1845.] changed, its employment, object or direction, is changed from bad to good. Here then is no physical regeneration, and no physical inability. But we are not concerned to vindicate Calvin from the imputations of Dr. Moehler. Nullius addictus jurare in verba magistri. Our simple object is to bring out in the clearest manner, the theological sentiments of those whom Moehler himself so ably represents. We are Calvinists in the same sense as our worthy brethren of the Presbyterian Board of Publication, who say, in the advertisement to their beautiful edition of the Institutes, that "this term is not understood as by any means implying an entire coincidence in the views of Calvin, or a submission to his authority as an umpire in theological controversies. Although a learned and pious, he was a fallible man; and his opinions although deserving of profound respect, are not to be blindly followed. While admitting that the Institutes, considering the times and circumstances in which they were written, form an invaluable body of divinity, still it must be acknowledged, that some of the doctrines therein maintained have been more luminously set forth in modern times." Had Dr. Moehler been as conversant with the writings of Edwards and Dwight as with those of the Reformers, he would have better understood the views of at least one class of Protestants upon human freedom. Admitting that he has fairly represented the views of Luther, Calvin, Zuingle and others, we must own that he stands here upon better ground than they. But his views do not differ essentially from those of the standard divines of New England. Take the following as a specimen. "According to Catholic principles, in the holy work of regeneration we find two operations concur-the divine and he human; they pervade each other, so 135 that regeneration constitutes one theandric work. God's holy power precedes, awakening, exciting, vivifying;--man, the while, being utterly unable to merit, call forth, or even desire, that divine grace; yet he must let himself be excited, and follow with freedom. God offers his aid to raise the sinner after his fall; yet it is for the sinner to consent and receive that aid. By accepting it, he is accepted by the divine Spirit; and through his faithful co-operation, he is exalted again gradually (though never completely in this life) to that height from which he was precipitated. The divine Spirit worketh not by absolute necessity, though he is urgently active. His omnipotence suffers human freedom to set it a bound, which it can not break through, because an unconditional interference with that tion of the moral order of the world, freedom would bring about the annihilawhich the divine wisdom hath founded on liberty." Dr. Moehler thus satirizes the doctrines of natural inability and physical regeneration which he (unjustly, as we think) imputes to the Reformers, as the representatives of the Protestant faith. "By this doctrine the identity of consciousness is destroyed; and we can not see how the man, new-born or newly created, can recognize hinself to be the so, unless he stands before the mirror, same-at least it is not easy for him to do and perceives to his contentment, that he has ever the same nose, and consequently is the same person as heretofore. Nor can we conceive how repentance can be possible on such a theory; for the new-created faculties will find it hard to repent of what they have not perpetrated; and the old can not repent, for a divine act is not within their power." But it is needless to pursue this We branch of the subject farther. do not think the Romanists so much at fault in their theory about human agency in the matter of salvation as in their practice. Their notions of free will, however, lead them very generally to discard the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, at least as they understand it. But the real difficulty lies in their inability to reconcile the certainty of an event with the possibility of its opposite, or the entire freedom of human action; things the consistency of which is apparent in the occurrences of every day. Those of our readers who have a taste for metaphysical discussions, will find much to entertain them in the debates of the Fathers at Trent upon predestination. Some affirmed that "liberty is understood to be a power to both the contraries; and that it could not be said to be a liberty to evil, if it were not also to good. But they were made to acknowledge their error, when they were told that the saints, and blessed angels in heaven, are free to do good, and therefore that it was no inconvenience that some should be free only to do evil!" Others maintained, that "God governeth and moveth every thing according to its proper nature, which in contingent things is free, and such as that the act may consist together with the power to the opposite; so that with the act of predestination, the power to reprobation and damnation doth stand." These views however, were neither understood nor relished by the Council at large. The following articles concerning free will were proposed for censure in the Council. "1. God is the total cause of our works, good and evil; so that the adultery of David, the cruelty of Manlius, and the treason of Judas are works of God as well as the calling of Saul. 2. No man hath power to think well or ill, but all cometh from absolute necessity, and in us is no free will, and to affirm it is a mere fiction. 3. Free will since the sin of Adam is lost and a thing only titular, and when one doth what is in his power he sinneth mortally; yea, it is a thing feigned and a title without reality. 4. 4. Free will is only in doing ill and hath no power to do good. 5. Free will moved by God, doth by no means co-operate, and followeth as an instrument without life, or as an unreasonable creature. 6. God converteth those only whom he will, though they will not and spurn against it." After a protracted discussion, a decree condemning these several articles was framed, but with so much ambiguity, that two leading friars of the Dominican and Franciscan orders published each a vo luminous commentary upon it, giv ing contradictory opinions on almost every point. When this decree had been approved at Trent, it was sent to the Pope," who gave it to the friars and learned men of Rome to be consulted of; and it was approved by them, because every one might understand it in his own sense." Well done, most holy and ecumenical synod of the one, true, and infallible church! The canon concerning justification, first denies that the deeds of the law can justify the sinner, and insists upon the necessity of divine grace and the influences of the Holy Spirit for this end; then asserts the freedom of man's will; then denies that "all the works which precede justification for whatever reason done, are sins, and merit the displeasure of God;" and finally declares that if any one shall say, that "the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is needed which may co-operate in securing the grace of justification, or that there is no necessity for him to be prepared and disposed for it by an act of his own will," he shall be accursed. 66 Concerning the cause of justification, the Council decrees as follows. The final cause is "the glory of God and of Christ, and eternal life;" the efficient cause, a compassionate Deity, who freely cleanses and sanctifies (the soul,) sealing and anointing it with the Holy Spirit of promise;" the meritorious cause, his well-beloved and only-begotten Son, our Lord Jesus Christ;" but the instrumental cause is, "the sacrament of baptism, which is the sacrament of faith, without which justification never reached one." any Now it matters not how much a Romish doctor in his abstract speculations may insist upon the necessity of divine grace in the work of man's salvation, so long as he holds that that grace is bestowed through the medium of a sacrament. The doctrine of the saving efficacy of sacraments is the bane of his whole system. The ignorant mass, who are not instructed by doctrinal preaching, as Protestants are, will seize upon the idea of virtue in the sacrament, and trust to what they can see and touch for salvation, rather than to an unseen, though living faith. The views of Romanists concerning the nature of justification, explain their views of the relation of FAITH to that act. If justification is not a mere judicial act of God, but an internal change of the man himself, then of course it calls for something more than mere faith. The Council of Trent defines the relation of faith to justification as follows: "Since the Apostle has said that man is justified through faith and grace, these words are to be understood in the sense which the uniform consent of the Catholic church has held and expressed; so that although we say he is justified by faith, because faith is the beginning of human salvation, the basis and root of all justification, without which it is impossible to please God, and enter into the fellowship of his sons; we also say that he is justified by grace, because nothing which precedes justification, whether faith or works, confers the grace of justification itself." They insist also that the exercise of charity and the performance of good works, that is, the mode of life which we regard as the fruit and evidence of regeneration, is as much concerned in the justification of the believer as is faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. If we use the term faith in an objective sense, to denote the system of faith revealed in the Gospel, then Roman Catholics and Protestants agree that it is only by faith that man is justified. Both hold that there is no other name given to men whereby they may be saved, but the name of Christ Jesus; and that salvation through that name is given Vol. III. 18 through the mercy of God, and "without any merit on the part of mankind in general or of any individual man.' But when we use the term subjectively, the Protestant means by it a cordial trust in Christ which is the condition of our justification before God; but the Catholic, confounding it with various other graces, makes justifying faith the actual sanctification of the soul, as the ground and assurance of its acceptance with God-an act whereby "the righteousness of Jesus Christ is not only imputed, but actually communicated to believers by the Holy Spirit, so that they are not only reputed, but made just by his grace." (Bossuet.) The Roman Catholic's idea of justification is in like manner the key to his DOCTRINE OF GOOD WORKS. For want of a proper distinction between justification and sanctification, he makes those works which are the fruit and evidence of a sanctified heart themselves contribute to justification. Thus the Council of Trent declares in substance, that works are not the mere fruit and evidence of justification, but the means of preserving and increasing it in the sight of God; that good deeds are not in such a sense the gift of God but that they may also be the meritorious deeds of the justified person himself, and that the justified are enabled, through works performed in God, to satisfy the divine law according to the condition of this present life, and to merit eternal life and augmented glory when they depart in a state of grace. The holy Fathers of Trent have furnished us with the anomaly of merited grace. For say they, "so great is the goodness of the Lord toward men, that he considers his own gifts as their merits." Moehler understands by this nothing more than what is sometimes called the merit of congruity; as for example, that between believers Dr. and heaven there must be a homogeneity-an internal relation; "that relation which, by God's eternal ordinances and his express promises, exists between sanctity and beatitude; terms which are not only in separable, but which stand in the relation of cause and effect." If this is all, we do not object to the idea, though we should prefer to express it by some less exceptionable term. But this is not all which is meant by the term merit when applied to the works of believers. Not to insist upon the sense attached to it by the great body of Roman Catholics, let us see how it is understood by Dens, the acknowledged guide of their priests. We shall discover that his doctrine of grace is completely nullified by that of merit; for man can both do by grace deeds which entitle him to eternal life, and deserve an increase of grace for these self-same deeds. We can not follow him in all his minute scholastic distinctions on these points, but shall give a brief outline of them to illustrate our position. He first divides grace into two kinds, external and internal; the one affecting a man outwardly or through the senses, as the preaching of the Gospel; the other affecting him inwardly. Internal grace is then divided into grace conferred gratuitously, and grace which places its subject in a gracious or acceptable state before God; and this latter species of internal grace is divided into habitual and actual grace. Habitual grace is divided into primary, which makes the unrighteous righteous, and secondary, which is an increase of grace, and makes the righteous more righteous. Actual grace is also divided into 1, operating and co-operating; 2, preventing and subsequent; 3, exciting and assisting; 4, sufficient and efficacious; 5, grace of the understanding and grace of the will; 6, grace of the first state or state of innocence, and grace of the second state, or state of lapsed nature. There are treatises upon these several subdivisions. Works are then divided into three classes, viz. works deserving of eternal life, works, only morally good, and salutary works. Those works are called salutary which "in some mode conduce to eternal happiness or justification, viz. works of faith, hope and charity, fasting, alms, &c." No such work can be performed without actual grace. But "man even in his fallen state may without grace perform some works which are morally good; i. e. which are done according to the dictate of right reason through the natural powers only, with the general concurrence of God; and which are intermediate between sinful works, and such as conduce to salvation." The writer next proceeds to assign the various causes of grace. "The primary efficient cause of grace, both actual and habitual, is God alone. The secondary or instrumental efficient causes are the human nature of Christ, and the sacraments of the church. The ministerial causes are angels and men; angels, by supplying directions by which we may attain to grace; and men, not only by prayer and teaching, but also by administering the sacraments. The final cause is the glory of God and Christ, and our salvation. The meritorious cause is Christ. The prayers and merits of holy men may be a meritorious cause, but subordinate to the merits of Christ, because they are united to him. In this way a just man, by works done through grace, may worthily merit for himself an increase of grace, and properly merit primary grace for another." Dr. Dens divides merit into two kinds; the merit of fitness and the merit of worthiness. The former is "a work to which some reward or recompense is ascribed from gra tuitous liberality and propriety;" the latter," a work to which a reward or payment is due from justice." 66 He then asserts that "the actions of a just man working by grace, merit worthily (i. e. justly deserve) grace and glory;" that even "the endurance of diseases and other afflictions can be meritorious and satisfactory ;" and in short, that every human action which proceeds from free will not only moved by actual grace, but also instructed by sanctifying grace, if it may be referred to God, is worthily meritorious and thus not only acts of charity, but also of temperance, justice and every virtue, are meritorious of eternal life." The Douay Catechism inculcates the same doctrine. In chapter xv. we find mention of seven corporal works of mercy and seven spiritual. The former are, 1. To feed the hungry. 2. To give drink to the thirsty. 3. To clothe the naked. 4. To harbor the harborless. 5. To visit the sick. 6. To visit the imprisoned. 7. To bury the dead. It is claimed that these works are meritorious, and justly entitle him who performs them to a reward in heaven, from such passages as Matt. xxv, 35, 36, 2 Tim. iv, 7, 8,* and Heb. vi, 10, where such deeds are commended simply as proofs of devotion to the Lord Jesus Christ, whose reward is "of grace." The seven spiritual works of mercy are, 1. To give counsel to the doubtful. 2. To instruct the ignorant. 3. To admonish sinners. 4. To comfort the afflicted. 5. To forgive offenses. 6. To bear patiently the troublesome. 7. To pray for the quick and dead. These works are proved to be meritorious from Daniel xii, 3! "They that be wise, (or are teachers,) shall shine as the brightness of *The Rhemish Testament here reads ❝ a crown of justice." the firmament; and they that turn Here then we have the doctrine, as plain as words can make it, that men can merit salvation for themselves and others; that on performing certain works of mercy they may hereafter claim the rewards of heaven as their just due. True we are told that this very merit flows from the grace of Christ; but to the mass of Roman Catholics what is this but an unmeaning abstraction? Is it not their practical belief that they can counterbalance their sins by their good deeds? The round of ceremonies prescribed by the church encourages this belief; the doctrine of the sacraments, especially that of penance, encourages it. The very grace of God is conferred through the sacraments, and these do not depend for their efficacy on the faith of the recipi ent. Theologians may insist that they do; but the mass of the people do not so understand it; and here we think they follow the Council of Trent more closely than its learned apologists. Dr. Moehler tells us that "the Catholic church, above all things, insists on a radical internal change." But where does she insist upon it? In her pulpits? Who does not know that the pulpit occupies a secondary place in Roman Catholic churches even in this country-where the priest is made a preacher by the force of circumstances-while in the cathedrals of the old world it is rarely found at all? Who does not know that one thing which distinguishes Protestants from Roman Catholics is the importance attached by the former to the faithful preaching of the Gospel? Where in Roman Catholic countries can be heard, upon the Sabbath, a clear and faithful exhibition of the sinfulness of man and the necessity |