THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
form of antinomianism in the Ranters (see below). The first, as far as known, to propagate distinctively antinomian principles in England at this time was John Eaton, who wrote The Honeycomb of Free Justification by Christ Alone (London, 1642). He distinguished the time of the law, the time of John the Baptist, and the Christian dispensation, as glorious, more glorious, and most glorious. Under the Mosaic law " sin was severely taken hold of, and punished sharply in God's children. John laid open their sins, and the danger of them, yet we read not of any punishment inflicted on God's children. The third time, the most
glorious, is since Christ groaned out his blood and life upon the cross, by which sin itself, and guilt, and punishment are so utterly and infinitely abolished that there is no sin in the Church of God, and that now God sees no sin in us; and whosoever believeth not this point is undoubtedly damned " (quoted by E. Pagitt, Heresiography, London, 1662, p. 122). The following summary of teachings of seventeenth-century Antinomians from Thomas Gataker's Antinomianism Discovered and Confuted (London, 1652; quoted by Pagitt, p. 123) may be accepted as substantially trustworthy:
1. That the Moral Law is of no use at all to a believer, nor a rule for him to walk in, nor to examine his life by, and that Christians are free from the mandatory power of it: whence one of them [Antinomians] cried out in the pulpit, "Away with the Law, which cuts off a mans legs and then bids him walk." 2. That it is as possible for Christ to sm as for a child of God to sin. 3. That the child of God need not nor ought not to ask pardon for sin, and that it is no less than blasphemy for hirr. so to do. 4. That God doth not chasten any of his children for sin, nor is it for the sins of God's people that the land is punished. 5. That if a man know himself to be in a state of grace, though he be drunk, or commit murder, God sees no sin in him. 6. That when Abraham denied his wife, and in outward appearance seemed to he in his distrust, lying, dissembling, and equivocating that his wife was his sister, yea, then all his thoughts, words, and deeds were perfectly holy and righteous from all spot of sin in the eyes of God.
By far the most unattractive of the sectaries
of this time are the Ranters, who seem to have
been almost identical in doctrine and
6. The practise with the Brethren of the
Ranters. Free Spirit and who, by their enthusiastic propagandism, seduced multitudes from the fellowship of the evangelical denominations. According to Samuel Fisher (Baby Baptism Mere Babism, London, 1653), " Some Ranters are not ashamed to say that they are Christ and God, and there is no other God than they, and what's in them, and such like blasphemies." They denied the existence of the devil, heaven, and hell. Moses they declared to be a conjurer and Christ a deceiver of the people. Prayer is useless. Preaching and lying are all one. The Scriptures they regarded as cast-off fables, and when they condescended to use them at all they practised the most absurd allegorizing. They claimed that nothing is sin but what a man thinks to be so. Their practise is represented as corresponding with their immoral teaching.
A large proportion of the Particular Baptists of England during the latter half of the eighteenth century, by way of reaction against Socinianism and the missionary movement, became
involved in a hyper-Calvinistic (supralapsarian) type of thought that involved making God responsible for evil, complete denial of 7. Later human initiative or part in salvation Phases of and conduct, renunciation of the law Antinomi- as a rule of life, and the disowning of anism. human agency and responsibility in the extension of the kingdom of Christ. This Baptist antinomianism was combated in England by Andrew Fuller, John Ryland, and others. A still more virulent type of antinomianism appeared among American Baptists in the nineteenth century by way of reaction against the missionary and educational work of the denomination. Here as in England leaders and led were illiterate and deeply prejudiced against human institutions and agencies, which they regarded as an impertinent interference with God's sovereignty. These antinomian Baptist parties are still extant. See Baptists, I., 4, §§ 4-5; II., 3, §§ 3, 4.
A. H. Newman. II. Antinomian Controversies: 1. Of the German Reformation: Antinomian doctrines were vigorously discussed in Germany during the Reformation period until the Formula of Concord made a final adjustment of the matter in 1577. Luther had held that the Mosaic law, as an ancient code devised under special conditions for a particular people, was superseded by the civil law of modern states, and no longer possessed for Christians a juridical or ceremonial force.1 Furthermore, the whole law, even the decalogue included, was in no wise to be employed by Christians in the spirit of justification by 1. Luther's works, since that involved a super- Earlier ficial and mercenary idea of divine Teachings justice. There was, however, need to about the preach the law from a spiritual stand- Law, point, emphasizing a realization of sin by which the conscience should be humbled before the divine wrath; though the preaching of the law exclusively led to
1 In combating the legalistic element in medieval Roman Catholic teaching and in the radical religious parties of the early Reformation time, Luther allowed himself to use language in disparagement of the Mosaic law so strong and unqualified as to give great encouragement to those that were eager for fleshly freedom. A few sentences should be quoted: " Christ is not harsh, severe, biting as Moses. Therefore, away with Moses forever, who shall not terrify deluded hearts." Again: " The gospel is heavenly and divine, the law earthly and human; tne righteousness of the gospel is just as distinct from that of the law as heaven from earth, as light from darkness. The gospel is light and day, the law darkness and night." In his polemic " against the Heavenly Prophets " (Erl. ed., xxix. 150) he says: " We will take our stand on the right ground and say that these sin-teachers and Mosaic prophets shall leave us unconfounded by Moses; we will neither see nor hear Moses. How does this please you, dear revolutionists ? And we say further that all such Mosaic teachers [i.e., the Zwickau prophets, q.v.] deny the gospel, banish Christ, and overthrow the whole New Testament. I speak now as a Christian and for Christians, since Moses was given to the Jewish people alone and has nothing to do with us Gentiles and Christians. We have our gospel and New Testament; if they will prove from this that pictures are to be done away with, we will gladly follow them. But if they wish by means of Moses to make Jews of us, we will not suffer it." Of course, he did not mean utterly to repudiate Moses, but rather by a tour de force to repudiate what he considered an unauthorized use of Moses. (a. h. x.)