of the Augsburg Confession and the other Symbolical Books.
§ 43. God, in his mercy, has interposed. The doctrines which Arndt,
Muhlenberg, and men of the old faith, regarded as the life-blood of a
healthy, scriptural religion, are regaining their authority. Many still
reject them; the old faith of the church—Bible truth, is unwelcome to an
ignorant, rationalistic, and unconverted heart. But others have been
taught by observation and experience that mere human measures and
inventions cannot conduct to a healthy and permanent religion, and that
divine truth, as taught in the Scriptures, and set forth in our Symbolical
Books, and the other means of grace given to the Church by its divine
Head, are the only sources from which such a healthy religion can proceed.
In this spirit Arndt wrote the “True Christianity,” and by this spirit the
Synod of Pennsylvania is animated. This ecclesiastical body desires to
take away all glory from man, and to give it all to Christ. One of the
results of its attachment to our ancient and holy faith, is the
publication of the present volume, in which the author so eloquently and
affectionately urges all men to repent, to believe in Christ, and to lead
a holy life.
§ 44. The divine blessing has so remarkably attended the use of Arndt’s
“True Christianity,” in the original language, and in its various
translations, that the present editor humbly entertains the hope that the
time and labor expended by him in preparing this new edition, may also be
of avail. And he prays that the “True Christianity” may continue the work
which it has already performed, and instruct, guide, and comfort anew the
souls of its readers, to the praise and glory of God.
C. F. S.
PHILADELPHIA, August, 1868.
BOOK I.
Wherein True Christianity, Sincere Sorrow For Sin, Repentance, Faith, And
The Holy Life Of The True Christian, Are Considered.
The Author’s Preface To The First Book.
Christian Reader! That the holy Gospel is subjected, in our age, to a
great and shameful abuse, is fully proved by the ungodly and impenitent
life of those who loudly boast of Christ and of his word, while their
unchristian life resembles that of persons who dwell in a land of heathens
and not of Christians. Such an ungodly course of conduct furnished me with
an occasion for writing this Treatise; it was my object to show to plain
readers wherein true Christianity consists, namely, in the exhibition of a
true, living, and active faith, which manifests itself in genuine
godliness and the fruits of righteousness. I desired to show that we bear
the name of _Christians_, not only because we ought to believe in Christ,
but also because the name implies that we live in Christ, and that He
lives in us. I further desired to show that true repentance proceeds from
the inmost centre of the heart; that the heart, mind, and affections must
be changed; that we must be conformed to Christ and His holy Gospel; and
that we must be renewed by the word of God, and become new creatures. For
even as every seed produces fruit of a like nature, so the word of God
must daily produce in us new spiritual fruits. If we become new creatures
by faith, we must live in accordance with our new birth. In a word, Adam
must die, and Christ must live, in us. It is not sufficient to acquire a
knowledge of the word of God; it is also our duty to obey it practically,
with life and power.
2. There are many who suppose that Theology is merely a science, or an art
of words, whereas it is a living experience and practical exercise.—Every
one now aims at acquiring eminence and distinction in the world; but no
one is willing to learn how to be devout. Every one now seeks out men of
great learning, who can teach arts, languages, and wisdom; but no one is
willing to learn from our only Teacher, Jesus Christ, how to become meek
and sincerely humble; and yet His holy and living example is the true rule
for our life and conduct, and, indeed, constitutes the highest wisdom and
knowledge; so that we can with truth declare, “The pure life of Christ
opens all knowledge to us.”
3. Every one is very willing to be a servant of Christ; but no one will
consent to be His follower. And yet He says: “If any man serve me, let him
follow me.” John 12:26. Hence, he who truly serves and loves Christ, will
also follow him; and he who loves Christ, will also love the example of
His holy life, His humility, meekness, patience, as well as the cross,
shame, and contempt which He endured, although the flesh may thereby
suffer pain. And although we cannot, in our present weakness, perfectly
imitate the holy and exalted life of Christ (which, indeed, is not
intended in my Book), nevertheless, we ought to love it, and long to
imitate it more fully; for thus we live in Christ, and Christ lives in us,
according to the words of St. John: “He that saith he abideth in him ought
himself also so to walk, even as he walked.” 1 John 2:6. It is now the
disposition of the world to acquire a knowledge of all things; but that
which is better than all other knowledge, namely, “to know the love of
Christ” (Eph. 3:19), no one desires to acquire. But no man can love
Christ, who does not imitate his holy life. There are many—a majority,
indeed, of men in this world—who are ashamed of the holy example of
Christ, namely, of his humility and lowly condition; that is, they are
ashamed of the Lord Jesus Christ; of them he says: “Whosoever shall be
ashamed of me and of my words, in this adulterous and sinful generation,
of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed,” etc. Mark 8:38. Christians
now desire a Christ of imposing appearance, who is magnificent, rich, and
conformed to the world; but no one desires to receive, to confess, and to
follow the poor, meek, despised, and lowly Christ. He will, therefore,
hereafter say: “I never knew you” (Matt. 7:23); ye were not willing to
know me in my humility, and therefore I do not know you in your pride.
4. Not only, however, is ungodliness, in all its forms, at variance with
Christ and true Christianity, but it is also the cause of the daily
accumulation of the displeasure of God, and of the penalties which he
inflicts; insomuch that he fits all creatures to be avengers, and that
heaven and earth, fire and water, are made to contend against us; so that
all nature is thereby sorely distressed, and well-nigh overwhelmed. Hence,
a season of affliction must be expected; war, famine, and pestilence; yea,
the last plagues are coming in with such violence, that we are exposed to
the assaults of nearly every creature. For even as the terrible plagues of
the Egyptians overtook them before the redemption and departure of the
children of Israel from Egypt, so, too, before the redemption of the
children of God occurs, dreadful and unheard-of plagues will overtake the
ungodly and impenitent. It is therefore high time to repent, to begin
another course of life, to turn from the world to Christ, to believe truly
in him, and to lead a Christian life in him, so that we may securely
“dwell in the secret place of the Most High, and abide under the shadow of
the Almighty.” Ps. 91:1. Such is also the exhortation of the Lord: “Watch
ye therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape
all these things.” Luke 21:36. The same is also testified in Ps. 112:7.
5. Now, to this end, my Christian reader, this book may, to a certain
extent, serve thee as a guide, showing thee not only how thou mayest,
through faith in Christ, obtain the remission of thy sins, but also how
thou mayest avail thyself of the grace of God, in order to lead a holy
life; and how thou mayest demonstrate and adorn thy faith by a Christian
walk and conversation. For true Christianity consists, not in words, nor
in any external show, but in a living faith, from which proceed fruits
meet for repentance, and all manner of Christian virtues, as from Christ
himself. For as faith is hidden from human view, and is invisible, it must
be manifested by its fruits; inasmuch as faith derives from Christ all
that is good, righteous, and blessed.
6. Now, when faith waits for the blessings which are promised to it, the
offspring of this faith is _hope_. For what else is hope but a constant
and persevering expectation, in faith, of the blessings which are
promised? But when faith communicates to a neighbor the blessings which it
has itself received, _love_ is the offspring of such a faith, imparting to
the neighbor that which it has itself received from God; and when faith
endures the trial of the cross, and submits to the will of God, it brings
forth _patience_. But when it sighs under the burden of the cross, or
offers thanks to God for mercies which it has received, it gives birth to
_prayer_. When it compares the power of God, on the one hand, with the
misery of man, on the other, and submits unresistingly to the will of God,
_humility_ is the fruit. And when this faith diligently labors that it may
not lose the grace of God, or, as St. Paul says: “worketh out salvation
with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12), then the _fear of God_ is the
result.
7. Thus thou seest that all the Christian virtues are the offspring of
faith, proceed from faith, and cannot be separated from faith, their
common source, if they are indeed genuine, living, and Christian virtues,
proceeding ultimately from God, from Christ, and from the Holy Spirit.
Hence no work can be acceptable to God without faith in Christ. For how
can true hope, sincere love, persevering patience, earnest prayer,
Christian humility, and a childlike fear of God, exist without faith? All
must be drawn from Christ, the well of salvation (Isa. 12:3), through
faith, as well righteousness, as all the fruits of righteousness. But take
great care, my reader, that thou do not connect thy works, the virtues
which thou hast commenced to practise, or the gifts of the new life, with
thy justification before God. For in this matter, man’s works, merit,
gifts, and virtue, however lovely these may appear to be, have no
efficacy; our justification depends solely on the exalted and perfect
merit of Jesus Christ, apprehended by faith, even as it is set forth in
chap. V, XIX, XXXIV, and XLI, of this book, and in the first three
chapters of Book II. Take great care, therefore, not to confound the
righteousness of faith, on the one hand, and the righteousness of a
Christian life, on the other; but rather to make a clear distinction
between them; for here the whole foundation of our Christian religion is
involved. Still, thy repentance must be the great concern of thy life, for
otherwise thou hast no true faith, such as daily purifies, changes, and
amends the heart. Thou must, moreover, know that the consolations of the
Gospel cannot be effectually applied, unless they have been preceded by a
genuine godly sorrow, the result of which is a bruised and contrite heart;
for we read that “to the poor the gospel is preached.” Luke 7:22. How,
indeed, can faith give life to the heart, unless that heart has been
previously put to death by sincere sorrow and a thorough knowledge of sin?
Do not, therefore, imagine that repentance is a slight and easy work.
Remember the solemn and severe language of the Apostle Paul, when he
commands us to mortify and crucify the flesh, with the affections and
lusts, to offer the body as a sacrifice, to die unto sin, to be crucified
unto the world. Col. 3:5; Rom. 6:6; 12:1; 1 Pet. 2:24; Gal. 5:24; 6:14.
Truly, none of these things can result, when we gratify the flesh. Nor do
the holy prophets employ cheerful terms when they call for a contrite and
broken heart, and say: “Rend your heart—weep and lament.” Joel 2:13, 17;
Jer. 4:8. But where is such repentance now exhibited? The Lord Jesus
Christ, when alluding to it, demands that we should deny ourselves, and
renounce all that we have, if we desire to be his disciples. Luke 9:23;
Matt. 16:24. Verily, all this can never proceed from a gay, trifling, and
light mind; of this the evidence may be found in the seven Penitential
Psalms of David. The Scriptures abound in illustrations of the jealousy of
God, who demands both repentance and its fruits, without which eternal
salvation cannot be obtained. But afterwards the consolations of the
Gospel manifest their power. And both such repentance, and such
consolation, are solely the work of the Spirit of God, through the Word.
8. Now this Book which I have written, specially treats of such sincere
and earnest repentance of the heart, of the exhibition of faith in the
life and conduct, and of the spirit of love which should animate all the
acts of the Christian; for that which proceeds from Christian love, is, at
the same time, the fruit of faith. It is true that I have referred to some
earlier writers, such as Tauler, Thomas á Kempis, and others, who may seem
to ascribe more than is due to human ability and works; but my whole Book
is designed to counteract such an error. I would, therefore, kindly
request the Christian reader to remember the great object for which I
wrote this Book. He will find that its main purpose is this: To teach the
reader how to perceive the hidden and connate abomination of Original Sin;
to set forth distinctly our misery and helplessness; to teach us to put no
trust in ourselves or our ability; to take away everything from ourselves,
and to ascribe all to Christ, so that He alone may dwell in us, work all
things in us, alone live in us, and create all things in us, because he is
the beginning, middle, and end, of our conversion and salvation. All this
has been plainly and abundantly explained in many passages of this Book;
and, at the same time, the doctrines of the Papists, Synergists, and
Majorists, have been expressly refuted and rejected. The doctrine,
moreover, of justification by faith, has been set forth in this Book, and
especially in Book II., in the most pointed and explicit manner. In order,
however, to obviate all misapprehensions, I have subjected the present
edition to a very careful revision, and I beg the reader to receive the
editions which have appeared in Frankfort and other places, in the sense
in which the present Magdeburg edition is to be received. I also affirm,
that this Book, as well in all other articles and points, as also in the
articles of Free Will, and of the Justification of a poor sinner before
God, is not to be understood in any other manner than in accordance with
the Symbolical Books of the churches of the Augsburg Confession, namely,
the first UNALTERED AUGSBURG CONFESSION, the APOLOGY, the SMALCALD
ARTICLES, the TWO CATECHISMS of Luther, and the FORMULA OF CONCORD.
May God enlighten us all by his Holy Spirit, so that we may be sincere and
without offence, both in our faith and in our life, till the day of Christ
(which is near at hand), being filled with the fruits of righteousness,
unto the glory and praise of God! Amen.
Chapter I.
Showing What The Image Of God In Man Is.
_Be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and ... put on the new
man, which after God is created in righteousness and true
holiness._—EPH. 4:23, 24.
The image of God in man, is the conformity of the soul of man, of his
spirit and mind, of his understanding and will, and of all his faculties
and powers, both bodily and mental, to God and the Holy Trinity. For the
decree of the Holy Trinity was thus expressed: “_Let us_ make man in our
image, after our likeness,” etc. Gen., 1:26.
2. It is evident, therefore, that, when man was created, the image of the
Trinity was impressed on him, in order that the holiness, righteousness,
and goodness of God, might shine forth in his soul; diffuse abundant light
through his understanding, will, and affections; and visibly appear even
in his life and conversation: that, consequently, all his actions, both
inward and outward, might breathe nothing but divine love, purity, and
power, and, in short, that the life of man upon earth might resemble that
of the angels in heaven, who are always engaged in doing the will of their
Heavenly Father. In thus impressing his image on man, God designed to
delight and rejoice in him, just as a father rejoices in a child born
after his own image: for as a parent, beholding himself, or _another
self_, in his offspring, cannot but feel the greatest complacency and
delight; so, when God beheld the express character of his own Person
reflected in an image of himself, his “delights were with the sons of
men.” Prov. 8:31. Thus it was God’s chief pleasure to look on man, in whom
he rejoiced, and rested, as it were, from all his labor; considering him
as the great _masterpiece_ of his creation, and knowing that in the
perfect innocence and beauty of man, the excellency of his own glory would
be fully set forth. And this blessed communion our first parents and their
posterity were always to have enjoyed, had they continued in the likeness
of God, and rested in him and in his will; who, as he was their author,
was also to be their end.
3. It undoubtedly is the essential property of every image, that it be a
just representation of the object which it is intended to express; and as
the reflection in a mirror is vivid in a degree proportioned to the
clearness of the mirror itself, so the image of God becomes more or less
visible, according to the purity of the soul in which it is beheld.
4. Hence God originally created man perfectly pure and undefiled; that so
the divine image might be beheld in him, not as an empty, lifeless shadow
in a glass, but as a true and living image of the invisible God, and as
the likeness of his inward, hidden, and unutterable beauty. There was an
image of the wisdom of God, in the _understanding_ of man; of his
goodness, gentleness, and patience, in the _spirit_ of man; of his divine
love and mercy, in the _affections_ of man’s heart. There was an image of
the righteousness and holiness, the justice and purity of God, in the
_will_ of man; of his kindness, clemency, and truth, in all the _words_
and _actions_ of man; of his almighty power, in man’s _dominion_ over the
earth, and inferior creatures; and lastly, there was an image of God’s
eternity, in the _immortality_ of the human soul.
5. From the divine image thus implanted in him, man should have acquired
the knowledge both of _God_ and of _himself_. Hence he might have learned,
that God, his Creator, is all in all, the Being of beings, and the chief
and only BEING, from whom all created beings derive their existence, and
in whom, and by whom, all things that are, subsist. Hence, also, he might
have known, that God, as the Original of man’s nature, is all that
_essentially_, of which he himself was but the image and representation.
For since man was to bear the image of the divine goodness, it follows
that God is the sovereign and universal goodness _essentially_ (Matt.
19:17); and, consequently, that God is essential love, essential life, and
essential holiness, to whom alone (because he is all this _essentially_),
worship and praise, honor and glory, might, majesty, dominion, and virtue,
are to be ascribed: whereas these do not appertain to the creature, nor
belong to anything but God alone.
6. From this image of the Divine Being, man should further have acquired
the knowledge of _himself_. He should have considered what a vast
difference there was between God and himself. Man is not God, but God’s
_image_; and the image of God ought to represent nothing but God. He is a
portraiture of the Divine Being; a character, an image, in which God alone
should be seen and glorified. Nothing therefore ought to live in man,
besides God. Nothing but the Divinity should stir, will, love, think,
speak, act, or rejoice in him. For if anything besides God live or work in
man, he ceases to be the image of God; and becomes the image of that which
thus lives and acts within him. If therefore a man would become, and
continue to be, the image of God, he must wholly surrender himself to the
Divine Being, and submit entirely to his will; he must suffer God to work
in him whatsoever he pleases; so that, by denying his own will, he may do
the will of his Heavenly Father without reserve, being entirely resigned
to God, and willing to become a holy instrument in his hands, to do his
will and his work. Such a man follows not his _own_ will, but the will of
God; he loves not himself, but God; seeks not his own honor, but the honor
of God. He covets no estates nor affluence for himself, but refers all to
the Supreme Good; and so being contented to possess him, rises above the
love of the creature and the world. And thus ought man to divest himself
of all love of himself and the world, that God alone may be all in him,
and work all in him, by his Holy Spirit. Herein consisted the perfect
innocence, purity, and holiness of man. For, what greater innocence can
there be, than that a man should do, not his own will, but the will of his
Heavenly Father? Or what greater purity, than that man should suffer God
to work in him, and to do everything according to His pleasure? Or, what
greater holiness, than to become an instrument in the hands of the Spirit
of God? To resemble a child, in whose breast self-love and self-honor do
not yet prevail, is, in truth, the highest simplicity.
7. Of this entire devotedness to the Divine will, our Lord Jesus Christ,
while he sojourned in our world, was a _perfect_ example. He sacrificed
his own will to God his Father, in blameless obedience, humility, and
meekness; readily depriving himself of all honor and esteem, of all
self-interest and self-love, of all pleasure and joy; and leaving God
alone, to think, speak, and act, in him, and by him. In short, he
invariably made the will and pleasure of God his own, as the Father
himself testified by a voice from Heaven: “This is my beloved Son, in whom
I am well pleased.” Matt. 3:17. The Lord Jesus Christ, blessed forever, is
the true Image of God, in whom nothing appears but God himself, and such
manifestations as are agreeable to his nature; namely, love, mercy,
long-suffering, patience, meekness, gentleness, righteousness, holiness,
consolation, life, and everlasting blessedness: for by him, the invisible
God was willing to be discovered and made known to man. He is indeed the
image of God in a more sublime sense; that is, according to his
_Divinity_, by virtue of which, he is himself very God, the express and
essential image of his Father’s glory, in the infinite splendor of the
uncreated light. Heb. 1:3. But of this point no more can at present be
said: our design being to speak of him only as he lived and conversed in
his holy _humanity_, while he tabernacled upon the earth.
8. It was in such a holy innocence as this, that the image of God was, in
the beginning, conferred on Adam, which he should have preserved in true
humility and obedience. Sufficient it surely was for him, that he was made
capable of all the benefits of the divine image; of sincere and unmixed
love and delight; of undisturbed and solid tranquillity of mind; of power,
fortitude, peace, light, and life. But not duly reflecting that he himself
was not the _chief good_, but merely a mirror of the Godhead, formed
purposely to receive the reflection of the divine nature, he erected
himself into a _God_; and thus choosing to be the highest _good_ to
himself, he was precipitated into the greatest of all evils, being
deprived of this inestimable image, and alienated from that communion with
God, which, by virtue of it, he before enjoyed.
9. Had self-will, self-love, and self-honor, been excluded, the image of
God could not have departed from man; but the Divine Being would have
continued to be his sole glory, honor, and praise. As everything is
capable of its like and not of its contrary, and in its like acquiesces
and delights, so man, being in the similitude of God, was thereby prepared
to receive God into himself, who was also ready to communicate himself to
man, with all the treasures of his goodness; goodness being of all things
the most communicative of itself.
10. Finally, man ought to have learned from the image of God, that by
means of it he is united to God; and that in this union, his true and
everlasting tranquillity, his rest, peace, joy, life, and happiness alone
consist. He should have learned that all restlessness of mind and vexation
of spirit, arise from nothing but a breach of this union, by which he
ceases to be the image of God; for man no sooner turns to the creature,
than he is deprived of that eternal good which is to be derived from God
alone.
Chapter II.
Of The Fall Of Adam.
_As by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by the
obedience of one shall many be made righteous._—ROM. 5:19.
The fall of Adam was disobedience to God, by which man turned away from
the Divine Being to himself, and robbed God of the honor due to him alone,
in that he _himself_ thought to be _as God_. But while he thus labored to
advance himself, he was stripped of that divine image, which the Creator
had so freely conferred on him; divested of hereditary righteousness; and
bereaved of that holiness with which he was originally adorned; becoming,
as it regards his _understanding_, dark and blind; as to his _will_,
stubborn and perverse; and as to all the powers and faculties of the soul,
entirely alienated from God. This evil has infected the whole mass of
mankind, by means of a fleshly generation; and has been inherited by all
men. The obvious consequence arising from this is, that man is become
spiritually dead and the child of wrath and damnation, until redeemed from
this miserable state by Jesus Christ. Let not then any who are called
Christians deceive themselves with regard to Adam’s fall. Let them be
cautious, how they attempt to extenuate or lessen the transgression of
Adam, as though it were a small sin, a thing of little consequence, and,
at the worst, but the eating of an apple. Let them rather be assured, that
the guilt of Adam was that of Lucifer, namely, _he would be as God_: and
that it was the same most grievous, heinous, and hateful sin in both.
2. This apostasy (for it was nothing less), was, at first, generated in
the heart, and then made manifest by the eating of the forbidden fruit.
Though man was numbered with the sons of God; though he came forth from
the hands of the Almighty spotless both in body and in soul, and was the
most glorious object in the creation; though, to crown all, he was not
only a son, but the _delight_ of God; yet not knowing how to rest
satisfied with these high privileges, he attempted to invade Heaven, that
he might be yet higher; and nothing less would suffice him, than to exalt
himself like unto God. Hence, he conceived in his heart enmity and hatred
against the Divine Being, his Creator and Father, whom, had it been in his
power, he was disposed utterly to undo. Who could commit a sin more
detestable than this? or what greater abomination is there, that it was
possible to meditate?
3. Hence it was, that man became inwardly like Satan himself, bearing his
likeness in the heart; since both had now committed the same sin, both
having rebelled against the majesty of Heaven. Man no more exhibits an
image of God, but rather that of the Devil; he no longer is an instrument
in the hands of God, but is become an organ of Satan, and is thereby
rendered capable of every species of diabolical wickedness: so that,
having lost that image which was heavenly, spiritual, and divine, he is
altogether earthly, sensual, and brutish. For the devil, designing to
imprint his own image upon man, fascinated him so entirely by a train of
enticing and deceitful words, that man permitted him to sow that hateful
seed in his soul, which is hence termed the seed of the serpent; and by
which is chiefly meant, self-love, self-will, and the ambition of being as
God. On this account it is, that the Scriptures term those who are
intoxicated with self-love, “a generation of vipers.” Matt. 3:7. And all
those who are of a proud and devilish nature, “the seed (progeny) of the
serpent.” So the Almighty, addressing the serpent, says, “I will put
enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed.”
Gen. 3:15.
4. From this seed of the serpent nothing but deadly and horrible fruit can
possibly proceed; namely, Satan’s image, the children of Belial, the
children of the devil. John 8:44. As in every natural seed, how minute
soever it may be, are contained, in a most wonderful and hidden manner,
the nature and properties of the future plant, all its parts and
proportions, its branches, leaves, and flowers, in miniature; so in that
seed of the serpent, Adam’s self-love and disobedience (which has passed
unto all his posterity by a fleshly generation), there lies, as it were in
embryo, the tree of death, with its branches, leaves, and flowers, and
those innumerable fruits of unrighteousness which grow upon it. In short,
the whole image of Satan is secretly traced out there, with all its marks,
characters, and properties.
5. If we observe a little child with attention, we shall see how this
natural corruption displays itself from its very birth; and how self-will
and disobedience especially discover themselves, and break forth into
actions that effectually witness to the hidden root from which they
spring. Let us consider the child further, as it grows up to maturer
years. Observe the natural selfishness of the youth, his inbred ambition,
his thirst after worldly glory, his love of applause, his pursuit of
revenge, and his proneness to deceit and falsehood. And now these evils
multiply. Soon may be discovered in him vanity, arrogance, pride,
blasphemy, vain oaths, awful curses, frauds, skepticism, infidelity,
contempt of God and his holy Word, and disobedience to parents and
magistrates: wrath and contentiousness; hatred and envy; revenge and
murder, and all kinds of cruelty; especially if outward occasions offer
themselves, and call forth into action this latent and deadly seed, and
the various evils of Adam’s depraved nature. In proportion as such
occasions continue to present themselves, we shall observe the appearance
of other vices; wantonness, adulterous thoughts, lewd imaginations,
obscene discourses, lascivious gestures, and all “the works of the flesh:”
we shall behold drunkenness, rioting, and every species of intemperance;
fickleness, excessive wantonness, and all that can please the appetite,
the lust of the eye, and the pride of life. And besides these, there may
soon be discovered, covetousness, extortion, chicanery, sophistry,
imposture, and every description of sinister practice; together with
knavery, overreaching in trade, and, in short, the whole troop, or rather
army of sins, iniquities, and crimes, which are so various and so many,
that it is impossible to recount or declare the number of them; according
to the words of the prophet Jeremiah, “the heart is deceitful above all
things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” Ch. 17:9. And if to
those already enumerated there be added, in the last place, the seducing
and false spirits; then may be observed schisms in the church, wicked and
dangerous heresies, yea, the abjuring of God and Christ, idolatry, the
denial of the faith, hatred and persecution of the truth, the sin against
the Holy Ghost, with every kind of corruption in doctrine, perversion of
the Scriptures, and strong delusion. Now, what are all these but the image
of Satan, and the fruits of the serpent’s seed sown in man?
6. Who could ever have supposed that such a depth of wickedness and
depravity could be found in such a weak and helpless child; that so
venomous a principle, so corrupt a heart, lay hid in a babe apparently so
harmless? Who could possibly have believed this, had not man himself, by
his sinful and abominable life, by the imaginations of his thoughts (being
“only evil continually,” and desperately bent on what is bad), of his own
will brought it to light, and expressed, from his childhood, what was
before concealed as in a seed? Gen. 6:5; 8:21.
7. Oh! most vile and most accursed root! from which springs the poisonous
tree that is so fruitful in the production of every kind of plague. Oh,
seed of the serpent, most hateful, most dreadful! from which an image at
once so deformed and foul is generated; and which continually enlarges
itself, as it is excited by outward temptations and by the scandals of the
world. Full well might the blessed Jesus so solemnly and strictly forbid,
that any, by bad example, should offend little children; knowing that the
seed of the serpent lurks in them, as the deadly poison in the venomous
worm, ready to break forth into open acts of sin, whenever an occasion
presents itself.
8. Learn, then, O man! to know the fall of Adam, and the true nature of
Original Sin. Learn, if thou art wise, to discern it in thyself. Examine
it, not slightly and carelessly, but deeply, and as the importance of the
matter deserves; for this infection is greater, this depravation deeper
and more deadly, than can possibly be expressed by words, or even be
conceived in idea. “Know thyself!” and deeply consider what thou art, O
man! since the fall of thy first father; how thou, who wast in the image
of God, art become the image of Satan, an epitome of all his wicked
tendencies, and art conformed to Satan in all malice and ungodliness. For
as in the image of God all the divine virtues and properties are
contained, so in the image of the Devil, which man, by turning himself
from God, has contracted, all the vices and properties are to be found,
and the very nature of the Devil himself. For, as man, before the fall,
bore the image of the heavenly Adam, that is, was altogether heavenly,
spiritual, and divine; so, since the first apostasy, he carries about with
him the image of the earthly Adam, being inwardly earthly, carnal, and
corrupt.
9. Lo! he is become as one of the beasts of the field. For what, O fallen
man! is thy wrathfulness? and to whom does it more properly belong, to the
lion, or to man? And do not thine envy and thy greediness betray in thee
the nature of the dog and of the wolf? And with regard to thy uncleanness
and gluttony, are not these evidences of a swinish nature? Didst thou,
indeed, but rightly examine thine own breast, thou wouldst there discover
a world of unclean and noxious beasts. Even in the tongue, that “little
member,” there may be found, according to St. James, a lake of
pestilential and creeping things, a hold of every foul spirit, the cage of
every filthy and hateful bird (Isaiah 13:21; Rev. 18:2), and, in a word, a
“world of iniquity.” James 3:6. Often, alas! do we make such progress in
wickedness as to surpass in wrath and fury the beasts of prey; in
ravenousness and violence, the wolf; in subtilty and cunning, the fox; in
malice and virulence, the serpent; and in filthiness and obscenity, the
swine. Hence it was, that our Lord termed Herod a fox, and the unholy, in
general, dogs and swine; to whom that which is holy should not be given.
Luke 13:32; Matt. 7:6.
10. Whosoever, therefore, fails to correct this corruption of nature, by
being truly converted and _renewed_ in Christ Jesus, but dies in the state
which has been described, must retain, forever, this bestial and Satanical
nature. He must be arrogant, haughty, proud, and devilish, throughout
eternity. And when he shall have neglected the time of his purification
here, he shall bear about with him the image of Satan in the blackness of
darkness forever; as a testimony, that while he was in the world, he did
not live in Christ, nor was renewed after the image of God. “For without
are dogs and sorcerers, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.” Rev. 21:8;
22:15.
Chapter III.
Showing How Man Is Renewed In Christ Unto Eternal Life.
_In Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor
uncircumcision, but a new creature._—GAL. 6:15.
The _New Birth_ is a work of the Holy Ghost, by which man, of a sinner, is
made righteous; and from being a child of damnation and wrath, is made a
child of grace and salvation. This change is effected through faith, the
word of God and the Sacraments; and by it, the heart, and all the powers
and faculties of the soul (more particularly the understanding, will, and
affections), are renewed, enlightened, and sanctified in Christ Jesus, and
are fashioned after his express likeness. The new birth comprehends two
chief blessings, namely, justification, and sanctification, or the renewal
of man. Tit. 3:5.
2. The birth of every real Christian is twofold. The first is “after the
flesh,” the second, “after the spirit;” the first is from beneath, the
second from above; the first is earthly, but the second heavenly. The one
is carnal, sinful, and accursed, as descending from the first Adam by the
seed of the serpent, after the similitude and image of the Devil; and by
this, the earthly and carnal nature is propagated. The other, on the
contrary, is spiritual, holy, and blessed, as derived from the second
Adam; after the likeness of the Son of God: and by this is propagated the
heavenly and spiritual man, the seed and image of God.
3. There is therefore in the Christian a _twofold_ line of descent; and,
consequently, _two_ men, as it were, exist in one and the same person. The
fleshly lineage is derived from Adam, and the spiritual lineage from
Christ, through faith: for as the old birth of Adam is in man by nature,
even so must the new birth of Christ be in him by grace. This is the old
and new man, the old and new birth, the old and new Adam, the earthly and
heavenly image, the flesh and the Spirit, Adam and Christ in us, and also,
the outward and inward man.
4. Let us now proceed to notice how we are regenerated by Christ. As the
old birth is propagated carnally from Adam, so the new birth is
spiritually propagated from Christ, through the word of God. This word is
the seed of the new creature: for we are “born again, not of corruptible
seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth
forever.” 1 Peter 1:23. And, again, “Of his own will begat he us with the
word of truth, that we should be a kind of first-fruits of his creatures.”
James 1:18. The word of God produces faith; and faith again apprehends the
word of God, and in that word embraces Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost, by
whose spiritual efficacy and virtue man is regenerated or born anew. In
other words, regeneration is effected, in the first place, by the _Holy
Ghost_; and this is what Christ means by being “born of the Spirit” (John
3:5); secondly, by _faith_; whence it is said,—“whosoever believeth that
Jesus is the Christ, is born of God” (1 John 5:1); and thirdly, by holy
_Baptism_; according to that passage of Scripture, “Except a man be born
of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” John
3:5.
5. In Adam, man has inherited the chief evils; as sin, divine wrath,
death, Satan, hell, and damnation; but in Christ, he is restored to the
possession of the chief blessings, as righteousness, grace, blessing,
power, a heavenly life, and eternal salvation. From Adam, man inherits a
carnal spirit, and is subjected to the rule and tyranny of the evil
spirit; but from Christ, he obtains the Holy Spirit, with his gifts,
together with his comforting guidance. From Adam, man has derived an
arrogant, proud, and haughty spirit; but if he would be born again and
renewed in his mind, he must receive from Christ, by faith, an humble,
meek, and upright spirit. From Adam, man inherits an unbelieving,
blasphemous, and most ungrateful spirit; and it is his duty to obtain from
Christ a believing spirit, that will prove faithful, acceptable, and
well-pleasing to God. From Adam, a disobedient, violent and rash spirit is
inherited; but from Christ, we imbibe, through faith, the spirit of
obedience, gentleness, and modesty, and the spirit of meekness and
moderation. From Adam, we, by _nature_, inherit a spirit of wrath, enmity,
revenge, and murder; but from Christ, we, by faith, acquire the spirit of
long-suffering, love, mercy, forgiveness, and universal goodness and
benignity. From Adam, man, by nature, inherits a covetous heart, a
churlish, merciless spirit, that seeks only to profit self, and grasp at
that which is the right of another; but from Christ, is obtained, by
_faith_, the spirit of mercy, compassion, generosity, and mildness. From
Adam proceeds an unchaste, unclean, and intemperate spirit; but from
Christ, a spirit of chastity, purity, and temperance, may be obtained.
From Adam, there is communicated to man a spirit full of calumny and
falsehood; while on the other hand, he acquires from Christ the spirit of
truth, of constancy, and of integrity. Lastly, we receive from Adam a
brutish and earthly spirit; and from Christ, a spirit from above, which is
altogether heavenly and divine.
6. Hence, it behooved Christ to take upon himself our nature, and to be
conceived and anointed by the Holy Ghost, in order that we might all
receive of his fulness. It was requisite that “the Spirit of the Lord
should rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit
of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the fear of the Lord”
(Isa. 11:2), that so human nature might in him, and by him, be restored
and renewed, and that we, in him, by him, and through him, might become
new creatures. This is accomplished by receiving from Christ, the spirit
of wisdom and understanding, for the spirit of folly; the spirit of
counsel, for that of madness; the spirit of might, for that of cowardice
and fear; the spirit of knowledge, instead of our natural blindness; and
the spirit of the fear of the Lord, instead of the spirit of impiety and
infidelity.
7. It is in this heavenly change that the new life and the new creation
within us consist. For as, in Adam we are all spiritually dead, and
incapable of performing any works, except those of death and darkness; so,
in Christ, we must be made alive (1 Cor. 15:22) and do the works of light
and life. As, by a _carnal generation_, we have inherited sin from Adam;
so, by _faith_, we must inherit righteousness from Christ. As, by a
fleshly descent from Adam, pride, covetousness, lust, and all kinds of
impurity, are entailed upon us; so by the spirit of Christ, our nature
ought to be renewed, and all pride, covetousness, lust, and envy, be
mortified within us. And thus is it necessary that we should, from Christ,
derive a new spirit, heart, and mind; even as we derived from Adam our
sinful flesh.
8. With reference to this great work of regeneration, Christ is called
“the everlasting Father” (Isa. 9:6), and we are renewed in him to life
eternal, being here regenerated into his likeness, and made in him new
creatures. And if our works ever prove acceptable in the sight of God,
they must spring from this principle of the new birth; that is, from
Christ, his Spirit, and an unfeigned faith.
9. Henceforth we must live in the new birth, and the new birth in us; we
must be in Christ, and Christ in us: we must live in the spirit of Christ,
and the spirit of Christ in us. Gal. 2:20. This regeneration with its
attendant fruits, is described by St. Paul, as the being “renewed in the
spirit of our mind,” “putting off the old man,” and the being “transformed
into the image of God.” He likewise considers it as the being “renewed in
knowledge after the image of him that created us,” and “the renewing of
the Holy Ghost.” Eph. 4:23; 2 Cor. 3:18; Col. 3:10; Tit. 3:5. It is termed
by Ezekiel, “taking away the stony heart, and giving a heart of flesh.”
Ch. 11:19. Hence it appears how the regeneration of man proceeds from the
incarnation of Jesus Christ. As man, by ambition, pride, and disobedience,
turned himself from God; so his apostasy could not be expiated and
removed, except by the extreme humility, lowliness, and obedience of the
Son of God. And as Christ, when upon earth, was most humble in his
conversation among men, so it is necessary, O man! that he should be the
same in thee; that he should dwell in thy soul, and restore the image of
God in thee.
10. And now, O man! contemplate the perfectly amiable, lowly, obedient,
and patient Jesus, and learn of him; live as he lived, yea, live in him,
and tread in his steps. For what was the cause of his living upon earth?
It was that he might become thy example, thy mirror, and the rule of thy
life. He, _he_ only, is the rule of life, and the pattern which every
Christian should strive to imitate. It is not the rule of any _man_
whatsoever. There is but one example,—Christ; and him the Apostles have,
with one consent, set before us for our imitation. And in the same manner
are we called to view his passion, death, and resurrection: even that
thou, O man! shouldest with him, die unto sin; and in him, with him, and
by him, spiritually rise again, and walk in newness of life, “even as he
also walked.” Rom. 6:4.