Newspaper Page Text
February 17, 1909. THE PRESBYTERIAN
truths for which in common we have been "contending earnestly
as the faith once delivered to the saints;" and to erect in
the historical records of the Church a monument which shall
at once declare to those that come after us our appreciation
of the inestimable value of these principles as the bulwark of
the Christian liberty wherewith Christ sets his people free, and
a definitely expressed statute testimony, to which ready appeal
may be made hereafter as direct authority in support of those
who stand for the truth as it is in Jesus against those who again
may treacherously attempt to subvert the doctrine and order
jf Christ's house."
Among the doctrines and constitutional principles
forming a part of the basis of the solemn covenant here
referred to, is the following:
"Hence this Synod anil its Presbyteries have steadfastly
protested against and resisted the assumption of authority by
t'ie church courts, to advise, direct and assist the civil government
in its policy by the exercise of their spiritual authority,
or to interpose the power of the spiritual sword for enforcing
any theories of social organization, or theories of labor or political
theories, or to direct men as citizens in the choico of
tlieir political policy," (Assembly's Digest, p. 423).
This language is perfectly explicit. To many it will
doubtless appear to cover, as if by prophetic anticipation,
the social program put forth by the Federal Coun
cil. Its terms should be carefully noted. The Synod
denies the right of the Church courts to "advise, direct,
and assist the civil government." It denies their
right to use the spiritual authority for enforcing any
theories of social organization, or theories of labor, or
for the purpose of directing men as citizens in their
choice of a civil policy.
To this statement of doctrine by the Synod of Kentucky,
our Assembly replied:
"Yet the Assembly feels free solemnly to assure the Synod
of Kentucky not only of our cordial approval of, and sincere
concurrence, substantially, in the Synod's statement of doctrine
and constitutional principles, as contained under the four
heads of the third division of their letter, but our sincere joy
to And our brethren of Kenturkv ?o ronHv t/% imko ....
J VMM,; V\- UUtVO TTIWU ua I 11
solemn covenant, with a view, among other things, to the
advancement and maintenance of these doctrines and principles,
as against the apparent Erastian tendencies of our American
Protestantism," (Assembly's Digest, p. 413).
The foregoing facts, taken from the record, raise this
grave question, which no doubt will receive due atten-.
tion from our Presbyteries, to wit: Are we not, as a
Church, pledged under the sanctions of a solemn covenant,
not only to the position that the Church can have
no social program, but also pledged to resist, as unscriptural
and pernicious, the doctrine that it can have
such a program?
CHRIST ALL IN ALL.
Remember it is not thy hold of Christ that saves
thee; it is Christ; it is not thy joy in Christ that saves
thee; it is thy faith in Chrigt, though that is the instrument
; it is Christ's blood and merit. Therefore look
not so much on thy hand, with which thou art grasp
| ng Christ, as to Christ; look not to thy hope, but to
Jesus, the author and finisher of thy faith. We shall
never find happiness by looking at our prayers, our doings,
or our feelings; it is what Jesus is, and not what
we are, that gives rest to our souls. If we would at
once overcome Satan, and have peace with God, it
would be by "looking unto Jesus." Let not thy hopes
*r fears come between thee and Jesus,
I
OF THE SOUTH. 5
CALVIN AS A REFORMER.
By Prof. Henry E. Dosker, D. D.
VI.
The next question to be discussed is that of the position
of Calvin among the Reformers. Chief among
them are the great quartet?Luther, Zwingli, Melanchthon
and Calvin. Of these Zwingli died young and
Melanchthon was by nature and temperament precluded
from the task of true leadership; Luther and
Calvin, therefore, remain as the two greatest leaders
of the Reformation. And between these two a fair
comparison seems impossible. Each was marvelously
great in his own sphere. We can. however, conceive
of Luther without Calvin, but not the reverse. Their
task was divinely appointed, each moved in his own
orbit and occupied his own peculiar place, in the great
work of the Reformation.
Luther stands forth as the great originator of the
iveiormation, L.aivin as its great organizer. Both men
thoroughly respected each other. Melanchthon tells
us that, after reading Calvin's "Institutes" on the Supper,
Luther said: "I hope he will some day think
better of us. It is right, however, to bear something
in so excellent a spirit." Calvin addresses Luther as:
"Very renowned man and faithful servant of Jesus
Christ and at all times my revered father." Luther
said of Calvin's letter to Sadolet: "This writing has
hands and feet and I rejoice that God has called up
such people, who, if it be His will, may give the final
blow to papacy and finish, by His help, what I began
against Anti-Christ." And after reading Calvin's special
tract on the Lord's Supper, he lamented the fact
to Maurice Goltschen, his bookseller, "that Zwingli
and Oecolampadius should not thus have explained
themselves." Said he of Calvin, on that occasion,?
"Certainly a learned and pious man, and I might well
have entrusted the whole affair of this controversy to
him from the beginning." Luther therefore deeply ap
preciaiea L-aivin s conciliatory spirit.
Mclanchthon became Calvin's bosom friend and although
pointed things were frequently said in their
correspondence, especially when Calvin detected signs
of weakness in his friend, the tie between them was
only broken by Melanchthon's death in 1560. Some
passages in this correspondence, especially on Calvin's
part, are pathetic in their tenderness. An equally
strong and abiding friendship existed between Calvin
and the Strasburg Reformers and especially between
^aivin ana muunger, tne successor ot z.wingii at Zurich,
and his spiritual heir. There was not a theologian
of name in his day with whom Calvin did not stand in
direct contact. Melanchthon first called him "the theologian"
and afterwards Scaliger said of him?"Calvin
stands alone among the theologians." His great power
and erudition were recognized on every hand and his
relation to nearly all the great leaders of the Reforma- *
tion was one of mutual esteem and confidence.
Luther was the idol of the German people, even
his enemies paying him secret homage; Calvin re