FAITH
767
FAITH
that the only rule and standard by which all dogmas
and all doctors are to be weighed and judged, is noth-
ing else but the prophetic and apostolic writings of
the Old and New Testaments" (Form. Concordia;,
1577). But men had already perceived that the
Bible could not be left to interpret itself, and in 1571
Convocation had put forward what was, perhaps im-
wittingly, a double rule of faith; " preachers", they say,
"shall see that they never teach anything . . . ex-
cept what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and
New Testament, and what the Catholic Fathers and
ancient Bishops have collected out of that very doc-
trine" (Wilkins, "Concilia", IV, 207). Convocation
thus not only laid down that the Bible was the rule
of faith, but msisted upon its inanimate character as
a witness to the Faith, for they declared the early
Church to be its acl^nowledged interpreter; moreover,
they were themselves exercising church authority.
A somewhat different doctrine appeared in the West-
minster Confession of Faith (1643-7), which de-
clared that the "Books of the Old and New Testa-
ments are . . . given by inspiration of God, to be
the rule of faith and life" (art. ii), but that the "au-
thority of the Holy Scripture . . . dependeth
not upon the testimony of any man or church" (art.
iv). They add; " We may be moved by the testimony
of the Chiuch to an high and reverent esteem of the
Holy ,Scri]5ture . . . yet our full persuasion of
the infallible truth and divine autliority thereof is
from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing wit-
ness by and with the word in our hearts" (art. v).
Tliis is a clear enunciation of the principle that the
judgment of each individual, moved by the assistance
of the Holy Spirit, is the proximate living rule of
faith. But apart from its solvent effect upon any
true view of the Church, it is easy to see that such a
rule could never serve as an infallible interpreter of
the inanimate rule, viz., the Bible. For where does the
Bible ever testify to the inspiration of certain books?
And what limits does it assign to the canon? More-
over, the inward work of the Holy Spirit, being purely
subjective, can never be a decisive and universal test
of doctrinal divergences or critical views; thus Luther
himself termed St. James's Epistle an "epistle of straw".
The fruits of this princijjle are everywhere apparent
in Protestant Biblical criticism. "The Reformation
theologians treated Paul as if he were one of them-
selves. More recent writers do the same. In Nean-
der and Godet Paul is a pectoral theologian, in Riickert
a pious supernaturali-st, in Baura Hegelian, in Luthardt
orthodox, in Ritschl a genuine Ritschlian" (Exposi-
tory Times, 1904, p. 304). In practice, however, the
Reformed Churches have never acteil up to the principle
of private judgment, but have, in one form or another,
urged the authority of the Church in deciding the con-
tents of the Bible, its inspiration, and its meaning.
II. The Church as the Rule of Faith. — This follows necessarily from any adequate view of the Church as a Divinely constituted body, to whose keep- ing is entrusted the deposit of faith, but the grounds for this doctrine may be briefly stated as follows: —
(1) New TesUnncnt. — Christ gave His disciples no command to write, but only to teach: " going therefore, teach ye all nations, . . . teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you" (Matt., xxviii, 19-20). "As the Father hath .sent me, I also send you" (John, xx, 21). And in accordance with this, the Church is everywhere presented to us as a living and undying society compo.sed of the teachers and the taught. Christ is in the Church, and is its Head; and He promised that the Holy Spirit .should be with it and abide in it. "He will teach you all things, and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever I shall have said to you" (John, xiv, 20). Hence St. Paul calls the Church "the pillar and ground of the truth" (I Tim., iii, 15; cf. Mark, xvi, 16; Rom., x, 17; Acts, XV, 28).
(2) Tradition. — The same doctrine appears in the
writings of the Fathers of every age; thus St.
Ignatius (ad Trail., vii), " Keep yourselves from
heretics. You will be able to do this if you are not
puffed up with pride, and (so) separated from(our)
God, Jesus Christ, and from the bishop, and from the
precepts of the Apostles. He who is within the altar
is clean, he who is without is not clean; that is, he
who acts any way without the bishop, the priestly
body, and the deacons, is not clean in conscience."
And St. Irena-us (" Adv. Ha-r.", Ill, ii) says, of heretics,
that " not one of them but feels no shame in preaching
himself, and thus depraving the rule of faith" (rbv
Tfi$ d\r}8clas Kavdm); and again (III, iv), " it is not right
to seek from others that truth which it is easy to get
from the Church, since the Apostles poured into it in
fullest measure, as into a rich treasury, all that be-
longs to the truth, so that whosoever desires maj-
drink thence the draught of life". A little further on,
he speaks (V, xx) of the "true and sound preaching
of the Church, which offers to the whole world one
and the same way of salvation". Such testimonies
are countless; here we can only refer to the full and
explicit teaching which is to be found in TertuUian's
treatises against Marcion, and in hLs " De pr3>script ioni-
bus Hsereticorum", and in St. Vincent of Lerins'
famous " Commonitorium ". Indeed St. Augustine's
well-known words may serve as an epitome of patristic
teaching on the authority of the Church. " I would not
believe the Gospels imless the authority of the Catholic
Church moved me thereto" (Contra Ep. Fund., V).
It should be noted that the Fathers, especially Ter-
tuUian and St. Irenteus, use the term tradilion not
merely passively, viz., of orally bestowed Divine
teaching, but in the active sense of ecclesiastical inter-
pretation. And this is untloubtedlj' St. Paul's mean-
ing wlien he tells Timothy to upliold " the form of
sound words which thou hast heard from me " (II Tim.,
i, 13). It Ls in this sense that the various formulae of
faith, of which we have the earliest sample in I Cor.,
XV, 3-4, became the rule of faith.
(3) Theologians. — The teacliing of the Chtirch's Doc- tors on this point has ever been the same, and it will suffice if we quote two passages from St. Thomas, who, however, has no set treatise on a question which he took for granted. "The formal object of faith", he says, " is the First Truth as manifested in Holy Scrip- ture and in the Church's teaching. Hence if anyone does not adhere as to an infallible and Divine rule to the Church's teaching, which proceeds from the Church's truth manife.sted in Holy Scripture, such an one has not the habit of faith, but holds the truths of faith not by faith but by some other principle" (II-II, Q. v, a. 3). And still more explicitly when (Quodl., ix, art. 10) he asks whether canonized saints are necessarily in heaven, lie says, "it Ls certain that the judgment of the universal Church cannot possibly err in matters pertaining to the faith; lience we must stand rather by the decisions which the pope judicially pronounces than by the opinions of men, however learned they may be in Holy Scripture."
(4) Reason. — If faith is necessary for all men at all times and in all places, and if atrue saving faith demands a clear knowledge of what we have to be- lieve, it is clear that an infallible teaching Church is an absolute necessity. Such a Church alone can speak to men of all classes and at all times; it alone can, by reason of its perpetuity and ageless character, meet every new difficulty by a decla- ration of the sound form of doctrine which is to be held. If the teaching of Christ anil His .\postles is di.storted, none but the Church can say "This is its true meaning, and not that; I know that it is as I say becau.se the Spirit which assists me Ls One with the Spirit which rested on Him and on them"; the Church alone can say, "Christ truly ro.se from the tomb, and I know it, because I was there, and saw the stone
