THE OLD SCOTTISH CONFESSION OF 1560.
[Sidenote: Alleged Omission of a Chapter.]
Knox, in his 'History of the Reformation,' has stated that the
preparation of this Confession was entrusted to the same six ministers
who were commissioned to draw up the Book of Discipline--viz., Wynram,
Spottiswoode, Willock, Douglas, Row, and himself.[102] It has been
frequently taken for granted that the Confession was prepared and
revised within four days after the formal charge to frame it was issued
by the Parliament, and that the Book of Discipline was not ordered to be
prepared till after the Parliament of 1560 was adjourned. It is evident,
however, from the dates specified in the Introduction, and at the
conclusion of the copy of the Book of Discipline engrossed by Knox,[103]
that the original charge to frame it had been granted on the 29th April
1560, or just two days after the nobles and barons signed one of those
"godly bands" or covenants[104] by which they pledged themselves to
stand by each other in setting forward the Reformation of religion
according to God's Word; and it can hardly be supposed that that book
should have been taken in hand some months before the Parliament met,
and that no attempt should have been made in this interval to prepare
materials for the 'Confession of Faith.' Besides, Knox has not stated
that within four days after the charge was formally issued the
Confession was _prepared_, but only that it was _presented_, so that we
may hold with Dr M'Crie that "the ministers were not unprepared for this
task," which was then formally devolved on them by the Parliament. Knox
has further stated that the Confession was accepted by the Parliament in
the form in which it was laid before them _without change of a single
sentence_.[105] Others supplement his statement by explaining that
before it was publicly presented it was submitted privately to certain
lords of Parliament, and by their direction was handed for revision to
the rather time-serving Wynram and the anon time-serving and
vacillating Laird of Lethington, who softened many harsh expressions in
it, and even recommended the omission of a chapter or part of a chapter
from it. This they say was a chapter bearing the title, "Of the
obedience and disobedience due from subjects to magistrates."[106] But
the chapter on the "Civil Magistrate" still found in the Confession
treats so fully and expressly of the obedience due to magistrates, that
it is difficult to see how place could ever have been sought for an
additional chapter on the same subject. There may possibly at first have
stood in the chapter still retained some such clause or sentence
regarding the _limits_ of obedience as we find in the corresponding
chapter of some of the Genevan symbolical books,[107] and this may have
been the matter deemed unfit to be "entreated of" at that time, and
recommended by the revisers to be omitted; or it may be that, after all,
their recommendation and the suggestions of the English ambassador on
the subject were not followed in this instance, and that we have the
chapter still as it was originally framed by Knox and his
associates.[108]
In endeavouring to form an estimate of the real merits of this
Confession, we must make due allowance for the circumstances in which it
was composed. Even though we suppose that the materials of it had been
collected beforehand, only four days seem to have been allowed to the
committee to put them into final shape.
[Sidenote: Character of the Confession.]
We must not look either on the one hand for an exhaustive and logical
elaboration of the several doctrines of the system and nicely balanced
statement of complementary truths, or on the other for a careful
avoidance of incidental expressions which seem dogmatically to determine
points not fully or directly handled in the places where we should have
expected them to be so. Yet, if we make such due allowance, look at it
from the proper point of view, and peruse the work not only in the now
obsolete Scotch, but also in the neat Latin version which often
accompanies it, and is said to have been the work of Archbishop
Adamson,[109] we shall not hesitate to own that it holds a
distinguished place among the Confessions of that age, and is a credit
to our reformer and his associates. Coinciding not infrequently in
expression and agreeing generally in its definitions of doctrine with
the other Reformed or Calvinistic Confessions (an agreement which its
framers explicitly testified by inserting among the subordinate
standards of their church, first Calvin's Catechism, and a few years
after the Later Helvetic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism), the
Scottish Confession of 1560 had characteristics of its own,--a framework
rather historical than dogmatic, and a liberal and manly, yet reverent
and cautious spirit. It probably contributed to mould the early Scottish
theology into a form somewhat less minute and rigid than the Swiss, yet
considerably less vague and indefinite than the earlier English.
The first topic deserving of notice, from the place it holds both in the
preface and in the body of this treatise, is the distinct and hearty
acknowledgment of the supreme authority of the written Word of God, or
"the buiks of the Auld and New Testamentis," which books are briefly but
sufficiently defined as those "quhilk of the ancient have been reputed
canonicall."[110] In these they affirm "that all thingis necessary to
be beleeved for the salvation of mankinde is sufficiently expressed,"
and to these they desire in all things to conform, protesting that, if
any man should note any article or sentence in their Confession contrary
to the Scriptures, and should "of his gentleness" admonish them of the
same, they "do promise unto him satisfactioun fra the mouth of God, that
is, fra His Haly Scriptures, or else reformation of that quhilk he sal
prove to be amisse."[111]
[Sidenote: The Fall and the Remedy.]
In the opening chapter the unity and attributes of God, and the trinity
of persons in the Godhead, are briefly but definitely treated of.[112]
In subsequent chapters the divinity of our blessed Lord is fully
asserted, and the "heresies of Arius, Marcion, Eutyches, Nestorius, and
sik uthers as either did denie the eternitie of His Godhead, or the
veritie of His humaine nature, or confounded them or zit devided them,"
are specifically rejected.[113] The second chapter treats of the
creation and fall of our first parents, while the third treats of the
effects of the fall in language no less explicit than that of the other
Protestant Confessions, Lutheran and Reformed; and as it not only
clearly embodies the teaching of our reformers on this subject, but
gives a brief summary of their views regarding the application of the
Gospel remedy, it may be as well I should quote it at length. It is as
follows: "Be quhilk transgressioun, commonlie called original sinne,
_wes the image of God utterlie defaced in man_, and he and his
posteritie of nature become enimies to God, slaves to Sathan, and
servandis unto sin.[114] In samekle that deith everlasting hes had and
sall have power and dominioun over all that have not been, ar not, or
sall not be, regenerate from above: quhilk regeneratioun is wrocht be
the power of the Holie Gost, working in the hartes of the elect of God
ane assured faith in the promise of God reveiled to us in His Word, be
quhilk faith we apprehend Christ Jesus with the graces and benefites
promised in Him."[115]
[Sidenote: The Eternal Decree.]
[Sidenote: Alasco's Influence.]
After this follow several chapters on the history of the promises of
redemption, the preparation for the coming of the promised Redeemer,
the dignity and constitution of His person, His incarnation,
sufferings, and death, His resurrection and ascension, and the blessed
effects resulting from them to His people. In another of these chapters
distinct reference is made to "the eternall and immutable decree" from
which the appointment of the God-man as our Redeemer, and "al our
salvatioun springs and depends";[116] and in another all that is good in
us is traced up to that decree of the eternal God who of mere grace
elected us in Christ Jesus His Son before the foundation of the world
was laid. The same mysterious subject is again referred to in the
sixteenth chapter, which treats of the church, and, like the earlier
Confession used by Knox's congregation at Geneva and our later
Confession, identifies that invisible but real church, which is "the
bodie and spouse" of Christ Jesus, with the elect of all ages, nations,
and tongues, so that "as without Christ Jesus there is nouther life nor
salvation, so sal there nane be participant therof bot sic as the Father
hes given unto His Sonne," and who in time come unto Him.[117] Many
individual expressions occurring in these chapters can be clearly traced
to one or other of Calvin's Confessions, or to the earliest edition of
his Institutes;[118] but the only Confession I can remember in which a
similar, though shorter, history of the preparation for the coming
Redeemer is given, is the 'Summa Doctrinæ' of John Alasco,[119] which
may be regarded as the Confession of Faith, not only of the ministers
but also of the members of the church of the foreigners in London. Knox
was brought into contact with them both in London and in Frankfort,
agreed with them generally in opinion, and largely adopted their forms
and arrangements in matters of worship and discipline.
[Sidenote: Justification.]
A group of chapters[120] treats of the nature and work of the Holy
Spirit, the cause of good works, the works which are reputed good, the
perfection of the Law of God, and the imperfection of man. Those who
have overlooked the explicit statement in the third chapter concerning
the depravity of man have generally overlooked or failed to perceive the
full significance of the emphatic statements in the twelfth chapter
regarding our entire dependence for spiritual renovation, and all good,
on the Holy Spirit. The words are: "Of nature we are so dead, so blind,
and so perverse, that nether can we feill when we ar pricked, see the
licht when it shines, nor assent to the will of God when it is reveiled,
unles the Spirit of the Lord Jesus quicken that quhilk is dead, remove
the darknesse from our myndes, and bowe our stubburne hearts to the
obedience of His blessed will;"[121] and again, "As we willingly spoyle
ourselves of all honour and gloir of our awin creation and redemption,
so do we also of our regeneration and sanctification."[122] These
statements, however they may be viewed by others, seem to me no less
explicit than those of the later Confession, which have been sometimes
contrasted with them. "This effectual call is of God's free and special
Grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, who is
altogether passive therein _until_, being quickened and renewed by the
Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace
the Grace offered and conveyed in it."[123] The last of this group of
chapters contains the fullest and most direct exposition the Confession
embodies of the views of its framers in the article of Justification. It
is as follows: "It behovis us to apprehend Christ Jesus with His justice
and satisfaction, quha is the end and accomplishment of the Law, be
quhome we ar set at this liberty that the curse and malediction of God
fall not upon us, albeit we fulfill not the same in al pointes. For God
the Father, beholding us in the body of His Sonne Christ Jesus, acceptis
our imperfite obedience as it were perfite, and covers our warks, quhilk
ar defyled with mony spots, with the justice of His Sonne."[124] To the
same effect it is said in chapter xxv. that "albeit sinne remaine and
continuallie abyde in thir our mortall bodies, zit it is not imputed
unto us, bot is remitted and covered with Christ's justice."[125] It has
been questioned, however, whether we have in these statements the
doctrine taught generally in the reformed churches regarding the
_articulus stantis vel cadentis ecclesiæ_. This can be a question only
with those who forget that the church which received this Confession,
and required her adult members to assent to the heads of it, appointed
for the instruction of her youth the Catechism in which this doctrine of
Calvin is stated in his own words; and that the very men[126] who in
1560 drew it up, in 1566, along with their brethren of the General
Assembly, declared of the _Later Helvetic Confession_--which is
admitted to contain what has been termed "the Lutherano-Calvinian view"
of justification--that therein was "most faithfully, holily, piously,
and indeed divinely explained" what they themselves had for eight years
been constantly teaching, and still by the grace of God continued to
teach, and that in consequence they felt constrained not only to express
their approval, but their "exceeding commendation of every chapter and
of every sentence," save the one relating to holidays.[127] It may be
taken for granted that they knew their own meaning, and that of their
Swiss brethren;[128] the more especially as in our day Stähelin, whose
impartiality and historical reputation will not be challenged, has
adduced the statement in chapter xv. as one of his proofs that Calvin
himself could not have framed the Scotch Confession otherwise than Knox
has done.[129]
[Sidenote: Notes of the True Church.]
The nature of the church, and the notes by which the true church is to
be discerned, are explained in chapters xvi. and xviii. As in most of
the other Reformed or Calvinistic Confessions, greater prominence is
assigned to the Invisible Church, consisting of the elect of all times
and nations, than to the general visible church subsisting at any
particular time in the world and embracing all who profess faith in
Christ and submit to the godly discipline He has prescribed. The notes
by which it may be discerned whether any branch of the professing church
is indeed part of the true Kirk of Christ are stated _negatively_--not
to be "antiquitie, title usurpit, lineal descente, place appointed, nor
multitude of men approving," as Roman Catholics were wont to allege; and
_positively_ to be "the trew preaching of the Worde of God," "the right
administration of the Sacraments," and "ecclesiastical discipline
uprightlie ministred as Goddis Worde prescribes."[130] "These articles,"
as Principal Lee has so pithily expressed it, "have been almost as
disagreeable to some Episcopalian writers as they were to the most
servile adherents of the pope. It is thought a most dangerous omission
to make no mention of uninterrupted succession and conveyance of
authority from the apostles. This omission has been somewhat incorrectly
charged against the reformers of our church. They do certainly mention
_lineal succession_, but they mention it only to disown it. They say
that though the Jewish priests in our Saviour's time 'lineally descended
from Aaron,' yet no 'man of sound judgment will grant that they were the
Church of God.'"[131] They further assert that wherever the three notes
given above are found and continue for any time (be the number never so
few above two or three), there without all doubt is the true Kirk of
Christ, who according to His promise is in the midst of them; and in
this they are borne out not only by Calvin but by Luther, who boldly
affirmed: "Were I the only man on earth that held by the Word, _I alone
would be the church_, and I would be justified in pronouncing of all the
rest of the world that it was not the church."
[Sidenote: Two Sacraments only.]
The only other parts of the Confession I deem it necessary to refer to
in this review of it are the chapters relating to the sacraments and the
right use of them. It was asserted some years ago by a leader of modern
thought in Scotland that Knox did not go beyond the Zwinglian doctrine
regarding the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper; and that his Order for the
administration of it was a bold protest against the "mystical jargon"
which Luther employed, and from which Calvin was not free. When he made
this assertion he seems to have forgot that the address in Knox's Order
for the administration of the Lord's Supper was little else than a
translation of that in Calvin's Liturgy, and teaches exactly the same
mystical doctrine. This doctrine is no less explicitly taught in the
Confession; and Stähelin, whose competence to judge in the matter cannot
be questioned, maintains that the Zwinglian doctrine is as explicitly
rejected as the Romano-Lutheran; and that the language as well as the
doctrine closely resembles Calvin's. The text of the common editions of
the Confession speaks of two _chief_ sacraments only as being appointed
under the New Testament as well as under the Old. From this expression,
some, who are more familiar with Anglican than with Calvinistic
formularies, have concluded that Knox, like several of the earlier
English reformers, attributed a _quasi_-sacramental character to some of
the other rites regarded as sacraments by the Romanists. But in the
copy of the Confession reprinted in Dr Laing's edition of Knox's History
the word _chief_ is omitted in the second instance, and the clause runs
_two sacraments only_.[132] Perhaps it will be accepted as some
confirmation of the correctness of this reading that it is identical
with that found in Alasco's 'Epitome Doctrinæ Ecclesiarum Frisiæ
Orientalis,' from which treatise the opening sentence of chapter xxi. of
the Scottish Confession may possibly have been taken,[133] though the
verbal coincidence with the early edition of Calvin's Institutes is in
some respects more marked.
[Sidenote: Type of Scottish Theology.]
Such are the main contents and general bearing of this ancient Scottish
Confession. Notwithstanding the confident assertions to the contrary
made of late both within and without the Presbyterian churches, I
venture to think that no one who, with a good conscience and honest
intent, could sign that Confession, and answer in the affirmative the
questions regarding election put to candidates for the ministry at their
ordination, need hesitate to put his name to that which in 1647 was
received as "in nothing contrary" to the former, and held its place
alongside of it even after the restoration of Charles II., and under the
episcopal _régime_.[134] Most assuredly at least no one need hesitate to
do so who would have put his name to that Confession which was drawn up
in the time of the first episcopacy,[135] and which is quite as
distinctively Calvinistic as the Westminster Confession, while it
ventures incidentally to determine some points the Westminster divines
have wisely left undetermined.[136] The old Confession can advance no
claim to the terse English style, the logical accuracy, the judicial
calmness, and intimate acquaintance with early patristic theology which
characterise that mature product of the faith and thought of the more
learned Puritans of the south. I am not ashamed to avow that it has long
appeared to me that there is somewhat to be said in favour of the
opinion that Scottish presbyterianism gained quite as much as, nay, more
than, it lost, by being brought into contact with the broader, richer,
and decidedly more catholic spirit of the south, and adding to its
earlier symbolical books those which it still holds in common with
almost all the orthodox presbyterians of the Anglo-Saxon race. No one
who will take the trouble to read the report of the discussion on
Arminianism in the Scottish General Assembly of 1638[137] will, I am
sure, be so bold as to affirm that the type of theology then prevalent
among Scottish ministers was in any material respect different from that
which was set forth in the Confession of 1647, and which has never
since, either under episcopal or presbyterian _régime_, been set aside
in the National Church. The teaching of the latest of our symbolical
books imposes nothing in regard to the doctrines known as
Calvinistic[138] but what is explicitly contained in or fairly deducible
from the earliest Confession drawn up for the English church at Geneva,
of which Knox was pastor, and adopted (along with the larger one on
which I have been commenting) at the beginning of the Reformation in
Scotland, and printed in Scotch psalm-books[139] as late as 1638, in
which it is asserted "which church is not seene to man's eye but only
knowne to God, who of the lost sonnes of Adam hath ordained some as
vessels of wrath to damnation, and hath chosen others as vessels of His
mercy to bee saved, the which also in due time He calleth to integritie
of life and godly conversation to make them a glorious church to
Himselfe."[140]
[Sidenote: Unmeasured Language.]
Probably, however, the main argument against recurring to the old
Scottish Confession of 1560 is that derived from the unmeasured language
of vituperation in which it, as well as the contemporary forms of
recantation[141] required of priests at that date, indulges when
referring to the teaching of the members of the pre-Reformation church.
No doubt it might be deemed sufficient proof of this to subjoin the
examples furnished in chapter xviii. on the "Notis" or marks by which
"the trewe Kirk is decernit fra the false," where the old church is
designated the "pestilent synagoge," "the filthie synagogue," and "the
horrible harlot, the kirk malignant"[142]--the last words no doubt meant
as a translation of the Vulgate rendering of Psalm xxvi. 5, _ecclesiam
malignantium_,[143] translated "the congregation of evil doers" in our
authorised English version. But I may add, in corroboration, that in
chapter xxi. on the true uses of the sacraments, the papists are charged
with having "perniciouslie taucht and damnablie beleeved" the
transubstantiation of the bread into Christ's natural body and of wine
into his natural blood,[144] and that in the last chapter the language
of Rev. xiv. 11 ("the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and
ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his
image") is adduced in proof of the ultimate fate of those who delight in
superstition or idolatry.[145]
The same unrestrained spirit is shown in some contemporary Confessions,
notably in the earliest Danish one, the framers of which seem to have
kept closer to Luther than to the more gentle Melanchthon: but however
excusable it may have been in the fierce battle then forced on them,
there can be no doubt that the calmer and more measured language of the
later Confession is a decided improvement on the statements of the
earlier one; and I do not hesitate to say that, with the simpler formula
of 1693-94 recently restored, and the explanatory act which accompanies
it--emphasising the distinction between matters of minor importance and
the great doctrines of the faith--the position of the ministers of our
church in these respects is as nearly what it should be as is that of
the ministers in any of the allied Presbyterian churches.
FOOTNOTES:
[102] Laing's Knox, ii. 128.
[103] Ibid., ii. 183, 257.
[104] [For this band, see Laing's Knox, ii. 61-64.]
[105] ["Quhilk thay willinglie acceptit and within foure dayis presentit
this Confessioun as it followis, without alteratioun of any ane
sentence." (Laing's Knox, ii. 92).]
[106] [These statements are based on the information which Randolph sent
to Cecil on 7th September 1560 (Laing's Knox, vi. 120, 121).]
[107] "At vero in praefectorum obedientia unum semper excipiendum ne ab
ejus obedientia nos deducat, cujus decretis regum omnium jussa cedere
par est.... Adversus ipsum si quid imperent nullo sit nec loco nec
numero, sed illa potius sententia locum habeat, obediendum Deo magis
quam hominibus."
[108] This seems to be the opinion of Dr Laing (Knox's Works, vi. 121,
n.) Indeed one can hardly read chapter xviii. without having a suspicion
induced that Knox may have proved too strong for them in regard to some
of what they termed the more harsh expressions in the treatise, as well
as in regard to the particular chapter in question.
[109] [The Scotch and Latin versions are printed in parallel columns in
Dunlop's 'Collection of Confessions' ii. 13-98.]
[110] "Libros, qui ab infantia usque ecclesiae semper habiti sunt
canonici" (Latin version, Dunlop, ii. 70).
[111] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 17, 18; Laing's Knox, ii. 96. A similar
protestation is made in the Preface to the First Book of Discipline
(Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 518; Laing's Knox, ii. 184).
[112] The sources from which this chapter was taken can still be pretty
clearly traced. I place in parallel columns its statements and those of
the two Confessions from which it was probably taken:--
"We confesse and acknawledge "Je confesse qu'il y a un seul
ane only God, to whom only we Dieu auquel il nous faut tenir,
must cleave, whom onelie we must pour le servir, adorer, et y avoir
serve, whom onelie we must worship, notre fiance et refuge."--Confession
and in whom onelie we must subscribed by students
put our trust. in Academy in Geneva.
"Who is eternall, infinit, "I beleve and confesse my
unmeasurable, incomprehensible, Lorde God eternal, infinite,
omnipotent, invisible: ane in unmeasurable, incomprehensible,
substance, and zit distinct in and invisible, one in substance,
thre personnis, the Father, the and three in persone, Father,
Sone, and the Holie Gost."--Old Sonne, and Holy Ghoste."--Confession
Scottish Confession, in Dunlop's of English Congregation
Confessions, ii. 21, 22. at Geneva, in Laing's Knox, iv.
169; Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 3.
[113] This also comes from a Genevan source:--
"We condemne the damnable "Ideirco detestor omnes haereses
and pestilent heresies of Arius, huic principio contrarias
Marcion, Eutyches, Nestorius, puta Marcionis, Manetis, Nestorii,
and sik uthers."--Old Scottish Eutychetis, et similium."--Genevan
Confession, as above, ii. 31. Confession.
[114] Extraneum ab omni benedictione Dei, Satanae mancipium, sub peccati
jugo captivum, horribili denique exitio destinatum et jam
implicitum.--Calvin.
[115] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 24, 25; Laing's Knox, ii. 98. It has
been questioned if this description of faith is one which Calvin and his
stricter followers would have used. But nothing is more common, even in
the earliest edition of his Institutes, than to find him describing
faith as the apprehension of Christ with His gifts, or graces, as well
as with His righteousness: "Apprehendimus ac obtinemus et ... Christi
_dona_ amplectimur, quod ipsum est habere veram, ut decet fidem." "Haec
omnia nobis a Deo offeruntur ac dantur in Christo Domino nostro nempe
remissio peccatorum gratuita, ... _dona et gratiae_ Spiritus Sancti si
certâ fide ea amplectimur." In one of these chapters [of the Scottish
Confession] relating to the incarnation of Christ Jesus, He is spoken of
not only, as in most of the Protestant Confessions, as the promised
Messiah, the just seed of David, the Immanuel, or God in our nature--God
and man in one person--but also as the _Angel of the great counsel of
God_ [Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 31; Laing's Knox, ii. 99]. This
expression is no doubt a translation of the μεγαλης βουλης
αγγελος of the Septuagint, and is the more remarkable, not only as
showing familiarity on the part of some of the framers of the Confession
with a somewhat unusual rendering of one of the most explicit Messianic
prophecies of Isaiah, but also as showing that they had perceived the
true significance of an expression which last century gave rise to no
little discussion and misconception. So far as I can remember, this
remarkable expression does not appear in any other of the Protestant
Confessions of that age.
[116] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 32; Laing's Knox, ii. 100.
[117] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 60, 61; Laing's Knox, ii. 108.
[118] The following are a few specimens of close verbal coincidence
between the Scottish Confession and the first edition of Calvin's
Institutes:--
1. "It behooved that the Filii Dei sumus quod naturalis
Sonne of God suld descend unto Dei Filius sibi corpus ex corpore
us, and tak himself a bodie of nostro, carnem ex carne nostra
our bodie, flesh of our flesh, and ossa ex ossibus nostris composuit
bone of our bones, and so become ut idem nobiscum esset.
the Mediator betwixt God
and man, giving power to so
many as beleeve in Him to be
the sonnes of God."--Dunlop,
ii. 33, 34.
2. "Quhatsaever wee have Ut quod in Adamo perdidimus
tynt in Adam is restored unto us Christus restitueret.
agayne."--Dunlop, ii. 34.
3. "It behooved farther the Praeterea sic nostra referebat,
Messias and Redemer to be very verum esse Deum et hominem
God and very man, because He qui Redemptor noster futurus
was to underlie the punischment esset.... Prodiit ergo verus
due for our transgressiouns, and homo, Dominus noster, Adae
to present himselfe in the presence personam induit ... ut Patri
of His Father's judgment se obedientem pro eo exhiberet
as in our persone to suffer for our ut carnem nostram in satisfactionem
transgression and inobedience, justo Dei judicio statueret
be death to overcome him that ac sisteret, ut in eâdem carne
was author of death. Bot because peccati poenam persolveret.
the onely Godhead culd Quum denique mortem nec solus
not suffer death, neither zit culd Deus sentire, nec solus homo
the onlie manhead overcome the superare posset, humanitatem
samin, He joyned both togither cum divinitate sociavit ut alterius
in one persone that the imbecillitie imbecillitatem morti in poenam
of the ane suld suffer and persolveret, alterius virtute
be subject to death quhilk we adversus mortem in victoriam
had deserved: and the infinit luctaretur.
and invincible power of the
uther, to wit, of the God-head,
suld triumph and purchesse to us
life, libertie, and perpetuall
victory."--Dunlop, ii. 35, 36.
4. "That Hee being the Judicis scilicet sententia damnatus
cleane, innocent Lambe of God, pro nocente et malefico ut
was damned in the presence of apud summi judicis _tribunal_ ejus
an earthlie judge, that we suld damnatione absolveremur.
be absolved befoir the _tribunal_
seat of our God."--Dunlop, ii.
37, 38.
5. "Suffered ... the cruell Crucifixus in cruce quae Dei
death of the Crosse, quhilk was lege maledicta fuerat.
accursed be the sentence of
God."--Dunlop, ii. 38.
6. "Suffered for a season the Divini judicii horrorem et
wrath of His Father quhilk sinners severitatem sensisse ... luens
had deserved. Bot zit we poenas non suae ... sed nostrae
avow that He remained the only iniquitati. Neque tamen
wel-beloved and blessed Sonne intelligendum est patrem illi
of His Father, even in the middest unquam iratum fuisse. Quomodo
of His anguish and enim dilecto filio, in quo illi
torment."--Dunlop, ii. 38. complacitum est, irasceretur.
[119] Alasco's Works, ii. 296, 298.
[120] Chapters xii.-xv.
[121] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 46. "Sunt autem dona Spiritus Sancti,
per quem regeneramur, e diaboli potestate et vinculis explicamur, in
filios Dei gratuito adoptamur, ad omne opus bonum sanctificamur."--Calvin.
[122] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 47.
[123] Westminster Confession, chap. x.
[124] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 58. There is hardly one of these
expressions that may not be found in Calvin's Institutes:--
It behoves us to apprehend Confiteor nos justificari per
Christ Jesus with His justice and fidem quâtenus per eam apprehendimus
satisfaction. Jesum Christum.
We are set at this liberty Omni execratione quae nobis
that the curse and malediction incumbebat eximeremur dum in
of the law fall not upon us. eum traduceret. Fides, in Christi
damnatione absolutionem,
benedictionem in maledictione,
apprehendit.
God the Father, beholding Ubi nos in filii sui communionem
us in the body of His Son Christ semel recepit, opera
Jesus, accepts our imperfect nostra grata acceptaque habet,
obedience as it were perfect. non quod ita promereantur sed
quia condonatâ eorum imperfectione,
nil in illis intuetur, nisi
quod a Spiritu suo profectum,
purum ac sanctum est.
_Covers_ our works, which are Nullae nostrae sordes aut
defiled with many spots, with immunditiae imperfectionis
the justice of His Son. imputantur, sed illa puritate
Christi ac perfectione velut
sepultae _conteguntur_.
Cujus perfectione tegatur
nostra imperfectio. See also
Calvin's Catechism in Dunlop's
Confessions, ii. 175.
[125] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 95; Laing's Knox, ii. 119.
[126] [Of the six, all save Willock sign the letter to Beza on 4th
September 1566 (Laing's Knox, vi. 548-550).]
[127] Laing's Knox, vi. 546-548.
[128] Considerable ingenuity has been expended in the attempt to show
that the words "who is the end and accomplishment of the law" are to be
understood in some other than their most obvious and commonly received
meaning. Without questioning the competency of such ingenious rather
than ingenuous exposition, were a case raised before the judicial
committee of a modern privy council to have the expounder tried and
condemned as a heretic, I venture to think that when the matter to be
determined is rather what, in point of fact, did Knox and his associates
hold and teach, the following brief quotation from the "godly and
perfect" treatise of Balnaves on Justification must go pretty near to
settle it: "Christ is the end of the law (unto righteousnes) to all that
beleeve--that is, Christ is the consummation and fulfilling of the lawe,
and that justice whiche the lawe requireth; and all they which beleeve
in Him are just by imputation through faith, and for His sake are repute
and accepted as just" (Laing's Knox, iii. 492). If more than this has
been taught in recent times, I should be greatly inclined with Principal
Lee to trace it to Jonathan Edwards, or perhaps even to the great
Independent, Dr Owen, rather than to the Westminster divines, or the
earlier Scottish.
[129] Stähelin's Johannes Calvin, ii. 88.
[130] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 66-68; Laing's Knox, ii. 110.
[131] Lee's Lectures on the History of the Church of Scotland, i. 124,
125.
[132] Laing's Knox, ii. 113. [In the Confession, as printed in the Acts
of the Parliaments of 1560 and 1567 ratifying it, the word _chief_ is
retained (Acts of Parliament, ii. 532; iii. 20). The Confession of 1616
bears that: "We believe that there be only two sacraments appointed by
Christ under the New Testament, Baptisme and the Lord's Supper" ('Booke
of the Universall Kirk,' iii. 1137). Concerning the sacraments the First
Book of Discipline says: "They be two, to wit, Baptism and the Holy
Supper of the Lord Jesus" (Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 520; Laing's Knox,
ii. 186).]
[133] Hujus generis _duo praecipua_ in vetere ecclesiâ fuerunt
circumcisio et agnus paschalis. Nos illorum loco _duo_ etiam habemus
baptismum et caenam domini.
[134] "The Confession of Faith made by Mr Knox, and ratified in
Parliament by King James VI., together with the Westminster Confession
(both agreed on by the General Assembly of Presbyters), are owned next
to the Word of God, by both parties, as the Standard of the doctrine of
our Church" (Case of Suffering Church of Scotland).
[135] It is printed at length in Calderwood's History, vii. 233-242; and
also in the 'Booke of the Universall Kirk,' iii. 1132-1139; and is
supposed to have been mainly the work of Howie, Melville's successor at
St Andrews.
[136] [In speaking of this Confession of 1616, Dr Grub says that it
"agrees with the old one in all important points, the chief difference
being in its more marked enunciation of the doctrine of Calvin in regard
to election and predestination" (Grub's History, ii. 306).]
[137] Printed in Peterkin's Records of the Kirk, pp. 155-160.
[138] Generally so designated, but really as old as the days of Paul and
Augustine.
[139] [After 1564-65, the Book of Common Order was usually printed with
a complete metrical version of the Psalms (Laing's Knox, vi. 279, 280,
284); and was comprehended under the name 'Psalm Book' (_infra_, p.
128). Mr Cowan, of 47 Braid Avenue, Edinburgh, informs me that the
Confession, drawn up for the English congregation at Geneva, appears in
every edition of the Book of Common Order which he has examined, from
the Geneva edition of 1556 down to the edition printed by Evan Tyler in
1644.]
[140] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 8; Laing's Knox, iv. 171, 172.
[141] [These forms of recantation may be seen in the Maitland
Miscellany, iii. 215-221; and in the Register of St Andrews
Kirk-session, Scot. Hist. Soc., i. 11-18.]
[142] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 65, 66; Laing's Knox, ii. 109, 110.
[143] The designation is undoubtedly Knoxian, as it occurs in his
dispute with Friar Arbuckill in 1547. To the reformer's assertion "that
the spous of Christ had nether power nor authoritie against the Word of
God," the Friar replied, "Yf so be, ye will leave us na kirk;" and to
that the reformer rejoined, "In David I read that thare is a church of
the malignantis, for he sayis, _Odi ecclesiam malignantium_. That church
ye may have without the Word, ... of that church yf ye wilbe, I can not
impead yow" (Laing's Knox, i. 200).
[144] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 80; Laing's Knox, ii. 114.
[145] Dunlop's Confessions, ii. 96, 97.