ESSAYS IN ORTHODOXY.* Ir is an encouraging sign of the
times that so much interest should be taken by the younger clergy in theology. No doubt there are many who are very insufficiently equipped in theological learning, and the writer of the book before us has some trenchant passages in his Epilogue on the unsatisfactory. state' of the teaching in so-called Theological Colleges ; but this book and the many similar treatises which aro constantly appearing show that a leaven is at work, and that the accredited teachers of religion are beginning to put their theological ideas in order. Mr. Quick comes forward as a champion on the orthodox
side ; not so truculent indeed or so witty as Mr. Knox, whom he characterizes as " ultra-orthodox," but with the same disposition to attack Modernism in all its forms, and especially to find fault with those Christian apologists who claim that certain Articles of the Creed must be "restated in the light of modern knowledge. What is required, says Mr. Quick, is not " restatement but explanation." But if Mr. Quick finds Mr. Knox " ultra-orthodox," this can only be because there are doctrines of the Creed which he, orthodox as he is, feels the necessity of restating ; while Mr. Knox is content with everything as it is. Wo find an example of such a doctrine in the Athanasian Creed. Mr. Quick,
being a metaphysician, recognizes that the doctrine of the Trinity as there expressed " is clothed in the philosophic technicalities of a bygone age." How then does he propose to meet the difficulty ? By an appeal for " restatement " ? By no means. He lays it down that the purpose of the dogma being to exclude error and not to express the whole truth of the mystery, the acceptance of the dogma does not
preclude " ever fresh and different interpretations of the truth which it protects." By this method of cipoling with dogmas, an orthodox
metaphysician can find no difficulties anywhere, and so " restatement " can never be necessary. We do not grudge Mr. Quick his freedom ; but we think he ought to remember how different is the case of the historical critic ; for it is the historical critics from whom most of the proposals for restatement " have come, because they have found cause to question some of the historical statements in the Apostles'
Creed. To the historian an alleged occurrence must bo either a fact or not ; but no such alternative troubles the metaphysician ; and so
Mr. Quick thinks it not indecorous to refer to historical critics as " self- accredited specialists in sincerity." We dislike Mr. Quick's excursions into polemics, because he shows no understanding of the position against which he protests ; and they are besides altogether foreign to the purpose of his treatise, which deals not with the historical statements of the Creed butgwith its metaphysical doctrines. Having made that criticism, which amounts to saying that the author is still a very young man and apt to use his teeth, as Plato said young people will, we wish to express the opinion that the main task which he set himself has been on the whole very successfully carried out. His explanations of most of the doctrines discussed are certainly helpful ; he has especially a very useful gift of illustration by analogy, of which we may quote an instance or two. For example, in illustration of God's work as Creator ho puts forward man's recognized power of creating character by influence
" If we ask within our human world what is the most effective force in the creation of our souls, I suppose we should be bound to reply. that it is the influence, and above all the love, of our fellow-men. It is a bare matter of fact that it is the love of parent, teacher, and friend, which really makes the true character of a man, and enables him to become his true and perfect self, in so far as he succeeds at all in reaching his ideaL . . . In every moment of our mutual converse we are in a very true sense creating each other. If, then, we are to think of God as the Creator of souls, we must naturally think of Him also as their Lover. The creative love of men, whereby in the society of earth we make and determine each other, finds its source and its fulfilment in the Love of God, the ever-present environment of each of us, which makes and determines the development of all."
Take again the problem of the self-limitation of knowledge and power in the incarnate Word of God. This Mr. Quick illustrates by the "self- limitation of sympathy " necessary in any one who wishes to teach a child the elements of a subject in which he is an expert
He must in some sense take on him the nature of the child. Ho must put out of his mind the problems with which he has been grappling for his forthcoming book ; he must forget the phraseology of his cla.ssic article in the latest technical encyclopedia. He must put himself back at the beginning of the subject, that he may guide another beginner along the first stages of his journey. And yet the one thing ho must not do is to forget the way. His own more recondite knowledge will not occupy his attention, yet it will reveal itself surely and clearly in the certainty with which he surmounts the initial obstacles and avoids the first easy by-paths which lead to nothing. The exposition of a teacher less expert could not be at once so simple and so tree to the deepest principles of the subject. May we not in all reverence apply this analogy to the incarnate consciousness of our Lord ? In a true sense He emptied Himself . . . yet in Bethlehem and on Calvary and at every part in Hie earthly ministry the Divine Power and Wisdom act and are glorified through the very limitations which the Divine sympathy has imposed."
Further, the chapters upon 'The H. oly Spirit as Witness and Sanctifier " • Essay, in Orthodoxy. By Oliver Chan 'Quick. London: Macmillan and Co. Ii.. contain not a little good counsel upon practical problems of belief and conduct ; and they are written with a freshness that makes their perusal pleasure. In his discussion of some Articles of the Creed Mr. Quick is, we think, less successful. It is not given to many theologians to say an illuminating word on the Atonement ; and we regret to find that some of the ideas which Mr. Quick defends as orthodox are such as have been definitely rejected by the more enlightened minds and consciences of Christian people to-day ; for example, the idea that the death of Christ was the God-inflicted penalty for human sin. It should be sufficient to say that this idea receives no countenance from our Lord's own teaching, either in the Parable of the Vineyard, or in His reference to the great fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. " Offering for sin" and " penalty for sin" are different ideas which should not be confused. Again, in the discussion about the Last Judgment we note the absence of any reference to the current teaching of the Jewish Apocalypses, which is a serious omission. Clearly in discussing this topic the way must be prepared for the theologian by the despised historical critic, whose task it should be to determine what elements in the Gospel tradition belong not to Christ's own teaching but to the background of the Gospels, Once more, we must express surprise at Mr. Quick's doctrine that pain and death are the result of sin. In one place ho makes the interesting suggestion that St. Paul's belief that the majority of his converts would not die before the Advent" enabled him to grasp more firmly the central truth, that physical death is only an outward symbol of the great fact that through self-sacrifice alone can the human personality enter upon life eternal." That is undoubtedly a point worth making. But a few pages previously, when writing of the entry of death into the world before the creation of man, he speaks of it as an evil " which seems to be the result as well as the foreshadowing of sin." It may still be considered orthodox to declare that all death is the result of sin, but in view of our new knowledge that death was in the world before man, that doctrine would seem to require, if not " restatement," at least a more careful " explanation " than Mr. Quick gives it in this remarkable obiter dictum.
Previous page
