58S 



THEOLOGY. 



Do we then say that the exercise or reason is to 

 be wholly discarded in reference to all that pertains 

 to supernatural theology? No: there is nothing 

 that calls it into more vigorous or more delightful 

 exercise. Yet it is allowed only a servant's place, 

 and is called to perform only a servant's work: the 

 inadequate manner in which it frequently does this, 

 should teach us to rejoice that there is One above 

 it to control and assist it, even in its humble sphere. 

 What purposes then does it serve ? Its first office 

 is to judge of the evidence of the truth of religion; 

 the external evidences and the internal evidences 

 that the bible is an inspired book, that all the 

 parts of it are inspired, and that therefore our 

 religion is from God. This work can be performed 

 by no other, and reason is sufficient for it, for here 

 there is nothing mysterious, nothing which is not 

 as plain to a common understanding, as the subjects 

 which the mind is called upon to consider in the 

 common course of affairs. Its second office is to 

 examine the contents of revelation, to ascertain the 

 sense of the words and phrases in which it is ex- 

 pressed, to bring to the illustration of it our 

 previous knowledge of subjects connected with it, 

 to trace the relation of its parts, and to draw out 

 in regular order the system of doctrines and duties 

 which it teaches. The communication of a revela- 

 tion to us implies such an exercise of reason on our 

 part ; and but for this it might as well have been 

 addressed to the beasts which perish. Its third 

 office is to compare opinions with scripture; if they 

 agree with it, to approve them ; and if they are 

 contrary to it, to refute them. It is not the weight 

 that is used in the balances of the sanctuary, and 

 according to which doctrines are found to be suffi- 

 cient or wanting ; hut it is the hand which uses the 

 balances, and the eye that detects the result. Its 

 fourth and last office is to deduce inferences from 

 the plain announcements of scripture, either as these 

 are viewed individually, or as two or more of them 

 are taken in connection. On this we shall make 

 some remarks immediately. Meantime, it is evi- 

 dent, from what has been said, that reason is not 

 exiled from the regions of theology, and that the 

 purposes it serves are most important. Still even 

 in using it for these purposes, instead of complaining 

 that the sphere of its activity is too limited, we 

 iced to bear in mind the apostolic caution, " Beware 

 lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain 

 deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudi- 

 ments of the world, and not after Christ." 



We have said that it is one of the legitimate 

 offices of reason to draw inferences from the plain 

 announcements of scripture. This is an important 

 remark in relation to didactic theology, for it is 

 acted on to a very considerable extent. Its just- 

 ness has been frequently denied and much declaimed 

 against. Nothing, it has been said, can be admitted 

 as a doctrine of supernatural theology, except what 

 is expressly stated in scripture, and to elevate to 

 an equality with that, those things which we think 

 proper to infer from it, is to endanger the purity of 

 sacred truth, and grant to reason an authority tan- 

 tamount to that of the word of God. In this there 

 is some appearance of reasonableness and prudence, 

 but there is only the appearance of these. " No- 

 thing is more plain than that, when a proposi- 

 tion is laid down from which certain inferences 

 naturally arise, it is the office of the understanding 

 to draw Jbe conclusions, and to rest in them with 

 equal confidence, as in the premises from which they 

 arc deduced. This is the mode of procedure of all 



intelligent creatures, in the matters to which they 

 turn their attention. Human knowledge would be 

 exceedingly circumscribed and imperfect, if our 

 views were strictly confined to farts, and these 

 would be of little use, if we were not permitted to 

 educe from them observations and maxims for the 

 regulation of our conduct. Had every thing which 

 it is useful for us to know, been delivered in express 

 terms in the scriptures, the bible would have In-, n 

 too voluminous for common use; and besides, such 

 minuteness was not necessary. God speaks in it to 

 men who are capable of reasoning on the ordinary 

 affairs of life, and who can use this power in matters 

 of religion." We may also remark, that a moral 

 precept is in reality a doctrine expressed in an 

 imperative form. The commandment " Thou shult 

 not kill," is just a certain way of expressing the 

 abstract (nitli, that it is contrary to the will ot 

 God and the eternal rule of righteousness, that a 

 man should kill, and that his doing so shall involve 

 him in the guilt and punishment of a heinous sin. 

 Now is it not true that the more minute precepts 

 of the law, the application of even the greatest of 

 them to particular cases, and the greater number of 

 the rules of Christian prudence, are to be obtained 

 from scripture, only as inferences more immediate 

 or remote. A multitude of precepts are included 

 in some general one; the motive by which we 

 should be actuated is pointed out, and we are left 

 to learn from it the duties to which we should be 

 excited by it ; and a prohibition is given as being 

 also the hint concerning the opposite duty which is 

 incumbent on us. But we have seen that precepts 

 and doctrines are not essentially different, and 

 experience tells us that we may err as grievously in 

 attempting to infer a point of sin or duty, as in 

 attempting to deduce abstract truths. Finally, the 

 principle that inferences from scripture are not 

 admissible in theology, goes a great deal farther 

 than its patrons seem to be aware of, or are pre- 

 pared to follow out in their practice. It necessarily 

 forbids us either to write or speak about religion, 

 except in the very words of scripture ; it tells us 

 that it is not divine truth we have in our minds, 

 except in so far as it is present to our thoughts, 

 clothed in the precise language of the bible ; it 

 would banish from the world every religious book 

 but the bible, for unless we merely retail its words, 

 we violate the principle of these men. What is 

 every attempt to explain it but a deduction of 

 inferences ? Nay, what is an attempt at even the 

 most rigidly literal translation but in a great 

 degree the same exercise of reason? Neither 

 Christ nor his apostles abstained from exhibiting 

 the deductions which may be made from the facts 

 and doctrines recorded in the inspired record; and 

 though we cannot be perfect as they were, yet we 

 have not the most distant hint that in this respect 

 they were not an example to us. 



Popish divines find another source of theological 

 doctrine in the writings of the Fathers and the 

 traditions preserved in the church. Scripture of 

 itself is not sufficient for them, and the reason is 

 obvious: they hold many doctrines of which not 

 the least vestige is to be found in it; nay, they 

 hold doctrines which are in direct opposition to it. 

 Strenuously as they deny this, they have not been 

 ashamed to confess it among themselves. The 

 bishops met at Bononia, to consult for restoring 

 the dignity of the Roman see, addressed the fol- 

 lowing advice to Pope Julius the Third : " Among 

 all the counsels which we can give at this time, w.- 



