Translated from the Latin of the late Prof. J. A. H. Tittmann of the University of Leipsic, and accompanied with Notes and Remarks, by M. Stuart, Prof. Sac. Lit. etc.

Introduction.

[It is not without some fears, that I may be thought to have entered too earnestly into the discussion on the subject of imputation, that I submit the following essay and my remarks upon it to the public eye. Yet when differences of opinion arise among Christians, who are desirous of knowing and obeying the truth, I know of no way so likely to compose or terminate them, as kind, respectful, and (if need be) ample discussion. I am fully aware, that the prospect of doing good depends, in such a case, much upon the manner of discussion as well as the matter. There is a way of maintaining what we believe to be truth, with an assuming, imperative, denunciatory tone; in which case all that we can rationally expect, and (I had almost said) hope, to do, in regard to men who think and judge for themselves, is to excite aversion and perhaps indignation. Nothing can be further from my wishes and intention VOL. VIII. No. 23.

1

than such a method of discussion. My sincere belief is, that the doctrine of imputation, strictly considered, whether it have respect to sin or righteousness, is unscriptural, and therefore unfounded. My apprehension also is, that, urged as it sometimes has been, it is the root and ground of some serious errors in theology. With such a conviction, why may I not have the liberty of giving reasons for my belief, that they may be canvassed, and if not well-grounded may be fairly set aside? And especially, why may not this be done, when I well know that multitudes of able and faithful ministers of the gospel and enlightened private Christians, think substantially as I do on this great subject?

In the preceding No. of this work, I intimated, on p. 283, that I intended to present the thoughts of another writer, on the subject of the imputation of Christ's active obedience to the believer. The following essay from the pen of the late Prof. Tittmann of Leipsic, is designed as the fulfilment of that prom

To those who know his character, the depth and extent of his learning, his distinguished acquisitions as a sacred philologist and theologian, and his great candour and moderation, no commendation of mine is needed to ensure respectful attention to what he has said on the controverted topic now in question. I have preferred to employ his words rather than my own, because there are some views given by him in which he must be deemed more worthy of being heard than myself.

The translation is free. I have not designedly presented any sentiment which is not to be found in the original; but I have not felt myself bound to a nude literal version, nor to the division of sentences and paragraphs which the original exhibits.

The notes which I have added are necessarily of a miscellaneous character, and were designed to be so. One principal design, however, pervades the whole of them; which is, to exhibit in its true light the grand principle of Protestantism as such, and to shew how inefficacious all attempts are, to compel in any way the conscience and understandings of men in matters of religion, except by fair argument and kind reasoning founded simply upon the Scriptures. If the notes have no tendency to do this, then they fail as to the accomplishment of what I designed. The historical investigations necessary to write them, have unavoidably been various and extensive. I would indulge the hope that the reader may not find my labour to have been bestowed in vain.

The great subject in question is now before our religious public in such a way, that retreat from discussion seems unavoidable. The sooner, therefore, the whole matter is investigated and discussed, the speedier will be the prospect of a final adjustment, at least for the present, of the difficulty, and a return to mutual kindness and confidence. M. S.]

WHAT HAS PAul taught respecting the Obedience of CHRIST?

In correcting and amending the developments of doctrinal theology, we should feel our entire dependance on the divine instruction which may be deduced from the holy Scriptures. This the nature of the thing itself teaches us; and this, moreover, will be conceded by all who give their assent to evangelical sentiments.

In former times, many doctrinal modes of expression, the words of which were taken from the sacred books and employed to express the public or private opinions of religious teachers, were adopted by theologians with the more readiness and confidence, because it was thought that they were employed in the like way by the apostles. Hence many phrases and modes of expression, which are frequent and common in the New Testament, came at length to be employed by theologians in a sense foreign to the real meaning of the inspired writers; and thus to be used, so as either to support new opinions not found in the Scriptures, or else to bring into vogue an incongruous method of teaching theology. In this way, Christian doctrines in modern times came to be built in some respects rather upon the words, than upon the sentiments, of the Scriptures.

After the reformation in hermeneutics commenced, those who turned their attention to improvement in the method of doctrinal instruction, laboured particularly upon the examination of what are called dicta classica; especially on the exainination of those by which the usual formulas of doctrine are expressed. As the labours of many in this way were successful, it is the more to be wondered at, that many formulas of this kind, which perhaps are either sanctioned by the Symbols of the church, or which may appear to be capable of being defended by appeal to particular passages of Scripture, have not been dismissed from doctrinal instruction, but still continue to predominate in

books and in the schools, to the no small detriment of advance in true Christian knowledge.

It is easy, however, to explain the manner in which all this has happened. To form an adequate and proper judgment respecting the formulas in question, not only the single passages of Scripture in which they occur must be investigated, (and with this only the greater part satisfy themselves), but the common idea which pervades all such passages must be pointed out, so that those things which are here and there spoken of in a variety of ways, may all be reduced to some certain rule or standard. Here, indeed, it requires not a little caution, in order properly to avoid seeking out the same sentiments in all passages; which some have erroneously done. Still, it will greatly aid our method of teaching doctrinal theology, if we will compare, in an intelligent way, the doctrinal formulas verbally taken from the apostles, with those sentiments of the apostles respecting any particular subject, which in different places are expressed in various forms, but still comprehended under one common notion or idea.

In teaching theology, then, or in amending the method of propounding it to the mind, it should be an object of particular care to investigate the views of the inspired writers respecting every doctrine, by a careful comparison of particular passages of the Scriptures. In this way we may determine what is the true sense which we should give, agreeably to the meaning and intention of the sacred writers, to the formulas of doctrine purporting to be drawn from the Scriptures. In particular, we should thoroughly investigate the epistles of Paul with the intention of accomplishing this, inasmuch as most of the formulas of expression in doctrinal theology are taken from the discussions of this inspired writer.

In doing thus, we should not fear any appeal to the authority of our Symbols; for the very constitution of our evangelical church requires, nay demands and insists upon it, that all doctrine shall be brought to the test of the Scriptures. Our Symbols, be it remembered also, contain the public confession of doctrine as maintained IN OPPOSITION TO GAINSAYERS, rather than a perpetual rule of teaching theology which is imperious. The theologians of our church, moreover, after the Formula Concordiae was introduced, frequently employed words and phrases that occur in the Symbols, in a sense and in a way which were new; for they used doctrinal expressions in a way