ART. VI.-THE LESSONS OF THE CHURCH YEAR NOT A PERVERSION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE.

BY THE REV. E. V. GERHART, D. D.

To the Ancient Lessons of the Church Year the objection has been made that the Gospel and Epistle must, in some cases, be taken in a sense which modifies or changes the evident meaning of the inspired Author. The import of the selected passage viewed from the stand-point of the writer and in its relation to the entire scope of the particular book to which it belongs, is one, whilst the sense of the passage as the lesson for a given Sunday, when viewed in the light of the Church Year and in its relation to the Lessons of the preceding and succeeding Sundays, is another. We get thus two meanings. The one is conveyed by the inspired writer; the other is put into the passage by the Church. This, it is thought, involves a perversion of Holy Scripture; or if not a perversion, at least an unwarrantable degree of freedom, and an abuse of Scripture.

This objection like some others, has been urged in a plausible form; and, among the influential writers of the present age, by the celebrated Reformed Theologian, Dr. Ebrard; who, however, nevertheless concedes the wisdom and propriety of the Pericopes as an order and basis of the preaching of the Gospel.

Were the Scriptures identical and commensurate with the Gospel, or were the Scriptures the only true and legitimate. form of presenting and proclaiming the Gospel, the objection would be relevant and valid. But when we bear in mind that the books of the New Testament, though written by inspired men and thus the true standard of the Christian Faith and the authoritative source of Christian knowledge, are nevertheless merely the original, and therefore not the exclusive, but only one complex form in which the mysteries of the Faith are set forth and taught, the force of the objection must disappear.

The books of the New Testament, when viewed as now collected and arranged, or when taken in their chronological order, are not and do not claim to be a logically connected whole. Every author writes for a special purpose which is more or less general as the circumstances may require, but it is not absolutely general. He does not contemplate, immediately, all the needs of the Church, practical and theoretical, in every stage of her history throughout all the ages to come; and then write with a direct reference to those general and comprehensive needs. Every one writes too for his special purpose independently of all the rest, being moved by the same Spirit, who divideth to every man severally as He will. Yet moved by the manifestations of the Spirit, he presents his own view of Christ and His salvation; and this view is freely shaped by his peculiar psychological habit and personal character, and conditioned besides by the particular circumstances of the Church to which he is addressing himself. The human, modified by concrete inward and outward relations, is in its measure a positive factor of the written production, as really as the divine.

No writer, however, presents his own view of the whole Christian revelation. He teaches a part of the Gospel, or some elements of it; or he exhibits the Gospel under some one given. aspect or from one particular point of observation. There is indeed order and continuity of thought in every book, or nearly so: and in some, close logical reasoning and profound argument, as in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians. But no author aims at setting forth the Gospel in its entire rounded fullness. Nor does he present a system of the objective truth. A systematic view of the Gospel of Christ, as a whole, is not to be found in any one book, nor in all the books taken together of any one author.

This negative view of the Scriptures calls for no argument. That the New Testament contains no systematic presentation of the Gospel, or that the outward form in which the truth is taught in these inspired books is not as such a complete picture of the living Gospel, is now generally conceded by theologians, as well by those who do not as by those who do emphasize

the broad difference between the objective Gospel and the New Testament record. This fact does not, however, as some might imagine, invalidate or weaken the fundamental truth that Holy Scripture is the touchstone of Christian teaching and the unchangeable norm of a theological system. On the contrary, it serves rather to sustain and confirm this truth.

If we consider the Scriptures only from the stand-point of a scientific system, every single book assumes the character of a fragment, and the New Testament becomes a confused collection of fragments. But if we consider the Scriptures in their internal and organic relation to the objective Gospel; and every book in its connection with the life and character of its author, and with the time, place and circumstances for which it was written, no book is a fragment, nor are the canonical Scriptures an incomplete production; but the written word assumes a totally different character. It appears as a real unity, a living plant; and the entire New Testament, no matter what may be the external arrangement of its parts, confronts our faith as the blooming Paradise of God, where the infinite fullness, the order, harmony and beauty of the new creation reign supreme.

The author standing in the bosom of the new life, and writing under manifestation of the Spirit for a specific purpose produces a concrete work. The production is, so to speak, an individuality, that stands for itself amid the group; and is rooted not in a system of religious doctrines, but in the objective mystery of grace. The relation which it bears to the others is not outward, nor logical, nor abstract; but, what is more profound and real, it is inward, and dynamic, and concrete. Growing forth from the whole life of the Gospel, it carries and embodies this general life in itself; but it does this under a particular and definite outward form. As the true, eternal and infinite God was manifested in Jesus of Nazareth, who, although He was the second Adam and the Head of the new race, was also a real individual man, so does the infinite fullness of supernatural revelation as consummated in the resurrection and glorification of Jesus Christ, underlie, pervade and pulsate in every inspired book; yet the character of every book is truly human,

as much so as if it were not inspired by the supernatural power of the Gospel, but were human only. This human character it derives from the individual life of the author, from the moral, social and historical attitude of the times, and from the specific circumstances of the Church to which the book is adapted. The production is thus in the proper sense real and historical. It is adapted specifically to its own age; and, when considered under this aspect it is adapted in the same sense to no other age in the subsequent history of the Church.

Hence the several books differ widely from one another; and they differ so peculiarly that it is difficult if not impossible to classify them satisfactorily according to any scientific principle of division. The Gospel of St. John is unique; so is the Epistle to the Hebrews, and The Book of Revelation. A classification can at most be only approximate.

One

But this singular difference is organic, not mechanical. book differs from another as the oak from the fir, and the fir from the box. These are so many specific actualizations of one and the same general life of the vegetable kingdom. In like manner are these independent books related to the infinite life of the Gospel. Their unity and harmony stand not in the domain of thought, but in the domain of existence; not in an abstract system, but in a living constitution. Conditioned objectively by the real presence in the spirit of a new order of existence, and mediated subjectively by the communion and apprehension of faith, they are each one a single divine-human product; a product of inspiration and of individual apprehension, of inwrought supernatural power and of truly natural forces and relations; a product therefore that possesses, in one respect, a permanent, and in another, only a transient value and importance. Looking at the books of the New Testament under this two-fold aspect, that is, in their internal relation to the new creation in Christ and in their human character,-we may see what is and what is not a perversion of the Gospel; also, what is and what is not a perversion of Holy Scripture.

Fidelity to the Gospel is not identical with fidelity to the Scriptures. Internally and organically connected, and never

to be sundered, these forms of fidelity are nevertheless to be clearly distinguished. Fidelity to the Gospel and fidelity to the Scriptures, cannot contradict each other when both are genuine. The one includes the other. The minister who is faithful to the teachings of the written word in the broad, free spirit of the Gospel is so far forth faithful to the Gospel itself. But there is a false as well as a true fidelity to the Scriptures; a fidelity that perverts the Gospel and violates the free spirit that reigns in the books of the New Testament. There is a certain kind of narrow, literalistic fidelity which is no better than Pharisaic bondage to the letter. Such fidelity, so far from being true to the life of the Gospel, in reality contradicts its nature and authority.

To illustrate the difference between the Gospel or the objective revelation, and the Scriptures, and the manner in which a supposed fidelity to the Scriptures may contradict the living truth of the Gospel, we will adduce several examples.

The decalogue enjoins the observance of the seventh day, and there is no record in the Old or New Testament of any formal abrogation of the commandment; and the Apostles for a number of years at least, observed the Jewish Sabbath as well as the festivals and fasts enjoined by the Mosaic law. But the Church has surrendered the Sabbatic rest as part of a superseded dispensation, and in its stead has substituted, as being demanded by the spirit of the Christian dispensation, the festival of the resurrection, celebrated on the first day of the week.

Our Lord was circumcised as well as baptized. He became a son of the law, according to Jewish custom, at the age of twelve years; observed the Passover and other Jewish festivals during His life and ministry, not nominally only and outwardly, but in the true spirit of the Mosaic economy, for He fulfilled "all righteousness." The Apostles, following the example of our Lord, did the same thing, not only before His crucifixion, but afterwards also. After the Christian Church was fully constituted by the coming of the Holy Ghost. they continued for many years to observe strictly these Jewish festivals, the Apostle Paul, the bold antagonist of the Juda