have been from the beginning. They are, however, far better • known, and more clearly understood now than they weiB a thou- sand years ago. The mechanism of the heavens was the same iri the days of Pythagoras as it was in those of La Place ; and yet the astronomy of the latter was immeasurably in advance of that of the former. The change was effected by a continual and gradual progress. The same progress has taken place in theological know!- j edge. Every believer is conscious of such progress in his own ex- perience. When he was a child, he thought as a child. As he grew in years, he grew in knowledge of the Bible. He increased not only in the compass, but in the clearness, order, and harmony of his knowledge. This is just as true of the Church collectively as of the individual Christian. It is, in the first place, natural, if not inevitable, that it should be so. The Bible, although so clear and simple in its teaching, that he who runs may read and learn enough to secure his salvation, is still full of the treasures of the wisdom and knowledge of God ; full of ra ^aO-q tov Oeov, the pro- foundest truths concerning all the great problems which have taxed the intellect of man from the beginning. These truths are not systematically stated, but scattered, so to speak, promiscuously over the sacred pages, just as the facts of science are scattered over the face of nature, or hidden in its depths. Every man knows that there is unspeakably more in the Bible than he has yet learned, as every man of science knows that there is unspeakably more in nature than he has yet discovered, or understands. It stands to reason that such a book, being the svibject of devout and laborious study, centuiy after century, by able and faithful men, should come to be better and better understood. And as in matters of science, although one false theory after another, founded on wrong princi- ples or on an imperfect induction of facts, has passed away, yet real progress is made, and the ground once gained is never lost, so we should naturally expect it to be with the study of the Bible. False views, false inferences, misapprehensions, ignoring of some facts, and misinterpretations, might be expected to come and go, in endless succession, but nevertheless a steady progress in tho knjwledge of what the Bible teaches be accomplished. And we might also expect that here, too, the ground once surely gained would not again be lost.
But, in the second place, what is thus natural and reasonable in itself is a patent historical fact. The Church has thus advanced in theological knowledge.. The difference between the confused and discordant representations of the early fathers on all subjects con-
118 INTRODUCTION. [Ch. V. — R. C. R. of Faith.
nected with the doctrines of the Trinity and of the person of Christ, and the clearness, precision, and consistency of the views presented after ages of discussion, and the statement of these doc- trines by the Councils of Chalcedon and Constantinople, is as great almost as between chaos and cosmos. And this ground has never been lost.- The same is true with regard to the doctrines of sin and gi'ace. Before the long-continued discussion of these subjects in the Augustinian period, the greatest confusion and contradiction prevailed in the teachings of the leaders of the Church ; during those discussions the views of the Church became clear and set- tled. There is scarcely a principle or doctrine concerning the fall of man, the nature of sin and guilt, inability, the necessity of the Spirit's influence, etc., etc., which now enters into the faith of evangelical Christians, which was not then clearly stated and au- thoritatively sanctioned by the Church, In like manner, before- the Reformation, similar confusion existed Avith regard to the great doctrine of justification. No clear line of discrimination was drawn between it and sanctification. Indeed, during the Middle Ages, and among the most devout of the schoolmen, the idea of guilt was merged in the general idea of sin, and sin regarded as merely moral defilement. The great object was to secure holi- ness. Then pardon would come of course. The apostolic, Pauline, deeply Scriptural doctrine, that there can be no holiness until sin be expiated, that pardon, justification, and reconciliation, must pre- cede sanctification, was never clearly apprehended. This was the grand lesson which the Church learned at the Reformation, and which it has never since forgot. It is truQ then, as an historical fact, that the Church has advanced. It understands the gr^t doc- trines of theology, anthropology, and soteriology, far better now, than they were understood in the early post-apostolic age of the Church.
Modern Theory of Development. Very distinct from the view above presented is the modern the- ory of the organic development of the Church. This modem theory is avowedl}^ founded on the pantheistic principles of Schel- ling and Hegel. With them the universe is the self-manifestation and evolution of the absolute Spirit. Dr. Schaff ^ says, that this theory " has left an impression on German science that can never be effaced ; and has contributed more than any other influence to diffuse a clear conception of tlie interior organism of history." In his work on the " Principles of Protestantism," ^ Dr. SchaiF saya
1 Wliat, is Church History t p. 75. 2 Pagg 150.