Adrien Jean Quentin Beuchot.

The Bibliotheca sacra and American biblical repository online

. (page 32 of 98)
Online LibraryAdrien Jean Quentin BeuchotThe Bibliotheca sacra and American biblical repository → online text (page 32 of 98)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

cendo fieri poterat, rerum ordini legisque suae auctoritati consuleret All this
again is only the idea of penal example, and yet it is called by Grotins imme-
diately afterward a finis snperadditus satisfiEU^onis. £yen the idea of active obe-
dience Grotins cannot wholly reKnqnish. P. 87, Kegare nolnmus yim satisfkc*
tionls esse etiam in ipsa Christi actione (obsequiosa). Solet enim saepe etiam
actio grata admitti yelnt in poenae compensationem. Qnamyis benefidum acd-
pere Deus non potest, ipsius tamen summa bonitas qnalecnnque obsequium quasi
pro beneficio acdpit. Is this actio clmequioea anything else than the moral dis-
position which was manifested by Christ in his death, and which, eyen the Sod^
nian doctrine makes a condition (Voraussetzung) of the forgiyeness of sini
The instrumental agency (das Yermittelnde) in either case, is the moral impres-
sion which is produced by the death of Christ.

Digitized by


t70 I%$ Or0tkm Thmrjf ofthe Ji^ m mmt i i . [AnoL^

wording lo Socinus, it oonsiste in the moral dkpofikioa which was
exhibited bj Christ in his death. Even bj Sooinns hhnself, there*
fore, the bestowment of pardon is made dependent upon a moral coi^
dition which is connected with the death of Christ.

AHhough it is obvioas that, if the death of Christ is once poi un-
der the moral point of view, and in aooordanee therewith, the attea*
tion be directed not so much to ^Mst as to future sin, it is not neoes-
sary to confine ourselves exclusivelj to anj one mode of explaining
its moral action, still it is just as undeniablj obrious that, viewing
the two theories of Grotius and Socinus from their common point of
oppoffition to that of the church, we must regard the Gktitian idea of
a penal example as an essential improvement of the Sodnian theorj.
Not only is the idea of punishment in itself a verj essential element
of every theory of atonement and redemption,^ and, as such, unjustir
fiably omitted by Socinus, but there results from the fact the not ii^
considerable advantage, that so many passages of the New Testament,
in the explanation of which, the Sodnian exegesis cannot escape the
charge of caprice and violence, fall into easy and natural accordance
with the idea of Grotius.^ This, however, is the only advantage of
which this theory can boast ; in other respeets, so far as it diffen from
the main points of the Sodnian scheme, it is obnoxious to the same
charge of incompleteness which is so seldom to be escaped by those
theories which affect an intermediate position between two points of
view that are essentially divergent. The Sodnian system is at least
entirely consistent, in this respect, that, as it takes a much lower view
of the work of Christ than was taken by the church, so also it takes
an equally low view of the person of Christ ; while in the theory of
Grotius, there is this marked disproportion, that, occupying the same
position with the Sodnian scheme, in its view of the woHl of Christ,
it at the same time regards, as does the church, the person of Christ
not as a mere man, but as the incarnate Son of God, and hence fails
to explain in any satisfactory manner why the sufferings of such a
Grod-man should have been necessary, if they were designed to be
only a penal example. This defect, however, is only of a piece with
the entire character of the Grotian theory, so far as it is disUnguished

1 P. 87. Finis haec satisfactionis, sire poenae ferendne, multo apertias, immo
multo etiam certiore nexa cum morte Christi cohaeret, quam iUi fines quos ag-
noscit Socinus. Nam testimonium doctrinae satis atqne abnnde praebers pote-
rant miracnla : gloria qnoque coelestis conftBrri Christo, non interreniente morte,
facile potnit : at poenae Inendae mors, talis praesertim, proprie accommodata est
et poena ipsa pariendae liberationi.

' Bee on this point cap. 7^10 of the work of Qtotiiifl.

Digitized by


18M. j 1%$ BnMfnm itkiek the Theories etarL 271

lirom the ofher two theories to which it is opposed. While they start
from the idect^ the church theory from the idea of the absolute Justice,
tiie Sociniau from the idea of the absolute Gk)odness, of Ood, or at
kast, put the historical fact, the death of Christ, into such relation to
these respective ideas, as that our whole mode of conceiving that fact
is to be determined bj them, the theory of Grotius is founded upon
exactly the opposite view. This theory cannot rightly be said to
start from an idea ; since, in the penal example which it beholds in
the death of Christ, absolute Justice and absolute Groodness neutralize
each other in such a way that the theor^rhardly has a definite prin«
dple left ; except as we must confess that the idea of a penal exam*
pie, ef which it makes so much, distinguishes it from the Soctnian,
though even that distinction is rather formal than material. The
toore, however, the theory assumes the appearance of having for its
only starting point, the historical fact, in its pure objectivity, in con«
oection with the already existing idea of satisfaction, ip much the
more does it take its position over against that fact, with the confi-
dence of being able so to explain it by means of the judidid defini-
tions and distinctions to which it resorts, that there shall be as litUe
necessity of endorsing whatever is harsh and inconceivable in the
theory of the church, oH the one hand, as of agreeing in full with that
exact contradiction of this theory which is set up by Socinus, on the
other. If, therefore, all that one has to do, is, to hold in this manner
npon the mere historical fact, it is difficult to conceive how he can
have any further interest in defending a theory which starts from a
determinate idea. He has to do only with the fact itself, and he is
to treat it exactly after the manner of a process in law, in which one
nnderstands himself as bound to nothing but that to which he is held
by the existing legal fcmns, taken in their dosest constmction.

So also with the person of Christ. That the divine human dignitj
of the Redeemer is as necessary a presupposition for the theory of
the church, as it is superfluous to that of Socinus, is obvious at first
sight The theory of Grotius, on the contrary, although it recognises
that dignity in form, really nullifies it in fact ; since it is unable to
explain what is the precise importance of that dignity in the work of
redemption. How Christ should have been peculiarly fitted to stand
as a penal example on account of the dignity of bis person as God-
man, it is not easy to see.^ If he became incarnate for this end only,

^ P. 72. Qttod poena in Christom coUata faerit, hoc iu ad Dei et Christi
volantatem rcferimus, at ea quoque volnntas cansaB anas habeat, merito
Chrkti (qui peceatom com non nosiet, a Deo peccatam tkcttu est), sed in som*

Digitized by


which ocmld whh equal ease h«ve been secared by him as a mere
maiif as the Socinians hold, and so includes in himself nothing which
18 in its own nature necessary, then there is, and will idways remain^
an irreducible disproportion between the means and the end. Instead
of falling back upon the internal necessity of things, and dknwing aa
argument from thence, as was done in the theory of the <^srcb, and
instead of entirely renouncing aa idea whose rational necessity can-i
BOt be acknowledged, as was avowedly done by Socinus, Grotius has
given us a mere vindication, flattering himself that it has done aU
that can be Justly demandA of it, when by suggesting some plausible
end to be accomplished, it has relieved the presupposed foct from the
charge of being absolutely iocodoeivable* Such is the difference be-
tween the formal, judicial point of view, having as its outward stand-
ard of relWence, a given case in law, and the speculative, which goes
back to the iatemai idea of things, or to the abeolule nature of God,^

ma Christi ^titadine ad stataendom insigne exemplum, quae tarn in maxima
ipsios nobiscom coi\janctione tum in incomparabili personae dignitate consistit
This is tA that Grotias can say on this sobject.

^ thit eztemaitj and wmm of flrmatst which martcs Ike Qrocfam tkaory, ii
valy jastly and tlvyun^ indicated in the ettaj akemdy referrsd to hi the Evaiig^
KirchenseitiMig for 1884, p. 580 : ** The judicial mode of conception adopted by
Grotias, is merely fonnal ; L e. those forms and conceptions which have their
origin in mere positrve laws, are transferred unchanged to the divine relations •
or radier, the IsMer are sabjeeted to the former, and fashiofied and determined by
tfMm ', a pfooednre which makes it appear very much as if tiie doetrine laid down
by him in tlie fisst ciMtpier, and the doctrine of the Scriptara and the church
tHiich he defends, were two veiy different doctrines, or as if, in other words, his
system led to a very different doctrine from that which he proposes and professes
to defbnd.** P. 595 : ** The partml and distorted character of this theory betrays
Itself first and most dearly in the fact that Grotius is not able, in consistency
wilJi himneCt to point ott nay imoesiity (not even a moral one) for the satisfiK>>
Ikm made by Christ.** "^ Without satisfiujtion there is no forgiveness ; was the
fundamental nutxim in the orthodox doctrine of redemption, first distinctly ex-
pressed by Anselm, but held by the church in all ages. So long as the adverse
party opposed to this the mere proposition that forgiveness was possible even
witltout sstisAietion, no ground was gained against the actually existing, and
tkewfew divindy appointed sattafaetioii, as a condition of fi>rgiveness. They
Ikust go further, and prove that foigiveness was not possible with satisfiitction.
This was precisely what the everywhere-consistent Socinus attempted to do. Of
course, the only thing which was now left to the defender of the church theory
Who would not accept the direct antithesis (without satisfaction there is no for^
givenees), was» negatively, to prove that fiHgiveness was not impossible withfp
satisfaction ; L e. that tiie satisfaction made by Christ, and planned by God, was
entirely consistent with lliat foigiveness which might have taken place without it(
or, to express it somewhat paradoxically, diat God can forgive sin in spite of
that satisfiAction. ThiS) and in fiMt notiung morst G^totitts has proved by his

Digitized by


1852.] UfeofZuingU. 278


By B^ I>* 0. Bobbins, Professor of Luigiiagca, Middlebmy College.
[Contiiiued from Vol. VIII. p. 609.]

Labors^ Cares and Studies of Zuingli at Zurich^ 1520 — 1522.

ZuiKGLi, as has been previouslj intimated, was again in the pulpit
before he had fully recovered from the severe attack of the disease
by which he had been visited. He had even resumed all of his

book. But if the satis&ctioii of Christ staods m no necessary connection with
the forgiveness of sin, then this could not have been the design of satisfaction,
and neither forgiveness nor redemption in general, has any immediate depend-
ence upon satisfaction ; for to assign the forgiveness of sin as the object to be
iecared by satisfaction, and sUll to deny the internal necessity of satisfaction fof
the purpose of secnring that obyect, is, so to say, a logical oontradicHo in adjtoto.
Accordingly, the question with Grotios assumes this fonn : whether God had no^
grounds for the penal sufferings of Christ although he could have effected the
object in view without them 1" The utmost which Grotius has done, is, to show
the possibility, the fitness of Christ for the object in reference to which God em-
ployed him. Upon this point, however, his opponent had raised no question.
The question rather was: Why God would not foi^e sin otherwlM than on ao*
count of the death of Christ ? The answer which Grotius gives, stands in no ne-
cessary, or even real, connection with sin. Grotius himself acknowledges, tha^
God, who in accordance with his love desired to spare, i. e. to admit the relaxg*
tkm of the law, had also the power to do it without setting forth any penal ex-
ample, but that he was desirous of showing his wrath at the same time wiiii his
love. But why any addkiooal example, whmi a suffioently strong one is given
in the case of the reprobate and his final condemnation 1 And to what except
tions and objections does Grotius in this way expose himself? Is it not, for ex-
ample, the grossest injustice, nay, the grossest cruelty, in God, if, merely for the
purpose of exhibiting his wrath, he gives over his Son to the most excruciating
tortures, when he might forgive sin without them* yea, when he actually does-
(according to Grotius) foigive men without them ? " Just, as these last i^maric9
arc, it must stil* be said, when we consider the relation of the Qfotian theory to
the 8ocinian, and the relation of both to the teaching of the Scripture, that Gro-
dus was right in regarding the death of Christ from the point of view which is
fhmished by the penal relation ; only, be on^t not to have found the whole de-
sign of it in a mere penal example. Only when the necessity of the death of
Christ is explained on other grounds (as Wa*'*done by Bodnds), is it possible,
without charging God with cruelty, to connect the idea of penal example with
the deadi of Christ, so that the symbolic representation of punishment shall be
considered as substituted for its aonal endurance.
Vol. IX. No. o^ 24

Digitized by


274 Life of ZuingK. [ApEiLy

arduous labors while jet so weak that he writes to a friend: <<It
. [the -plague] has enfeebled my memorj and prostrated my spirits.
While preaching, I often lose the thread of qi^ discourse. My whole
frame is oppressed with languor and I am little better than a dead
man." But as returning health gave vigor to his frame, and strength
and elasticity to his mind, it became apparent that afflictions had not
been sent in vain. His preaching was even more fervent and spirit-
ual than before his sickness. The hearts and understanding of his
auditors were appealed to with a power and discrimination, that
constrained many of the magistrates as well as private citizens to cast
in their lot with the people of God. The spacious cathedral oonld
not contain aU that now flocked to hear him.

Sometime in the year 1520, the influence of Zoingli in Zurich be«
came more conspicuous from the measures which the Council of Zu-
rich felt constrained to adopt. The priests and monks had become
notorious for the effrontery with which they promulgated the most
absurd tenets in their addresses from the pulpit. The council, in
which there was at that time a considerable number of adherents to
the cause of reform, felt that their influence was derogatory to the
best interests of the community, and without much consideration in
reference to the respective duties of the civil magistrate and the
church, thought themselves called upon to undertake the reform of
such abuses. They accordingly issued an ordinance, that nothing
should be promulgated from theu pulpit that was not drawn from the
sacred fountains of the Old and New Testament. Thus the reforma-
tion became blended with the civil polity, and various were the re-
sults to Switzerland and the reformation, some of them propitious^
and others adverse*

The action of the magistrates caused still more decided opposition*
Many of the monks had never read the Bible, and how could they
preach in accordance with its pi'inciplGs 1 The nature of the ordi-
nance of the council proclaimed its origin in the teachings of Zuingli.
As the natural result, more bitter enmity speedily followed him.
Even plots were laid against his life ; but through the watchfnlness of
his friends and the care of a kind Providence, he escaped unharmed.

Another event occurred in the year 1521, which caused Zuingli
much anxiety. The war in Italy was just ready to break out afresh
between the emperor Charles Y. and Francis I. Pope Leo had sided
with the former. Francis claimed the assistance of the Swiss can-
tons, and Zurich alone refused to respond to his call. But they were
not allowed to remain neutral, although Zuingli lifted up his warning


zed by Google

1852.] Oppontion met toith. 275

voice. The eloquence and intrigue of the cardinal of Sion prevailed,
and 2700 Zurichers marched forth to the assistance of the emperor
and the Pope. Although Zuingli's voice was unheeded at this time,
yet he was not disheartened ; he was too well assured that his words
of warning would come back upon the breezes that wafted informa*
tion from the battle-field, with redoubled force. He accordingly
went quietly and with renewed energy about his master's business
among the Zurichers who remained at home.

Many, however, were roused by the truth to more vigorous oppo-
ntion. They accused their pastor of concerning himself too much
with the political affairs of Switzerland, and of placing undue stress
upon particular doctrines and repeating them too often in his dis«
courses. But we are unable at present to follow him through all the
labors and perils of this and the following year. Opposition of every
kind beset him both from open and secret enemies, from private
individuals and dvil magistrates ; but wisdom and strength were given
him sufficient for every emergency. Even when the assassin's hand
was ready to fall upon him, he says : '* God being my helper," '< I
fear them as the lofty crag the roaring waves that dash against its
base." Accordingly, when exhorted by Hedio and Myconius to
unite in preparation for more open and direct warfare upon his ene*
mies, he mildly replied : " I could wish to conciliate those stubborn
men by kindness and gentleness of demeanor, rather than to get the
better of them in an angry controversy."^ And indeed many en^
oouragements were mingled in his varied life. The good seed was
springing up and bearing fruit in many hearts about him. His silent
study and meditation yraa interrupted by one and another of those
from other cantons, who had caught something of his spirit, and were
desirous of consulting with him whdse words had fallen upon their
ears as a light in a dark place. Among those who visited him and
shared in his counsels, may be mentioned Berthold Haller and Henry
Bullinger, names familiar to all who have interested themselves in
Uie Swiss Reformation. Letters, too, not from the different cantons
alone, but from abroad, frequently cheered him on in his manifold
and difficult labors. Professor Vesse of Frankfort writes : " Oh how
it gladdens my heart to hear with what boldness you are preaching
Christ Jesus I Strengthen, I beseech you, by your exhortations those
whom the cruelty of unworthy prelates has banished from our be-
reaved churches."*

1 l>*Aubigne*8 History of the Refonnation, p. 37S.

* Quoted from D*Aabigiie*s History of the Beformation, p. 366,

Digitized by


276 lAf€ 4fZuimgU. [Apbil,

DuriDg the year 1M2 the bishop of Constance renewed his eferts
to suppress the heresy which was becoming so prevalent at Zarich.
Three of his emissaries appeared there. Late one evening, their
arrival was announced to Zuingli^ oonoeoted with the information
that an assembly of the clergy was summoned for the next morning.
There was great constmmatioa among the more doubting adherents
of the new doctrines. Zuingli himseU* appeared in the meeting, and
the efforts of his enemies were unavailing. The smaller council, in
which were the most violent enemies of the truth, was next appealed
to, and in the absence of Zuingli, he might have been condemned
without a hearings if his friends there had not insisted that the mat-
ter should be brought before the council of the two hundred. The
smaller council were unwilling that Zuingli should be admitted to
this consultation, but be and his friends ware firm in their demands,
and the council finally dedded that their pastor should be present.
The coacyutor of the bishop first delivered his fiilmination against
the ^ men who teach newly invented, abominable and seditious doc*
trines," and exhorted tlie council to continue in the diurch where
alone they could be saved. When Zuin^i arose to reply, the depn«
ties were already on their feet to leave the council, and could not be
prevailed upon to remain until a murmur of disapprobation at such
dastardly conduct ran through the assembly. When they were again
seated, Zuingli proceeded with a most triumphant and Christian con-
futation of the aspersions of his enemies, and vindication of the Goe*
peL The council arose without taking any action upon the matter,
but the rumor of the signal defeat of the emissaries of Borne was
soon spread abroad, and enthusiastic congratulations were poured in
upon Zuingli from every side. His enemies, too, were on the alert,
and Hoffman assailed the reformer in a written discourse before the
chapter. But Zuingli replied with so much pertinency and point,
that the matter " ended in a peal of laughter at the canon's expense.**
Zuingli soon after, April 16th, published his Treatise upcm the "• Free
Use of Meats."*

The Bishop of Constance, supported by Faber, next attempted to
accomplish by a letter to the Canons of Zurich what he could not do
by his deputies. This letter, at Zuingli's request, was committed to
him to answer, and the result was his Treatis^enominated ^* Archi-
teles," The Beginning and the End. This letter was written in the
best spirit, and couched in respectful language to the bishop, but yet

^ De Delectn et libero Oibonim Usa. See a more extended account of this
whole controTersj in D'Anbigne's HiBtoiy of the Kefonnatioii, p. 364 seq.

Digitized by


1852.] Elected to a Canmry at Zurich. 277

it was a firm and decisiye yindication of his course, closing with an
aggressive attack upon popish superstition and a significant indication
of the result that must follow from the present controversy. The
Helvetic diet was next appealed to bj the bishop, but the result was
a renewed declaration on the part of Zuingli that he should freelj
preach the Gospel, and contradict those who preach error whenever
opportunity should present itself. In pursuance of this resolution,
and in accordance with the wishes of the Great Council, Zuingli vis^
ited the nunnery of Oetenbach, where the daughters of the first fam-
ilies in Zurich were accustomed to take the vows of celibacy upon
themselves, and from the pulpit which had previously been occupied
only by monks, pronounced a discourse " Upon the Clearness and
certainty of the Word of God,** which was afterwards published, and
produced a very decided and salutary impression.

Zuingli was not without many significant testimonials of regard
from the citizens of Zurich during the first years of his labor there.
He was elected to a canonry in the cathedral which had been left
vacant by the resignation of Henry Engelhardt, who however retain-
ed the pastorship of the abbey church, and was an aid to Zuingli in
his work of reform. This appointment was accompanied by a " letter
from the authorities o^ the city, bearing honorable testimony to his
character and services.** But this appointment added new cares and
labors. An extract from a letter to Haller will show how much
occupied his hands as well as his thoughts must have been at this
time : " The hurry of business,** he says, ** and the care of the church-
es occupy me to such a degree, that Dr. Engelhardt lately told me^
he wondered that I had not before this time become distracted. For
instance, I have been ten times called off since I began this letter.
From Suabia they write to me for what I am not competent to per-
form for them ; though I do what I can. From every part of Swit-
zerland I am applied to by those who are in difficulties for Christ's
sake. If however anything occurs in which I can be of use to you,
do not spare me, for I hope for more leisure,** etc^ He seems some-
times to have almost given way to despondence from the anxieties
and cares that pressed upon him. He writes : '^ Such are the storms
that beat upon the house of God, and threaten to overthrow it, that,
unless the Lord himself had evidently appeared to watch over it, I
should long since have given it up fbr lost. But when I see that the
vessel of the church is in every case piloted and controlled by him,
and that he even commands the winds and the waves, I should be a

1 Calvin and the Swiss Befonnation, p. 46.

Digitized by


278 JU/e of Zuingli. [April,

coward indeed, and anworthj the name of a man, should I disgrace-
fully ruin myself by quitting my station. I therefore commit myself

Online LibraryAdrien Jean Quentin BeuchotThe Bibliotheca sacra and American biblical repository → online text (page 32 of 98)