considered as our work—all of salvation including our faith is a gift of God. We are God's workmanship - God's doing, God's poem - created in Christ Jesus.
We conclude with Calvin's praise of our gracious Lord:
"I greet Thee, who my sure Redeemer art, My only trust, and Saviour of my heart! Who so much toil and woe And pain didst undergo For my poor worthless sake; We pray Thee from our hearts, And idle griefs and smarts And foolish cares to take."—W. C. R.
LETTERS
The Editor: An open letter to the anti-Union leaders—In your communications you speak of your victory over the pro-Union forces. You have won a victory. You have won a victory by spreading fear and doubt through the Assembly and by engendering suspicion between men of goodwill and by willfully and maliciously dirtying the reputation and character of honorable men. You have won by appealing to every known weakness and prejudice of the people of the South. Instead of building up you have torn down.
You have won a battle but you have lost a war. You have placed your cause completely beyond the reach of victory. When the tactics you have used are seen by the people you beguiled they will look upon you in scorn. God in His wisdom has allowed the forces of division and blindness and self righteousness to win that your works might be seen and that you might be held to them by bars of iron. For the mark of this unholy victory is upon you and no water can wash it away. You have committed an offense in Israel. Jesus said, "Woe unto the world because of offenses, for it must needs be that offenses come; but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh!" Is it allowable to say, "Thus Saith The Lord?" or shall we just raise the question and let history confirm it.
ROBERT D. DAFFIN First Presbyterian Church, Hallstead, Pa., Franklin Hill, Pa.
Rather than boast of a "victory" there has been profound thankfulness that a respite has been given to enable all of us time to return to the emphasis we believe God would have foremost in the Church. Mr. Daffin's letter does nothing to decrease this thankfulness.
Ed.
The Sacraments
Gordon H. Clark, Ph. D.
On one occasion a friend and I visited some Lutheran professors. Perhaps they had not received many Calvinistic visitors, or perhaps they merely wanted to get the conversation started; but at any rate one of them asked what were some of the differences between Calvinists and Lutherans. Since we were not on a polemic mission, it did not seem wise to mention any major topic of contention such as predestination or perseverance; so I sought for some obscure technicality and remarked that Calvinists do not accept the theory of the communicatio idiomatum. (This is the theory that the qualities of Christ's divine nature can be attributed to his human nature.) But instantly, one of the gentlemen, a professor neither of philosophy nor of theology, but of history, replied that a denial on this point would undermine the whole Lutheran view of the sacraments. At such immediate penetration, my esteem of Lutheran scholarship, already high, soared still higher. But it struck me as a great tragedy of history that Lutheranism has tenaciously held to the one point at which Luther differed from the Calvinists, while at the same time it has departed from Luther on the many points of agreement.
In attributing to Christ's human nature, particularly to his body, the divine attribute of omnipresence, the Lutherans maintain a view of the Lord's Supper that is not far enough removed from the very objectionable Romish view. The Lord's Supper and Baptism will each be discussed in the following articles; but with respect to all their sacraments the Romanists hold that the effect is, one might say, automatically produced if the sacrament is properly administered. The water itself regenerates and the physical body of Christ nourishes.
On the contrary, the Westminster Confession says that "Sacraments are holy signs and seals of the covenant of grace." This is in full accord with Paul's warnings to those Jews who trusted in circumcision. "Circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcisism . . . For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh . . ." (Rom. 2:25-29). And to the same effect: "Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat . . . for he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself . . ." (I Cor. 11: 27-31).
Furthermore, in Romanism the proper administration of a sacrament, and therefore its efficacy, depends on the intention of the priest. Unless the priest has the secret intention of
