35Slotsom van mijn eerste lezing was, dat, in wetenschappelijken zin, onder Calvinisme te verstaan is, die voleinde evolutie van het Protestantisme, die in de 16e eeuw de levensontwikkeling van ons geslacht in een nieuwe en hoogere phase heeft geleid; dat de moderne wereldbeschouwing, die haar uitgangspunt in de Fransche Revolutie vond, niets dan het atheïstisch „Zerrbild” van dit Calvinisme is, en alzoo niet als een hoogere ontwikkelingsphase is te beschouwen; weshalve een iegelijk die weigert het atheïsme, of juister gezegd nog, het antitheïsme als uitgangspunt te kiezen, op het Calvinisme heeft terug te gaan, om uit het Calvinistisch beginsel, mits ontwikkeld in een vorm voor onzen tijd, te leeren denken en leven.

1 The conclusion arrived at in my first Lecture, was first, that, scientifically speaking, Calvinism means the completed evolution of Protestantism, resulting in a both higher and richer stage of human development. Further, that the worldview of Modernism, with its starting-point in the French Revolution, can claim no higher privilege than that of presenting an atheistic caricature of the brilliant ideal proclaimed by Calvinism, therefore being unqualified for the honor of leading us higher on. And, lastly, that whosoever rejects atheism, or to speak still more boldly, refuses to accept antitheism, as his fundamental thought, is bound to go back to Calvinism, not to repristinate it in its worn-out form, but once more to catch hold of the Calvinistic principles, in order to embody them in such a form as, suiting the requirements of our own century, may restore the needed unity to Protestant thought and the lacking energy to Protestant practical life.

46 The conclusion arrived at in my previous Lecture, was first, that, scientifically speaking, Calvinism means the completed evolution of Protestantism, resulting in a both higher and richer stage of human development. Further, that the world-view of Modernism, with its starting-point in the French Revolution, can claim no higher privilege than that of presenting an atheistic imitation of the brilliant ideal proclaimed by Calvinism, therefore being unqualified for the honor of leading us higher on. And, lastly, that whosoever rejects atheism as his fundamental thought, is bound to go back to Calvinism, not to restore its worn-out form, but once more to catch hold of the Calvinistic principles, in order to embody them in such a form as, suiting the requirements of our own century, may restore the needed unity of Protestant thought and the lacking energy to Protestant practical life.

A primeira conclusão alcançada em minha palestra anterior foi que, cientificamente falando, o Calvinismo significa a evolução completa do Protestantismo, resultando em um estágio de desenvolvimento humano tanto superior quanto mais rico. Além disso, que a cosmovisão do Modernismo, com seu ponto de partida na Revolução Francesa, não pode reivindicar privilégio maior que o de representar uma imitação ateísta do brilhante ideal proclamado pelo Calvinismo, estando portanto desqualificada para a honra de guiar-nos a níveis superiores. E, por último, que quem rejeita o ateísmo como seu pensamento fundamental, é constrangido a voltar-se para o Calvinismo, não a restaurar sua forma gasta, mas, uma vez mais, a apoderar-se dos princípios calvinistas, a fim de incorporá-los de tal forma que, satisfazendo os requerimentos de nosso próprio século, possa restaurar a unidade necessária do pensamento Protestante e a energia que falta à sua vida prática.

Заключение, к которому я пришел в своей предыдущей лекции, состояло, во-первых, в том, что, говоря с точки зрения науки, кальвинизм завершает эволюцию протестантизма, знаменуя более высокий и насыщенный этап человеческого развития. Кроме того, мировоззрение модернизма, имеющее своей отправной точкой Французскую революцию, — лишь атеистическое подобие того высокого идеала, который провозглашен кальвинизмом; а потому у него нет прав вести нас дальше и выше. И, наконец, мы заключили, что всякий, отвергающий атеизм как основную идею, вынужден вернуться к кальвинизму не для того, чтобы оживить его отжившие разновидности, но для того, чтобы еще раз усвоить его принципы и воплотить их в такую форму, которая, отвечая требованиям нашего столетия, могла бы вернуть протестантской мысли необходимое ей единство, а протестантской практической жизни — недостающую ей энергию.

Ik ga thans in mijn tweede lezing, getiteld: Het Calvinisme en de Religie, u het standpunt uiteenzetten, dat het Calvinisme inneemt op religieus gebied. Dat het op religieus gebied een eigen en indrukwekkend standpunt inneemt, wordt door niemand betwist. Het heeft als met één tooverslag een eigen godsdienstvorm, een eigene theologie, een eigen gestalte der kerk, een eigen kerkrecht, een eigen eeredienst en een eigen religieuse practijk geschapen, en het voortgezet historisch onderzoek leert op steeds klemmender wijs, dat in dit alles op Calvinistisch terrein één zelfde grondgedachte heerscht en één zelfde beginsel belichaamd is. Meet de kracht, die het Calvinisme hierdoor openbaarde, af naar de volslagen machteloosheid op dit terrein 36 van het moderne leven. Ook dat moderne leven toch roept, sinds het zijn mystieke periode intrad, in Europa en Amerika beide om een eigen godsdienstvorm. Een eeuw na het flikkeren van het klatergoud der „Aufklärung”, en nu het materialisme op wetenschappelijk terrein de aftocht blies, lokt de vroomheid weer, en is een bad in den warmen stroom van het mysticisme nogmaals modeartikel geworden. Bijna sensualistisch zwelgt die moderne mystiek haar bedwelmende teugen uit den nectarkelk van het Oneindige. Op de puinhoopen van het kerkelijk leven der Puriteinen zou aldus een nieuwe religie met nieuwen eeredienst, als een hoogere evolutie van het religieuse leven, worden ingeluid. Sinds meer dan het vierde eener eeuw is ons de inwijding en ontsluiting van dit nieuwe heiligdom toegezegd. En toch er werd niets uit. Er kwam niets grijpbaars. Er dook geen vormend beginsel op. Er ontstond geen gemeenschap. En zelfs de eerste ontkieming van de beloofde plant bleef uit. En daartegenover staat nu in de 16e eeuw de reuzengeest van Calvijn, die als met één meesterslag een geheel religieus gebouw in strengen stijl optrok, en die u de fundamenten van zijn bouw schier vergeten deed door de snelheid, waarmeê heel die bouw voltooid werd. In wat de moderne gedachte op religieus erf dusver meer knutselde, dan met machtige hand schiep, heeft niet één volk, heeft niet één gezin, heeft niet één ziel nog het requiescat voor het cor inquietum van Augustinus ¹⁾ gevonden, onderwijl de Reformator van Genève onder vijf volken tegelijk aan breede nationale kringen, én toen én nu na drie eeuwen, stuur voor het leven, verheffing tot den Vader der geesten, en klaarheid in het heilige schonk. Zoo rijst dus vanzelf de vraag, wat van die wondere kracht het geheim was. Laat mij op die vraag het antwoord mogen zoeken, eerst voor de Religie als zoodanig, dan voor haar openbaringsvorm in het kerkelijk leven, en ten slotte in haar vrucht voor de levenspraktijk.

In my present Lecture, therefore, treating of Calvinism and Religion, first of all I will try to illustrate the dominant position occupied by Calvinism in the central domain of our worship of the Most High. The fact that, in the 2 religious domain, Calvinism has occupied from the first a peculiar and impressive position, nobody will deny. As if by one magical stroke, it created its own Confession, its own Theology, its own Church Organisation, its own Church Discipline, its own Cultus, and its own Moral Praxis. And continued historical investigation proves with increasing certainty that all these new Calvinistic forms for our religious life were the logical product of its one fundamental thought and the embodiment of one and the same principle. Measure the energy which Calvinism here displayed by the utter incapability Modernism evinced in the same domain by the absolute fruitlessness of its endeavours. Ever since it entered its "mystical" period, Modernism also, both in Europe and in America, has acknowledged the necessity of carving out a new form for the religious life of our time. Hardly a century after the once glittering tinsel of Rationalism, now that Materialism is sounding its retreat in the ranks of science, a kind of hollow piety is again exercising its enticing charms, and every day it is becoming more fashionable to take a plunge into the warm stream of mysticism. With an almost sensual delight this modern mysticism quaffs its intoxicating draught from the nectar-cup of some intangible infinite. It was even purposed that, on the ruins of the once so stately Puritanic building, a new religion, with a new ritual should be inaugurated, as a higher evolution of religious life. Already, for more than a quarter of a century, the dedication and solemn opening of this new sanctuary has been promised us. And yet it has all led to nothing. No tangible effect has been produced. No formative principle lias emerged from the imbroglio of hypotheses. Not even the beginning of an associative movement is as yet perceptible, and the long looked for plant has not even lifted its head above the barren soil. — Now, in contraposition to tin's, look at the giant spirit of Calvin, who, in the sixteenth century. with one master stroke, placed before the gaze of the 3 astonished world an entire religious edifice, erected in the purest Scriptural style. So rapidly was the whole building completed that most of the spectators forgot to pay attention to the wonderful structure of the foundations. In all that the religious modern thought has, I will not say created, as with a master hand, but heaped together, like an unsuccessful amateur, — not one nation, not one family, hardly one solitary soul has (to use Augustine's words), ever found the requiescat for his "broken heart," while the Reformer of Geneva, by his might)' spiritual energy, unto five nations at once, both then, and after the lapse of three centuries, has afforded guidance in life, uplifting of the heart unto the Father of Spirits, and holy peace, for ever. This naturally leads to the question — what was the secret of this wonderful energy? Allow me to present the answer to this question, — first in Religion as such, next in religion as manifested in the Life of the Church, and lastly r in the fruit of Religion for Practical Life.

In my present Lecture, therefore, treating of Calvinism and Religion, first of all I will try to illustrate 47 the dominant position occupied by Calvinism in the central domain of our worship of the Most High. The fact that, in the religious domain, Calvinism has occupied from the first a peculiar and impressive position, nobody will deny. As if by one magical stroke, it created its own Confession, its own Theology, its own Church Organization, its own Church Discipline, its own Cultus, and its own Moral Praxis. And continued historical investigation proves with increasing certainty that all these new Calvinistic forms for our religious life were the logical product of its own fundamental thought and the embodiment of one and the same principle. Measure the energy which Calvinism here displayed by the utter incapability Modernism evinced in the same domain by the absolute fruitlessness of its endeavors. Ever since it entered its “mystical” period, Modernism also, both in Europe and in America, has acknowledged the necessity of carving out a new form for the religious life of our time. Hardly a century after the once glittering tinsel of Rationalism, now that Materialism is sounding its retreat in the ranks of science, a kind of hollow piety is again exercising its enticing charms and every day it is becoming more fashionable to take a plunge into the warm stream of mysticism. With an almost sensual delight this modern mysticism quaffs its intoxicating draught from the nectar cup of some intangible infinite. It was even purposed that, on the ruins of the once so stately Puritanic building, a new religion, with a new ritual, should be inaugurated as a higher evolution of religious life. Already, for more than a quarter of a century, the dedication and solemn opening of this 48 new sanctuary has been promised us. And yet it has all led to nothing. No tangible effect has been produced. No formative principle has emerged from the imbroglio of hypotheses. Not even the beginning of am associative movement is as yet perceptible, and the long looked for plant has not even lifted its head above the barren soil. – Now, in contraposition to this. Look at the giant spirit of religious in the sixteenth century, with one master-stroke, placed before the gaze of the astonished world an entire religious edifice, erected in the wrest Scriptural style. So rapidly was the whole building completed that most of the spectators forgot to pay attention to the wonderful structure of the foundations. In all that the religious modern thought has. I will not say created, as with a master hand. but heaped together. like an unsuccessful amateur. – not one nation, not one family, hardly one solitary soul has (to use Augustine’s words) ever found the requiescat for his “broken heart,” while the Reformer of Geneva, by his mighty spiritual energy, unto five nations at once, both then, and after the lapse of three centuries, has afforded guidance in life, the uplifting of the heart unto the Father of Spirits, and holy peace, forever. This naturally leads to the question – what was the secret of this wonderful energy? Allow me to present the answer to this question, – first in Religion as such, next in religion as manifested in the Life of the Church, and lastly in the fruit of Religion for Practical Life.

Nesta palestra, portanto, tratando sobre o Calvinismo e Religião, antes de mais nada tentarei ilustrar a posição dominante ocupada pelo Calvinismo na questão central de nossa adoração do Altíssimo. Ninguém negará o fato que, no campo religioso, o ele tem ocupado desde o princípio uma posição peculiar e magnífica. Como que por um toque mágico, ele criou sua própria Confissão, sua própria Teologia, sua própria Organização Eclesiástica, sua própria Disciplina Eclesiástica, sua própria Liturgia, e sua própria Praxis Moral. E a investigação histórica continua a provar, com crescente certeza, que todas estas novas formas calvinistas para nossa vida religiosa foram o produto lógico de seu próprio pensamento fundamental e a incorporação de um e o mesmo princípio.

Avalie a energia que o Calvinismo exibiu aqui comparando-a a total incapacidade que o Modernismo evidenciou no mesmo campo, em virtude da absoluta esterilidade de seus esforços. Desde que entrou em seu período “místico”, o Modernismo, tanto na Europa quanto na América, também tem reconhecido a necessidade de esculpir uma nova forma para a vida religiosa de nossos dias. Quase um século depois, o outrora brilhante ouropel46 do Racionalismo, agora que o Materialismo está fazendo soar sua retirada das classes de ciência, um tipo de piedade vazia, novamente está exercendo seu charme atraente e a cada dia está se tornando mais na moda dar um mergulho no rio morno do misticismo. Com um encanto quase sensual este misticismo moderno bebe em grandes goles sua bebida inebriante do copo de néctar de algum infinito intangível. Foi até mesmo proposto que, sobre as ruínas da outrora tão majestosa construção Puritana, uma nova religião, com um novo ritual, deveria ser inaugurada como uma evolução superior da vida religiosa. Já, por mais de um quarto de século, a dedicação e a abertura solene deste novo santuário nos tem sido prometida. E, todavia, tudo tem dado em nada. Não tem sido produzido nenhum efeito tangível. Nenhum princípio formativo tem emergido deste imbróglio de hipóteses. Nem mesmo o começo de um movimento associativo é ainda perceptível, e a planta longamente esperada ainda não tem levantado sua cabeça acima do solo estéril.

Em contraposição a isto, olhe para o espírito gigante de Calvino, que, no século 16, com um toque de mestre colocou diante do olhar fixo do mundo espantado um edifício religioso inteiro, erigido no mais puro estilo escriturístico. A construção toda foi completada tão rapidamente que muitos dos espectadores esqueceram de prestar atenção à maravilhosa estrutura das fundações. Em tudo que o pensamento religioso moderno tem, eu não direi criado, como com uma mão mestre, mas empilhado como um amador mal sucedido, - nenhuma nação, nenhuma família, dificilmente uma alma solitária (para usar palavras de Agostinho) jamais tenha encontrado o requiescat47 para seu “coração quebrantado”; enquanto que o Reformador de Genebra, por sua energia espiritual poderosa, para cinco nações ao mesmo tempo, tanto naquela época como após o lapso de três séculos, tem fornecido direção para a vida, o elevar do coração até o Pai dos Espíritos, e santa paz para sempre. Isto naturalmente conduz à questão, qual era o segredo desta energia maravilhosa? Permitam-me responder a esta questão, primeiro na Religião como tal, a seguir na Religião como manifesta na Vida da Igreja, e finalmente no fruto da Religião na Vida Prática.

Поэтому теперь, говоря «о кальвинизме и религии», я прежде всего попытаюсь проиллюстрировать доминирующую позицию кальвинизма в основной сфере нашей жизни, связанной с поклонением Всевышнему. Никто не станет отрицать, что в религиозной сфере кальвинизм занимал с самого начала особое, весьма заметное положение. Словно по мановению волшебной палочки он создал свое вероисповедание, свою теологию, свое церковное устройство, свою церковную дисциплину, свое богослужение и свою нравственную практику. Историческое исследование доказывает все определенней, что все эти новые формы, созданные кальвинизмом для нашей религиозной жизни, логически завершили его основную идею и воплотили один и тот же принцип. Сравните энергию, выказанную кальвинизмом, с крайней беспомощностью модернизма, который в тех же самых сферах не сделал абсолютно ничего. С того времени, как начался его «мистический» период, модернизм и в Европе, и в Америке признает, что надо создать новые, современные формы религиозной жизни. Прошло меньше столетия с той поры, когда рационализм блистал мишурным блеском, и вот сейчас материализм отступает в область науки, а какое-то пустое благочестие снова расставляет сети и с каждым днем все моднее становится нырять в теплый поток мистицизма. Этот нынешний мистицизм с почти чувственным наслаждением упивается ядовитым нектаром неосязаемой бесконечности. Наблюдалось даже стремление на развалинах некогда прочного пуританского строения воздвигнуть новую религию, с новым ритуалом, являющую более высокую ступень религиозного бытия. Больше четверти столетия нам обещают освятить и торжественно открыть это новое святилище; однако ничего не выходит, осязаемых результатов нет. Путаное скопление гипотез не породило действенного принципа. Нет даже признаков какого-нибудь движения, вожделенное растение не поднялось над бесплодной почвой.

Теперь посмотрим на великий дух Кальвина, который в XVI столетии могучим движением представил изумленному миру целостное здание в истинно библейском стиле. Его воздвигли так быстро, что большинство зрителей не заметило, как удивителен его фундамент. Тем, что современная религиозная мысль создала, даже не создала, а скорее нагромоздила, как неудачник-недоучка, ни один народ, ни одна семья и, наверное, ни одна душа не упокоила (если использовать выражение Августина) своего неспокойного сердца. А женевский реформатор со всей своей могучей духовной энергией и спустя три столетия снабжает руководством в жизни пять народов сразу, вознося их сердца к Всевышнему и даря им святой покой. Естественно спросить — в чем секрет этой удивительной энергии? Позвольте мне ответить на этот вопрос, рассмотрев сначала религию как таковую, затем религию, как она проявляется в жизни Церкви, и, наконец, ее плоды в практической жизни.

Eerst dan de Religie als zoodanig, die in haar optreden door 37 vier, onderling samenhangende, grondvragen beheerscht wordt: Zal ze om God of om den mensch? Zal ze rechtstreeks of middellijk? Zal ze partieel, dan wel heel onzen persoon en heel ons leven omvattend zijn? Kan ze normaal of moet ze abnormaal, d.i. hier soteriologisch wezen? Vier vragen, waarop het Calvinisme antwoordt: niet egoïstisch en om den mensch, maar ideëel om Gods wil; niet middellijk door kerk of priester, maar rechtstreeks uit het hart; niet partieel naast het leven, maar heel het leven opeischend; en zoo ook soteriologisch, d.i. niet uit de nu abnormale natuur, maar uit de palingenesie.

First, then, we must consider Religion as such. Here four mutually dependent fundamental questions arise; — (1) Does Religion exist for the sake of God, or for Man ? (2) Must it operate directly or mediate!)/? (3) Can it remain partial in its operations or has it to embrace the whole of our personal being and existence? and, (4) Can it bear a normal, or must it reveal an exceptional, i.e. a soteriological character? To these four questions Calvinism answers : (1) Man's religion ought to be not egotistical, and for man, but ideal, for the sake of God. (2) It has to operate not mediately, by human interposition but directly, from the heart. (3) It may not remain partial, as running alongside of life, but must lay hold upon our whole existence. And (4) Its character should be soteriological, i.e., it should spring, not from our fallen and therefore abnormal nature, but from the new man, re- 4 stored by palingenesis to his original standard.

First, then, we must consider Religion as such. 49 Here four mutually dependent fundamental questions arise; – 1. Does Religion exist for the sake of God, or for Man? 2. Must it operate directly or mediately? 3. Can it remain partial in its operations or has it to embrace the whole of our personal being and existence? and, 4. Can it bear a normal, or must it reveal an abnormal ,i.e., a soteriological character? To these four questions Calvinism answers: 1. Man’s religion ought to be not egotistical, and for man, but ideal, for the sake of God. 2. It has to operate not mediately, by human interposition, but directly from the heart, 3. It may not remain partial, as running alongside of life, but must lay hold upon our whole existence. And, 4. Its character should be soteriological, i.e., it should spring, not from our fallen nature, but from the new man, restored by palingenesis to his original standard.

Primeiro devemos considerar a Religião como tal. Aqui surgem quatro questões fundamentais mutuamente dependentes: - 1. A Religião existe por causa de Deus, ou por causa do homem? 2. Ela deve operar diretamente ou mediatamente? 3. Ela pode manter-se parcial em suas operações ou tem de abraçar o todo de nosso ser e existência pessoal? E, 4. Ela pode manter um caráter normal, ou deve revelar um caráter anormal, isto é, um caráter soteriológico?

A estas quatro questões o Calvinismo responde: 1. A religião do homem não deve ser egoísta e por causa do homem, mas ideal, por causa de Deus. 2. Ela não deve operar mediatamente, pela intervenção humana, mas diretamente do coração. 3. Ela não pode permanecer parcial, como correndo ao lado da vida, mas deve exercer controle sobre toda nossa existência. E, 4. Seu caráter deveria ser soteriológico, isto é, deveria nascer, não de nossa natureza caída, mas do novo homem, restaurado pela palingênesis ao seu padrão original.

Итак, сначала мы рассмотрим религию как таковую. Здесь возникает четыре фундаментальных взаимосвязанных вопроса: 1) Ради кого существует религия — ради Бога или ради человека? 2) Должна ли она действовать непосредственно или через посредников? 3) Может ли она воздействовать лишь на часть жизни или должна охватывать всю сферу нашего личностного бытия? 4) Может ли она быть естественной или должна быть «неестественной», т. е. иметь сотериологический характер? На эти четыре вопроса кальвинизм отвечает: 1) Религия должна быть не эгоистической, существующей для человека, но идеальной, существующей ради Бога. 2) Она должна действовать не опосредованно, через человека, а непосредственно исходить из сердца. 3) Она должна не сопутствовать жизни, но охватывать всю нашу жизнь. 4) Она должна быть сотериологической, т. е. проистекать не из нашей падшей природы, а из обновленного человека, восстановленного через новое рождение.

Elk dier vier punten ga ik u toelichten.

Allow me then successively to elucidate each of these four points.

Allow me, then, successively to elucidate each of these four points.

Permitam-me, então, elucidar sucessivamente cada um destes quarto pontos.

Позвольте мне теперь последовательно разъяснить каждое из этих четырех положений.

De nieuwere Religionsphilosophie laat de religie opkomen, uit wat haar niet schiep, maar bij den abnormalen, d.i. den gevallen mensch, haar stut en in stand houdt. Ze zag het stokje bij het stekje voor het stekje zelf aan. Daarbij nu wijst men terecht op de tegenstelling tusschen den mensch en de overmacht van den hem omringenden kosmos, en nu treedt de religie als redmiddel in, om den door vrees bevangen mensch tegenover dien dreigenden kosmos te sterken. In zich zelf gevoelende, hoe zijn geest zijn lichaam beheerscht, gist hij, dien kosmos naar zichzelf afmetend, ook in de natuur de drijfkracht van een verborgen geestelijk wezen. Animistisch verklaart hij de beweging in de natuur uit het in haar wonen van een heirleger van geesten, en poogt nu die geesten te vangen, te bezweren, te neigen tot zijn bestwil. Of ook, uit deze atomistische opvatting tot een meer monistische opklimmend, gelooft hij aan goden, straks hiërarchisch onder één God geconcentreerd, die boven de natuur staan, en hem dus tegen die natuur helpen kunnen. En eindelijk, de tegenstelling tusschen hetgeen geestelijk en stoffelijk is grijpende, eert hij den Urgeest als tegen al het zienlijke overstaande, om, straks ook dien Urgeest loslatend, in de hoogheid van zijn eigen geest tegenover al het stoffelijke, zich neder te buigen voor een ideaal, waarvan hij zelf de heroieke drager is. Doch door welke stadiën deze egoïstische religie zich ook voortbewege, ze is altijd subjectief en bestaat om den mensch. Men is religieus om de natuurgeesten te bezweren, om zich tegenover den kosmos vrij te maken, om zich in het besef zijner geestesmacht 38 boven al het zichtbare te verheffen. Onverschillig of de Lamah-priester de booze geesten in zijn kruiken opsluit, bij de natuurgoden van het Oosten hulp tegen de natuur wordt gezocht, in de meer intelligente goden van Griekenland zekere geestesmacht wordt aangebeden die zich boven de natuur verheft, of eindelijk in de ideëele philosophie de geest van den mensch zelf voorwerp van aanbidding wordt, het is en blijft een religie om aan den mensch beveiliging, vrijmaking, zelfverheffing, ten deele triomf zelfs over den dood te verzekeren. En ook waar deze religie zich monotheïstisch toespitst, blijft de God, dien men aanbidt, een God die er is om den mensch te helpen, om in de staten orde en rust, om in den nood hulp en uitredding, om tegenover wat verlaagt en ontadelt, veredeling en hooger bezieling te verzekeren. Gevolg waarvan dan ook is, dat al zulke religie bloeit bij hongersnood en pestilentie, bloeit onder de armen en verdrukten, bloeit bij de kleinen en onmachtigen, maar kwijnt in dagen van voorspoed, de welgestelden niet aantrekt, en door de hooger ontwikkelden wordt losgelaten. Zoodra men zich rustig en welgesteld voelt, en, dank zij de wetenschap, zich door den kosmos en zijn vernielende machten niet langer bedreigd weet, werpt men de krukken der religie weg en loopt onreligieus op eigen beenen. Een egoïstische religie, die, zoodra het egoïstisch belang voldaan is, als overbodig wegvalt. Aldus was het verloop der religie bij alle niet-Christelijke volkeren, en onder de naam-Christenen herhaalt zich in onze eeuw bij de hoogere, welgestelde en ontwikkelde klasse der maatschappij almeer geheel hetzelfde verschijnsel. Op het Europeesche continent acht de moderne beschaafde klasse zich nu reeds aan alle religie ontgroeid.

Modern religious philosophy ascribes the origin of religion to a potency, from which it could not originate, but which acted merely, as its supporter and preserver. It has mistaken the dead prop of the living shoot for the living shoot itself. Attention is called, and very properly, to the contrast between man. and the overwhelming power of the cosmos which surrounds him, and now religion is introduced as a mystical energy, trying to strengthen him against this immense power of the cosmos which inspires him with such deadly fear. Being conscious of the dominion which his own unseen soul exercises over his tangible body, he infers quite naturally, that Nature, also, must be moved by the impulse of some hidden spiritual being. Animistically, therefore, he first explains the movements of nature as the result of an indwelling army of spirits, and tries to catch them to conjure them, to bend them to his advantage. Then, rising from this atomistic idea to a more monistic conception, he begins to believe in the existence of personal gods, — first in the sense of a disorderly host of unconnected beings, but soon concentrated hierarchically, under some supreme Being, — expecting from these divine beings, who stand above nature, effectual assistance against the fiendish power of Nature. And finally, grasping the contrast between the spiritual and the material, he paj^s homage to the Primative and Supreme Spirit, as standing over against all that is visible, till, in the end. having abandoned his faith in such an extramuudane Spirit, as a personal being, and charmed by the loftiness of his own human spirit, he prostrates himself before some impersonal ideal of which in selfadoration, he deems himself to lie the worshipful bearer. But whatever may be the various stages in the progress of this egoistic religion, it never overcomes its subjective 5 character, remaining always a religion for the sake of man. Men are religious in order to conjure the spirits hovering behind the veil of Nature, to free themselves from the oppressive sway of the cosmos, or to raise themselves above all that is visible, in the consciousness of their spiritual superiority. It matters not whether the Llama priest confines the evil spirits in his jugs, whether the nature-gods of the Orient are invoked to find shelter agaiust the forces of nature, whether the loftier gods of Greece are worshipped in their ascendency above nature, or whether, finally, idealistic philosophy presents the spirit of man himself as the real object of adoration;— in all these different forms it is and remains a religion fostered for man's sake, aiming at his safety, his liberty, his elevation, and partly also at his triumph over death. And even when a religion of this kind has developed itself into monotheism, the god whom it worships remains invariably a god who exists in order to help man, in order to secure good order and tranquillity for the State, to furnish assistance and deliverance in time of need, or to strengthen the nobler and higher impulse of the human heart in its ceaseless struggle with the degrading influences of sin. The consequence of this is that all such religion thrives in time of famine and pestilence, it flourishes among the poor and oppressed, and it expands among the humble and the feeble; but it pines away in the days of prosperity, it fails to attract the well-to-do, it is abandoned by those who are more highly cultured. As soon as the more civilized classes enjoy tranquillity and comfort, and by the progress of science feel more and more delivered from the pressure of the cosmos, they throw away the crutches of religion, and with a sneer at everything holy, go stumbling forward on their own poor legs. This is the fatal end of egoistic religion; — it becomes superfluous and dissappears as soon as the egoistic interests are satisfied. This was the course of religion among all non-Christian nations, in earlier times, and the 6 same phenomenon is repeating itself in our own century, among nominal Christians of the higher, more prosperous and more cultured classes of society. On the continent of Europe at least, the modern and civilized middle classes deem themselves to have outgrown all religion.

Modern religious philosophy ascribes the origin of religion to a potency, from which it could not originate, but which acted merely as its supporter and preserver. It has mistaken the dead prop of the living shoot for the living shoot itself. Attention is called, and very properly, to the contrast between man, and the overwhelming power of the cosmos which surrounds him; and now religion is introduced as a mystical energy, trying to strengthen him against this immense power of the cosmos which inspires him with such deadly fear. Being conscious of the dominion which his unseen soul 50 exercises over his own tangible body, he infers, quite naturally, that Nature, also, must be moved by the impulse of some hidden spiritual power. Animistically, therefore, he first explains the movements of nature as the result of an indwelling army of spirits, and tries to catch them, to conjure them, to bend them to his advantage. Then, rising from this atomistic idea to a more comprehensive conception, he begins to believe in the existence of personal gods, expecting from these divine beings, who stand above nature, effectual assistance against the fiendish power of Nature. And finally, grasping the contrast between the spiritual and the material, he pays homage to the Supreme Spirit, as standing over against all that is visible, till, in the end, having abandoned his faith in such an extramundane Spirit, as a personal being. and charmed by the loftiness of his own human spirit, he prostrates himself before some impersonal ideal, of which in self adoration he deems himself to be the worshipful incarnation. But whatever may be the various stages in the progress of this egoistic religion, it never overcomes its subjective character, remaining always a religion for the sake of man. Men are religious in order to conjure the spirits hovering behind the veil of Nature, to free themselves from the oppressive sway of the cosmos. It matters not whether the Lama priest confines the evil spirits in his jugs, whether the nature-gods of the Orient are invoked to afford shelter against the forces of nature, whether the loftier gods of Greece are worshipped in their ascendency above nature, or whether, finally, idealistic philosophy presents the spirit of man himself as the 51 real object of adoration; – in all these different forms it is and remains a religion fostered for man’s sake, aiming at his safety, his liberty, his elevation, and partly also at his triumph over death. And even when a religion of this kind has developed itself into monotheism, the god whom it worships remains invariably a god who exists in order to help man, in order to secure good order and tranquility for the State, to furnish assistance and deliverance in time of need, or to strengthen the nobler and higher impulse of the human heart in its ceaseless struggle with the degrading influences of sin. The consequence of this is that all such religion thrives in time of famine and pestilence, it flourishes among the poor and oppressed, and it expands among the humble and the feeble; but it pines away in the days of prosperity, it fails to attract the well-to-do, it is abandoned by those who are more highly cultured. As soon as the more civilized classes enjoy tranquility and comfort, and by the progress of science feel more and more delivered from the pressure of the cosmos, they throw away the crutches of religion, and with a sneer at everything holy go stumbling forward on their own poor legs. This is the fatal end of egoistic religion; – it becomes superfluous and disappears as soon as the egoistic interests are satisfied. This was the course of religion among all non-Christian nations, in earlier times, and the same phenomenon is repeating itself in our own century, among nominal Christians of the higher, more prosperous and more cultured classes of society.

A Filosofia religiosa moderna atribui a origem da religião a uma potência da qual ela não poderia originar-se, mas que simplesmente agiu como seu patrocinador e preservador. Ela tem confundido o canhão que dispara a bala com a bala em si. A atenção é chamada, e muito propriamente, ao contraste entre o homem e o poder esmagador do cosmos que o cerca; e a nova religião é introduzida como energia mística, tentando fortalecê-lo contra este poder imenso do cosmos que lhe causa um medo mortal. Estando consciente do domínio que sua alma invisível exerce sobre seu próprio corpo material, ele naturalmente infere que a Natureza também deve ser movida pelo impulso de algum poder espiritual oculto. Animisticamente,48 portanto, primeiro ele explica os movimentos da natureza como o resultado da habitação de um exército de espíritos, e tenta pegá-los, invocá-los e subjugá-los em sua vantagem. Então, subindo desta idéia atomística49 para uma concepção mais compreensiva, ele começa a crer na existência de deuses pessoais, esperando destes seres divinos, que permanecem acima da natureza, assistência eficaz contra o poder demoníaco da Natureza. E, finalmente, entendendo o contraste entre o espiritual e o material, ele homenageia ao Espírito Supremo como estando em contraste com tudo que é visível, até, no fim, tendo abandonado sua fé em um tal Espírito extramundano como um ser pessoal e, encantado pela altivez de seu próprio espírito humano, prostra-se diante de algum ideal impessoal, do qual em auto-adoração supõe ser ele mesmo a venerável encarnação.

Quaisquer que possam ser os vários estágios no progresso desta religião egoísta, ela nunca supera seu caráter subjetivo, permanecendo sempre uma religião por causa do homem. Os homens são religiosos a fim de invocar os espíritos que pairam por trás do véu da Natureza, para libertarem-se da influência opressiva do cosmos. Não importa se o sacerdote Lama aprisiona os espíritos maus em suas cadeias, se os deuses da natureza do Oriente são invocados para proporcionar abrigo contra as forças da natureza, se os deuses mais sublimes da Grécia são adorados em sua ascendência sobre a natureza, ou se, finalmente, a Filosofia idealista apresenta o espírito do próprio homem como o verdadeiro objeto de adoração.

Em todas estas diferentes formas ela é e continua sendo uma religião promovida por causa do homem, visando sua salvação, sua liberdade, sua elevação, e em parte também seu triunfo sobre a morte. E mesmo quando uma religião deste tipo tem se desenvolvido em monoteísmo, o deus que ela adora invariavelmente permanece um deus que existe para ajudar o homem, para assegurar a boa ordem e a tranqüilidade do Estado, para fornecer assistência e livramento em tempos de necessidade, ou para fortalecer o mais nobre e alto impulso do coração humano em sua incessante luta contra a influência degradante do pecado.

A conseqüência disto é que toda religião como esta desenvolve-se em tempos de fome e pestilência, ela prospera entre os pobres e oprimidos, e expande-se entre os humilde e fracos; mas definha imediatamente nos dias de prosperidade, deixa de atrair o próspero, é abandonada por aqueles que são mais altamente cultos. Assim que as classes mais civilizadas gozam tranqüilidade e conforto, e pelo progresso da ciência sentem-se mais e mais libertas da pressão do cosmos, jogam fora as muletas da religião, e com um sorriso desdenhoso de tudo que é santo andam tropeçando em suas próprias pernas fracas. Este é o fim fatal da religião egoísta; - ela torna-se supérflua e desaparece assim que os interesses egoístas são satisfeitos. Este foi o curso da religião entre todas as nações não cristãs nos tempos primitivos, e o mesmo fenômeno está se repetindo em nosso próprio século, entre cristãos nominais das classes mais altas, mais prósperas e mais cultas da sociedade.

Современная религиозная философия приписывает возникновение религии той силе, от которой она возникнуть не могла; которая только помогала ей и поддерживала ее. Неживую подпорку живого ростка приняли за сам росток. Нам напоминают, и весьма уместно, о пропасти между человеком и подавляющей мощью мироздания, и тут же вводят религию как таинственную силу, пытаясь укрепить человека против неизмеримой силы, которая внушает ему смертельный страх. Понимая, что невидимая душа господствует над осязаемым телом, он заключает, вполне естественно, что природой движет скрытая духовная сила. Сперва он объясняет движения, происходящие в природе, с точки зрения анимизма, полагая, что в ней действуют полчища духов, и пытается уловить их, заклясть, использовать себе во благо. Потом, поднявшись от этой идеи к более широкой концепции, он начинает верить в личностных богов, стоящих над природой, и ожидает от них действенной защиты против демонических сил природы. Наконец, уловив разницу между духовным и материальным, он оказывает поклонение Высшему Духу, стоящему над всем видимым, пока, отказавшись от веры в такого духа как в личность и прельстившись величием своего собственного духа, он не простирается перед неким безличным идеалом, поклоняясь самому себе и почитая себя воплощением высшего начала. Но каковы бы ни были стадии этой эгоистической религии, она не преодолевает своей субъективности, оставаясь религией для человека. Люди религиозны, чтобы, заклиная духов, скрывающихся за завесой природы, освободить себя от страшной хватки мироздания. Неважно, загоняет ли лама злых духов в какие-то кувшины, призывают ли восточных богов природы защитить нас от природных же сил, поклоняются ли более возвышенным богам Греции, вставших выше природы, или, наконец, поклоняется ли идеалистическая философия человеческому духу. Во всех своих формах эта религия существует ради человека; цель ее — его безопасность, свобода, возвышение и, в какой-то мере, победа над смертью. Даже когда такая религия развилась в монотеизм, бог, почитаемый ею, по-прежнему существовал, чтобы помогать человеку, обеспечивать добрый порядок и спокойствие в государстве, помогать в нуждах или укреплять более благородные и возвышенные побуждения сердца в их непрестанной борьбе с гибельными последствиями греха. Отсюда следует, что все такие религии имеют успех во времена голода и мора, среди бедных и угнетенных, униженных и немощных, но увядают в дни процветания. Ей не удается привлечь благополучных, и ее оставляют образованные. Как только культурные слои общества обретут спокойствие и благодаря научному прогрессу почувствуют себя все более свободными от бремени мироздания, они отбрасывают подпорку религии и, насмехаясь над всем святым, упорно идут вперед на своих слабых ногах. Это — неизбежный конец эгоистической религии. Она становится лишней и исчезает, когда удовлетворяются эгоистические интересы. Таков был путь всякой религии у нехристианских народов, и то же самое повторяется в нашем столетии среди номинальных христиан, принадлежащих к обеспеченным и культурным слоям общества.

Doch juist daartegen staat nu het Calvinisme lijnrecht over. Het ontkent niet dat de religie óók haar menschelijke en subjectieve zijde heeft, noch betwist het feit, dat het zoeken van hulp in nood, en van sterkte tegenover de natuurmacht, of van geesteshoogheid tegenover het zinlijke, de religie draagt en bevordert, maar het houdt staande, dat ge de orde der dingen omkeert, zoo ge hierin het wezen en het doel der religie zoekt. Dit alles zijn voor den Calvinist, ja, vruchten die er uit voortvloeien, en steunsels 39 die haar stutten, maar niet de reden van haar bestaan. Alle religie werpt óók een zegen voor den mensch af, maar ze bestaat niet om den mensch, ze bestaat om God. Niet God is er om zijn schepping, maar de schepping is er om Gods wil. Hij heeft alle ding om zich zelfs wil geschapen. Deswege schiep Hij zelfs eene religieuse expressie in heel de natuur, in de plant, in het dier, in het kind. „De gansche aarde is van zijn heerlijkheid vol”. „Hoe heerlijk, o God, is uw naam over de gansche aarde.” „De hemelen vertellen Gods eer en het uitspansel zijner handen werk.” „Uit den mond der kinderen en der zuigelingen hebt Gij U lof bereid.” Vorst en hagel, sneeuw en damp, de afgronden en de stormwind, het moet alles God loven. Maar gelijk heel de schepping culmineert in den mensch, kan ook de verheerlijking haar voleinding eerst vinden in den mensch, die naar Gods beeld geschapen is; niet omdat de mensch, die zoekt, maar omdat God zelf de eenig wezenlijke religieuse expressie door het semen religionis ²⁾, alleen in het hart des menschen inschiep. God zelf maakt den mensch religieus door den sensus divinitatis ³⁾, die Hij spelen laat op de snaren van zijn hart. De expressie van nood vloeit hier wel in, maar alleen ten gevolge der zonde. En oorspronkelijk, naar zijn aard, is de religie uitsluitend expressie van bewondering en aanbidding, die verheft en aantrekt, niet van een afhankelijkheid die scheidt en drukt. Zooals de Serafs om den troon het Heilig, heilig, heilig! uitroepen, zoo moet ook de religie van de wereld der menschenkinderen één eeregeven zijn aan dien God, die haar schiep en bezielt. Alles rekent in de religie van God, en niet van den mensch af. De mensch blijft instrument en middel, God alleen is oorzaak en doel, uitgangspunt en punt van ruste, de bron waaruit de wateren vloeien en de oceaan waarin ze zich uitstorten. Irreligieus zijn is zijn hoogste levensdoel als mensch verzaken, en omgekeerd, om God te bestaan, om Gods wille er te zijn, en geheel in de verheerlijking van den naam des Heeren op te gaan, is van alle ware religie de pit en kern. “Uw naam worde geheiligd, Uw Koninkrijk kome, Uw wil geschiede,” is de bedetrits die in alle goed gebed vooropgaat. De leus is en 40 blijft toch: „Zoek eerst het Koninkrijk van uw God”, en denk daarna pas aan eigen nood. „Uit Hem, door Hem, tot Hem zijn alle dingen”. Vóór alles de belijdenis van Gods absolute souvereiniteit. Het gebed is in alle religie de diepste levensuiting. Aldus is de grondopvatting der religie op Calvinistisch terrein, en hooger opvatting vond niemand, en is niet te vinden. De Calvinistische grondgedachte, tevens de eenige Schriftuurlijke en zuiver Christelijke, is op religieus terrein de realiseering van het hoogste ideaal. Ook de religionsphilosophie onzer eeuw heeft bij haar stoutste grepen nog nimmer hooger gezichtspunt noch idealer opvatting gevonden.

Now the position of Calvinism is diametrically opposed to all this. It does not deny that religion has also its human and subjective side;— it does not dispute the fact that religion is promoted, encouraged and strengthened by our disposition to seek help in time of need and spiritual elevation in the face of sensual passions ; but it maintains that it reverses the proper order of things to seek, in these accidental motives, the essence and the very purpose of religion. The Calvinist values all of these as fruits which are produced by religion, and as props which give it support, but he refuses to honour them as the reason of its existence. Of course, religion, as such, produces also a blessing for man, but it does not exist for the sake of man; — it exists for the sake of God. It is not (rod who exists for the sake of His Creation; — the Creation exists for the sake of God. For, as the Scripture says, He has created all things for Himself. For this reason God Even impressed a religious expression on the whole of unconscious nature, — on plants, on animals and also on children. "The whole earth is full of His glory.** "How excellent is Thy Name oh God, in all the earth." "The Heavens declare the gloiy of God and the firmament sheweth His handiwork." "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings Thou hast ordained praise." Frost and hail, .snow and vapour, the abyss and the hurricane, — everything must praise God. But just as the entire creation reaches its culminating point in man, so also religion finds its clear expression only in man who is made in the image of God, and this not because man seeks it, but because God Himself increated in man's nature the real essential religious expression, by means of the seed of religion, as Calvin defines it, sown in our human heart. 7 God Himself makes man religious by means of the sensus divimtatis i.e. the sense of the Divine, which He causes to strike the chords on the harp of his soul. A sound of need interrupts the pure harmony of this divine melody, but only in consequence of sin. In its original form, in its natural condition, religion is exclusively a sentiment of admiration and adoration, which elevates and unites, not a feeling of dependence which severs and depresses. Just as the anthem of the Seraphim around the throne is one uninterrupted cry of "Holy, — Holy, —Holy"! so also the religion of man upon this earth should consist in one echoing of God's glory, as our Creator and Inspirer. The starting-point of every motive in religion is God and nut Man. Man is the instrument and means, God alone is here the goal, the point of departure and the point of arrival, the fountain, from which the waters flow, and at the same time, the ocean into which they finally return. To be irreligious is to forsake the highest aim of our existence, and on the other hand to covet no other existence than for the sake of God, to long for nothing but for the will of God, and to be wholly absorbed in the glory of the name of the Lord, such is the pith and kernel of all true religion. "Hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. Thy Will be done." is the threefold petition which gives utterance to all true religion. Our watchword must be.— "Seek first the kingdom of Cod," and after that think of your own need. First stands the confession of the absolute sovereignty of the Triune God; for of Him, through Him, and unto Him are all things. And therefore in prayer remains the deepest expression of all religious life. This is the fundamental conception of religion as maintained by Calvinism, and hitherto, no one has ever found a higher conception. For no higher conception can be found. The fundamental thought of Calvinism, at the same time the fundamental thought of the Bible, and of Christianity itself, leads, in the domain of religion to the realization of the highest 8 ideal. Nor has the philosophy of religion in our own century, in its most daviug flights, ever attained a higher point of view nor a more ideal conception.

Now the position of Calvinism is diametrically opposed 52 to all this. It does not deny that religion has also its human and subjective side; it does not dispute the fact that religion is promoted, encouraged and strengthened by our disposition to seek help in time of need and spiritual elevation in the face of sensual passions; but it maintains that it reverses the proper order of things to seek, in these accidental motives, the essence and the very purpose of religion. The Calvinist values all of these as fruits which are produced by religion, or as props which gave it support, but he refuses to honor them as the reason for its existence. Of course, religion, as such, produces also a blessing for man, but it does not exist for the sake of man. It is not God who exists for the sake of His creation; – the creation exists for the sake of God. For, as the Scripture says, He has created all things for Himself.

For this reason God even impressed a religious expression on the whole of unconscious nature, – on plants, on animals and also on children. “The whole earth is full of His glory.” “How excellent is Thy Name, God, in all the earth.” “The Heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament sheweth His handiwork.” “Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings Thou hast ordained praise.” Frost and hail, snow and vapor, the abyss and the hurricane, – everything does praise God. But just as the entire creation reaches its culminating point in man, so also religion finds its clear expression only in man who is made in the image of God, and this not because man seeks it, but because God Himself implanted in man’s nature the real essential religious expression, by means of the “seed of religion” 53(semen religionis), as Calvin defines it, sown in our human heart.

God Himself makes man religious by means of the sensus divinitatis, i.e., the sense of the Divine, which He causes to strike the chords on the harp of his soul. A sound of need interrupts the pure harmony of this divine melody, but only in consequence of sin. In its original form, in its natural condition, religion is exclusively a sentiment of admiration and adoration which elevates and unites, not a feeling of dependence which severs and depresses Just as the anthem of the Seraphim around the throne is one uninterrupted cry of “Holy, – Holy, – Holy”!, so also the religion of man upon this earth should consist in one echoing of God’s glory, as our Creator and Inspirer. The starting-point of every motive in religion is God and not Man. Man is the instrument and means, God alone is here the goal, the point of departure and the point of arrival, the fountain, from which the waters flow, and at the same time, the ocean into which they finally return. To be irreligious is to forsake the highest aim of our existence, and on the other hand to covet no other existence than for the sake of God, to long for nothing but for the will of God, and to be wholly absorbed in the glory of the name of the Lord, such is the pith and kernel of all true religion. “Hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. Thy Will be done,” is the threefold petition, which gives utterance to all true religion. Our watchword must be, – “Seek first the kingdom of God,” and after that, think of your own need. First stands the confession of the absolute sovereignty 54 of the Triune God; for of Him, through Him, and unto Him are all things. And therefore our prayer remains the deepest expression of all religious life. This is the fundamental conception of religion as maintained by Calvinism, and hitherto, no one has ever found a higher conception. For no higher conception can be found. The fundamental thought of Calvinism, at the same time the fundamental thought of the Bible, and of Christianity itself, leads, in the domain of religion, to the realization of the highest ideal. Nor has the philosophy of religion in our own century, in its most daring flights, ever attained a higher point of view nor a more ideal conception.

A posição do Calvinismo é diametralmente oposta a tudo isto. Ele não nega que a religião tem igualmente seu lado humano e subjetivo; não discute o fato de que a religião é promovida, encorajada e fortalecida por nossa disposição de buscar ajuda em tempo de necessidade e consagração espiritual diante de paixões sensuais; porém, sustenta que isto inverte a própria ordem das coisas para buscar, nestes motivos acidentais, a essência e o verdadeiro propósito da religião. O Calvinismo valoriza tudo isto como frutos que são produzidos pela religião, ou como âncoras que lhe dão apoio, mas rejeita honrá-los como a razão de sua existência. Certamente, a religião, como tal, produz também uma bênção para o homem, mas ela não existe por causa do homem. Não é Deus quem existe por causa de sua criação; a criação existe por causa de Deus. Pois, como diz a Escritura, ele tem criado todas as coisas para si mesmo.

Por esta razão, Deus mesmo imprimiu uma expressão religiosa no conjunto da natureza inconsciente, - nas plantas, nos animais e também nas crianças. “Toda a terra está cheia de sua glória”. “Grande é o teu nome, Deus, em toda a terra”. “Os céus proclamam a glória de Deus e o firmamento anuncia as obras de suas mãos”. “Da boca de pequeninos e crianças de peito tiraste perfeito louvor”. Fogo e saraiva, neve e vapor, e ventos procelosos – todos louvam a Deus. Mas, do mesmo modo como a criação toda alcança seu ponto culminante no homem, assim também a religião encontra sua clara expressão somente no homem que é feito à imagem de Deus, e isto não porque o homem a busque, mas porque o próprio Deus implantou na natureza do homem a verdadeira expressão religiosa essencial, por meio da “semente da religião” (semen religionis), como Calvino a define, semeada em nosso coração humano. O próprio Deus fez o homem religioso por meio do sensus divinitatis, isto é, o senso do Divino, que ele faz tocar as cordas da harpa de sua alma. Um ruído de necessidade interrompe a harmonia pura desta melodia divina, mas somente em conseqüência do pecado. Em sua forma original, em sua condição natural, a religião é exclusivamente um sentimento de admiração e adoração que eleva e une, não uma sensação de dependência que separa e deprime. Do mesmo modo como o hino dos Serafins ao redor do trono é um clamor ininterrupto de “Santo, Santo, Santo!”, assim também a religião do homem sobre esta terra deveria consistir em um ecoar da glória de Deus, como nosso Criador e Inspirador.

O ponto de partida de todo motivo na religião é Deus e não o homem. O homem é o instrumento e o meio, somente Deus é o alvo aqui, o ponto de partida e o ponto de chegada, a fonte da qual as águas fluem e, ao mesmo tempo, o oceano para o qual elas finalmente retornam. Ser irreligioso é abandonar o propósito mais alto de nossa existência, e por outro lado não cobiçar outra existência senão a vivida para Deus, não ansiar por nada exceto a vontade de Deus, e estar totalmente absorvido na glória do nome do Senhor, isto é a essência e o cerne de toda verdadeira religião. “Santificado seja o teu nome. Venha teu reino. Seja feita tua vontade”, é a tripla petição, que dá expressão à verdadeira religião. Nossa senha deve ser - “Buscai primeiro o reino de Deus”, e depois disto, pense em suas próprias necessidades. Primeiro permanece a confissão da absoluta soberania do Deus Trino; pois dele, através dele, e para ele são todas as coisas. E por isso, nossa oração continua a mais profunda expressão de toda vida religiosa.

Esta é a concepção fundamental da religião mantida pelo Calvinismo, e até agora, ninguém jamais encontrou uma concepção superior, pois nenhuma concepção superior pode ser encontrada. O pensamento fundamental do Calvinismo, ao mesmo tempo o pensamento fundamental da Bíblia e do próprio Cristianismo, conduz, no campo da religião, à realização do mais alto ideal. A Filosofia da religião em nosso próprio século, em seus vôos mais ousados, não tem jamais atingido um ponto de vista superior nem uma concepção mais ideal.

Позиция кальвинизма прямо противоположна этому. Он не отрицает, что у религии есть и человеческая, субъективная сторона; и не сомневается в том, что ее развивает и укрепляет наше стремление искать помощи в нужде, а также духовного укрепления перед лицом чувственных страстей. Однако он утверждает, что, когда в привходящих мотивах видят суть и самую цель религии, надлежащий порядок извращается. Кальвинизм ценит эти моменты, как плоды религии или ее подпорки, но отказывается считать их причиной ее существования. Конечно, религия как таковая помогает человеку, но она не существует ради человека. Не Бог существует ради Своего творения, а творение существует ради Бога. Как говорит Писание, Он создал все для Себя.

Вот почему Бог налагает религиозный отпечаток даже на всю бессознательную природу — на растения, на животных, на детей. «Вся земля полна славы Его». «Как велико имя Твое, Боже, по всей земле». «Небеса проповедуют славу Божию, творение рук Его возвещает твердь». «Из уст младенцев и грудных детей Ты устроил хвалу». Мороз и град, снег и туман, бездна и ветер — все возносит хвалу Богу. Но подобно тому, как все творение находит завершение в человеке, так и религия находит ясное выражение только в человеке, который сотворен по образу Божиему, и не потому, что человек ищет религию, а потому что Сам Бог влагает ее в природу человека посредством «семени религии», как говорит Кальвин, посеянного в человеческом сердце¹.

Сам Бог делает человека религиозным через sensus divinitatis, чувство Божественного, от которого и звенят струны нашей души. Набат нужды прерывает чистую гармонию божественной мелодии, но это — вследствие греха. В первоначальной форме, в естественном состоянии религия — только восхищение и поклонение, которое возвышает и объединяет, а не чувство зависимости, которое разделяет и угнетает. Подобно тому, как серафимы у престола несмолкаемо возглашают «Свят, Свят, Свят!», религия человека на этой земле должна лишь славить Бога, нашего Творца и Вдохновителя. Отправная точка всякого религиозного побуждения — Бог, а не человек. Человек — орудие и средство, только Бог — цель, начальная и конечная точка, источник, из которого текут воды, и в то же время океан, куда они возвращаются. Безрелигиозный — тот, кто оставил, отбросил высшую цель нашего бытия.

А вот не желать иной жизни, кроме жизни ради Бога, стремиться только к воле Божией, полностью погрузиться в славу имени Божиего — сердцевина и ядро всякой истинной религии. «Да святится имя Твое. Да приидет царствие Твое. Да будет воля Твоя», — это тройственное прошение выражает всякую истинную религию. Наш девиз — «Ищите прежде царства Божия», а потом уж думайте о собственных нуждах. Прежде всего мы исповедуем абсолютное верховенство Триединого Бога, ибо Им, через Него, и для Него все сотворено. Поэтому молитва — самое глубокое выражение религиозной жизни. Так понимает религию кальвинизм, и до сего дня никто не изобрел более возвышенного понимания. Его просто нельзя придумать. Основная идея кальвинизма, и основная идея Библии, и самого христианства ведет к осуществлению высочайшего идеала. Религиозная философия нашего столетия даже в своих самых смелых действиях не достигала более возвышенного идеала и более идеального понимания.

De tweede hoofdvraag bij alle religie is, of ze rechtstreeks dan wel „vermittelt” zal zijn. Zal er een kerk, een priester, een goeroe, een geheimnisdrager, tusschen God en uw hart staan, of wel zal, met wegwerping van alle tusschenschakels, de band der religie rechtstreeks de ziel aan God verbinden. En dan is in alle niet-Christelijke religiën de tusschenpersoon onmisbaar, en was ook op Christelijk erf de tusschenpersoon in de aanroeping van Maria en van de heiligen, in de priesterlijke hiërarchie van den clerus, tot zelfs in de vereering der martelaren weer binnengedrongen. En hoe ook Luther tegen het priesterlijk intermediair te velde trok, toch bleef ook in de kerk, die naar zijn naam genoemd is, de ecclesia docens ⁴⁾ als tusschenpersoon en uitdeeler der geheimnissen staan. Ook op dit punt drong eerst Calvijn tot de realiseering van het ideaal der zuivere religie door. De religie gelijk hij ze verstond, moest nullis mediis interpositis ⁵⁾, de rechtstreeksche gemeenschap tusschen God en het menschelijk hart verwezenlijken, en niet uit priesterhaat, noch uit heiligenafschuw, noch door onderschatting van de beteekenis der engelen, maar uitsluitend om het wezen der religie, en in dat wezen de eere van zijn God, te handhaven, trad hij, van geen wijken of geen wankelen wetend, tegen al wat zich tusschen de zien en God indrong met heilige verontwaardiging op. 41 Wel zag hij helder in, dat de gevallen mensch, om tot echte religie bekwaam te worden, een Middelaar van noode had, maar die Middelaar mocht dan ook niet een medemensch, maar kon alleen de God-mensch, God-zelf zijn, en door de inwoning van God den Heiligen Geest moest dit Middelaarschap niet onzerzijds, maar van Gods zijde worden bezegeld. In alle religie God zelf steeds de actieve macht. Hij ons religieus makend, ons religieus stemmend, en wij slechts klank en vorm gevend aan de religieuze expressie die Hij zelf uit ons te voorschijn riep. Hier ligt dan ook de fout van hen, die in Calvijn slechts een Augustinus redivivus zagen. Augustinus toch bleef zelf bisschop, bleef tusschen God Drieëenig en den leek in staan, en heeft den consequenten eisch der echte religie voor anderen zoo weinig ingezien, dat hij in zijn dogmatiek de Kerk als de mystieke Draagster huldigt, in wier schoot God alle genade doet uitvloeien en uit wier schat alle mensch de genade te ontvangen heeft. Augustinianisme en Calvinisme kan alleen verwarren, wie oppervlakkig enkel op de praedestinatie let, en verzuimt tot op den bodem van de religie door te dringen. Immers Religie om den mensch haalt van zelf den mensch als tusschenpersoon binnen; Religie om Gods wil sluit den tusschenpersoon onverbiddelijk uit. Beoogt de religie hoofdzakelijk den mensch te helpen, en moet het de mensch zijn die door zijn religieusiteit deze hulpe verwerft, dan is het volkomen natuurlijk dat de minder vrome mensch de tusschenkomst van een heiliger mensch inroept. Wat hij zelf niet verkrijgen zou, verkrijgt dan een ander voor hem. De vrucht hangt dan te hoog aan de takken, en alleen wie hooger grijpen kan, plukt ze en reikt ze den kleinere toe. Maar is de eisch der religie, dat elk hart Gode eere geve, dan kan de één niet voor den ander worden geschoven, dan moet een ieder persoonlijk opkomen, en bereikt de religie haar oogmerk eerst in het algemeene priesterschap der geloovigen. Zelfs bij het pasgeboren kind moet dan de religieuse expressie door God zelf in het hart zijn gelegd, en dat kindeke moet, zoo het ongedoopt sterft, niet in een limbus innocentium ⁶⁾ worden weggeborgen, maar 42 in persoonlijke gemeenschap tot God treden, om Hem te loven eeuwiglijk en altoos.

The second principal question in all religion is whether it must be direct, or mediate. Must there stand a church. a priest, or, as of old, a sorcerer, a dispenser of sacred mysteries, between God and the soul, or shall all intervening links be cast away, so that the bond of religion shall bind the soul directly to God. Now we find that in all non-Christian religions, without any exception, human intercessors are deemed necessary, and in the domain of Christianity itself the intercessor intruded again upon the scene, in the saints of the cloisters, in the Blessed Virgin, in the host of angels, and in the priestly hierarchy of the clergy; and although Luther took the field against all priestly mediation, vet the church which is called by his name, renewed by its title of "eclesia docens" the office of mediator and steward of mysteries. On this point also it was Calvin, and he alone, who attained to the full realization of the ideal of pure religion. Religion as he conceived it must "nullis rnediis interpositis" ', i.e. without any creaturely intercession realize the direct communion between God and the human heart. Not because of any hatred against priests, as such, not because of any undervaluing of the saints, nor underestimating the significance of angels, but solely because Calvin felt bound to vindicate the essence of religion and the glory of God in that essence, and absolutely devoid of all yielding or wavering, he waged war, with holy indignation, against everything that interposed itself between the Soul and God. Of course he clearly perceived that in order to be fitted for the true religion, fallen man needs a Mediator, but such a mediator could not be found in any fellow-man. Only the God-man,— only God Himself could be such a mediator. And this mediatorship could be con- 9 firmed not by us, but only from the side of God, by the indwelling of God the Holy Spirit in the heart of the regenerated. In all religion God Himself must be the active power. He must wake us religious. He must give us the religious disposition, nothing being left to us but the power to give form and expression to the deep religious sentiment which He, Himself, stirred in the depth of our heart. There we see the mistake of those who regarded Calvin as only an Augustinus redivivus. Notwithstanding his sublime confession of God's holy grace, Augustine remained the Bishop. He kept his position between the Triune God and the layman. And although promenent among the most pious men of his time, he had so little insight into the real claims of thorough-going religion on behalf of laymen that in his dogmatics he lauds the church as the mystical Purveyor, into whose bosom God caused all grace to flow and from whose treasure all men had to accept it. Only he, therefore, who superficially confines his attention to predestination can confuse Augustinianism and Calvinism. Religion for the sake of wan carries with it the position that man has to act as a mediator for his fellow-man. Religion for the sake of God inexorably excludes every human mediatorship. As long as it remains the chief purpose of religion to help man, and as long as man is understood to deserve grace by his devotion, it is perfectly natural that the man of inferior piety should invoke the mediation of the holier man. Another must procure for him what he cannot procure for himself. The fruit on the brandies hangs too high, and, therefore, the higher-reaching man has to pluck it, and hand it down to his helpless comrade. If. on the contrary, the demand of religion is that every human heart must give glory to God, no man can appear before God on behalf of another. Then every single human being must appear personally, for himself, and religion achieves its aim only in the general priesthood of believers. Even the new-born babe must have received the seed of 10 religion from God Himself; and in case it dies without being baptized, it must not be sent off to a limbus tnnocentium, but, if elected, enter, even as the long-lived, into personal communion with God. for all eternity.

The second principal question in all religion is whether it must be direct, or mediate. Must there stand a church, a priest, or, as of old, a sorcerer, a dispenser of sacred mysteries, between God and the soul, or shall all intervening links be cast away, so that the bond of religion shall bind the soul directly to God? Now we find that in all non-Christian religions, without any exception, human intercessors are deemed necessary, and in the domain of Christianity itself the intercessor intruded again upon the scene, in the Blessed Virgin, in the host of angels, in the saints and martyrs, and in the priestly hierarchy of the clergy; and although Luther took the field against all priestly mediation, yet the church which is called by his name, renewed by its title of “ecclesia docens” the office of mediator and steward of mysteries. On this point also it was Calvin, and he alone, who 55 attained to the full realization of the ideal of pure spiritual religion. Religion, as he conceived it, must “nullis mediis interpositis”, i.e., without any creaturely intercession, realize the direct communion between God and the human heart. Not because of any hatred against priests, as such, not because of any undervaluing of the martyrs, nor underestimating the significance of angels, but solely because Calvin felt bound to vindicate the essence of religion and the glory of God in that essence, and absolutely devoid of all yielding or wavering, he waged war, with holy indignation, against everything that interposed itself between the soul and God. Of course he clearly perceived that in order to be fitted for the true religion fallen man needs a Mediator, but such a mediator could not be found in any fellow-mam Only the God-man, only God Himself could be such a mediator. And this mediatorship could be confirmed not by us, but only from the side of God, by the indwelling of God the Holy Spirit in the heart of the regenerated.

In all religion God Himself must be the active power. He must make us religious, He must give us the religious disposition, nothing being left to us but the power to give form and expression to the deep religious sentiment which He, Himself, stirred in the depth of our heart. There we see the mistake of those who regarded Calvin as only an Augustinus redivivus. Notwithstanding his sublime confession of God’s holy grace, Augustine remained the Bishop. He kept his intermediate position between the Triune God and the layman. And although prominent among the most pious men of his time, he had so little insight into the real claims of 56 thorough-going religion on behalf of laymen that in his dogmatics he lauds the church as the mystical Purveyor, into whose bosom God caused all grace to flow and from whose treasure all men had to accept it. Only he, therefore, who superficially confines his attention to predestination can confuse Augustinianism and Calvinism. Religion for the sake of man carries with it the position that man has to act as a mediator for his fellow-man. Religion for the sake of God inexorably excludes every human mediatorship. As long as it remains the chief purpose of religion to help man, and as long as man is understood to deserve grace by his devotion, it is perfectly natural that the man of inferior piety should invoke the mediation of the holier man. Another must procure for him what he cannot procure for himself. The fruit on the branches hangs too high, and, therefore, the higher-reaching man has to pluck it, and hand it down to his helpless comrade. If, on the contrary, the demand of religion is that every human heart must give glory to God, no man can appear before God on behalf of another. Then every single human being must appear personally, for himself, and religion achieves its aim only in the general priesthood of believers. Even the new-born babe must have received the seed of religion from God Himself; and in case it dies without being baptized, it must not be sent off to a limbus innocentium, but, if elected, enter, even as the long-lived, into personal communion with God, for all eternity.

A segunda questão principal em toda religião é se ela deve ser direta, ou mediata. Deve haver entre Deus e a alma uma igreja, um sacerdote, ou, como nos tempos antigos, um feiticeiro, um despenseiro de mistérios sagrados, ou todos os elos intermediários deverão ser rejeitados, de modo que o elo da religião ligará a alma diretamente a Deus? Encontramos que em todas as religiões não cristãs, sem qualquer exceção, julga-se necessário intercessores humanos, e no próprio campo do Cristianismo o intercessor é novamente introduzido em cena, na bendita Virgem, nas hostes de anjos, nos santos e mártires e na hierarquia sacerdotal do clero; e embora Lutero tenha lutado contra toda mediação sacerdotal, a igreja, todavia, que é chamada por seu nome, renovou através de seu epíteto “ecclesia docens” o ofício de mediador e administrador de mistérios.

Também neste ponto, foi Calvino, e somente ele, que alcançou a plena realização do ideal da religião espiritual pura. A religião, como ele a concebeu, deve “nullis mediis interpositis”, isto é, sem a mediação de qualquer criatura realizar a comunhão direta entre Deus e o coração humano. Não por causa de algum ódio contra os sacerdotes, como tais, nem por causa de qualquer menosprezo pelos mártires, nem depreciação do significado dos anjos, mas somente porque Calvino sentia-se obrigado a vindicar a essência da religião e a glória de Deus nesta essência, e absolutamente isento de toda submissão ou hesitação, empreendeu uma guerra, com santa indignação, contra tudo que se interpunha entre a alma e Deus. Certamente, ele percebeu claramente que, a fim de ser qualificado para a verdadeira religião, o homem caído necessita de um mediador, mas tal mediador não poderia ser encontrado em qualquer semelhante. Somente o Deus-homem, - somente o próprio Deus poderia ser este mediador. E esta mediação não poderia ser confirmada por nós, mas somente por Deus, pela habitação de Deus - o Espírito Santo no coração do regenerado.

Em toda religião o próprio Deus deve ser o poder ativo. Deve fazer-nos religiosos. Deve dar-nos a disposição religiosa, nada sendo deixado para nós exceto o poder de dar forma e expressão ao profundo sentimento religioso que ele mesmo despertou no fundo de nosso coração. Nisto, vemos o engano daqueles que consideram Calvino apenas como um Augustinus redivivus. Apesar de sua sublime confissão sobre a santa graça de Deus, Agostinho continuou o Bispo. Ele manteve sua posição intermediária entre o Deus Trino e o leigo. E, embora proeminente entre os homens mais piedosos de seu tempo, tinha um discernimento tão pequeno acerca das reais reivindicações da religião plena em favor dos leigos que, em sua dogmática, elogia a igreja como a Fornecedora mística, em cujo seio Deus fez toda graça fluir e de cujo depósito todos os homens tinham de recebê-la. Somente aquele, portanto, que superficialmente restringe sua atenção à predestinação pode confundir Agostinianismo e Calvinismo.

A religião por causa do homem traz consigo a posição de que o homem tem de agir como um mediador por seu próximo. A religião por causa de Deus exclui inexoravelmente toda mediação humana. Visto que o principal propósito da religião continua sendo ajudar o homem, e visto ser entendido que o homem é digno da graça por sua devoção, é perfeitamente natural que o homem de piedade inferior deva invocar a mediação do homem mais santo. Outro deve procurar por ele o que não pode procurar por si mesmo. O fruto está pendurado em galhos muito altos, e, portanto, o homem que alcança mais alto deve colhê-lo, e passá-lo ao seu companheiro desamparado. Se, pelo contrário, a exigência da religião é que cada coração humano deva dar glória a Deus, nenhum homem pode comparecer diante de Deus em nome de outro. Então, cada ser humano deve comparecer pessoalmente por si mesmo, e a religião atinge seu alvo somente no sacerdócio universal dos crentes. Até mesmo o bebê recém-nascido deve ter recebido a semente da religião do próprio Deus; e no caso dele morrer sem ser batizado, não deve ser enviado para um limbus innocentium51, mas, se eleito, entra, tal como os longevos, na comunhão pessoal com Deus por toda eternidade.

Второй главный вопрос для всякой религии — должна ли она быть непосредственной или опосредованной. Должна ли церковь, священник, или, как в старину, колдун, отправитель священных мистерий, стоять между Богом и душой или все промежуточные звенья следует отбросить, чтобы религия связывала душу непосредственно с Богом? Мы видим, что во всех нехристианских религиях человеческих посредников считают необходимыми. Даже в сфере христианства посредники опять появляются в лице Пресвятой Девы, или ангельского воинства, или святых и мучеников, и в виде иерархии клира. Хотя Лютер восставал против всякого посредничества священников, все же церковь, названная его именем, по своему праву «ecclesia docens» (Учащей Церкви (лат.)) восстановила должность посредника и устроителя таинств. Только один Кальвин добился полного осуществления идеала чисто духовной религии. Религия, по его мысли, должна «nullis mediis interpositis», т. е. без всякого посредничества (со стороны творения), устанавливать прямое общение между Богом и человеческим сердцем. Дело не в какой-то ненависти к священникам, или недостаточного почтения к мученикам, или принижения значения ангелов, а лишь в том, что Кальвин чувствовал себя обязанным отстоять суть религии и славу Божию. Ни в чем не уступая, ни в чем не колеблясь, он со святым негодованием объявил войну всему, что помещало себя между душой и Богом. Конечно, он ясно понимал, что в истинной религии человек нуждается в Посреднике, но таким посредником не может быть никакой человек. Только Богочеловек, только Сам Бог может им быть. Мало того, посредничество можем утвердить не мы, но лишь Сам Бог, вселив в сердца возрожденных Святого Духа.

Во всякой религии должен действовать Бог, Он Сам должен сделать нас религиозными, Он должен вложить в нас предрасположенность к религии, нам же остается способность придать форму и выражение тем глубоким религиозным чувствам, которые Он возбудил в глубине наших сердец. Некоторые, заблуждаясь, считают Кальвина Augustinus redivivus (Воскресшим Августином (лат.)). Однако несмотря на свое возвышенное толкование Божией благодати, Августин был епископом, сохранил положение посредника между Триединым Богом и мирянами. Он был выдающейся личностью, одним из самых благочестивых людей своего времени, но тем не менее так узко смотрел на реальную потребность мирян в истинной религии, что в своих догматических трудах восхвалял Церковь как таинственную поставщицу благодати, словно Бог излил в нее всю свою благодать, и из ее сокровищниц люди должны ее черпать. Смешивать августинианство и кальвинизм может только тот, кто поверхностно сосредоточивает свое внимание на предопределении. Религия ради человека предполагает, что человек может действовать как посредник между Богом и своим ближним. Религия ради Бога жестко исключает всякое человеческое посредничество. Пока главная цель религии — помощь человеку; пока считается, что человек способен заслужить благодать своей религиозной ревностью, совершенно естественно, что человек, у которого благочестия меньше, должен призывать в посредники более святых людей. Другой должен обеспечить для него то, что он не может обеспечить сам. Плод висит слишком высоко, а потому более высокий человек должен достать его и протянуть беспомощному товарищу. Если же религия требует, чтобы каждое человеческое сердце воздавало славу Богу, то никакой человек не может предстать за другого человека перед лицом Божиим. Каждый должен предстать лично, религия достигает своей цели только при общем священстве верующих. Даже новорожденное дитя должно принять семя религии от Самого Бога; и если дитя умрет некрещеным, его не отсылают в limbus innocentium (Лимб невинных (лат.)), но оно, если избрано, навеки входит, как и люди, прожившие долго, в личное общение с Богом.

Het gewicht van deze tweede positie door het Calvinisme in het vraagstuk der religie ingenomen, en die in de belijdenis der persoonlijke uitverkiezing hare scherpste uitdrukking vindt, is onberekenbaar. Terwijl toch alle religie strekken moet om den mensch vrij te maken, ten einde hij de religieuse expressie, die in de natuur nog gebonden ligt, uit het vrije bewustzijn vertolke, legt omgekeerd alle optreden van een tusschenpersoon op religieus terrein den menschelijken geest een band aan, die te onheilspellender klemmen gaat naarmate de vroomheid aan innigheid wint. Nu nog zijn in Rome’s kerk de „bons catholiques” het engst in priesterlijke banden gebonden, en herwint alleen de min-vrome Catholiek, door losser van zijn kerk te zijn, een halve vrijheid. Op Luthers erf is de band minder knellend, maar toch nog verre van ontbonden. En de zelfstandigheid, die den geloovige desnoods ook tegenover den ambtsdrager doet optreden, vindt ge alleen in kerken, die de religieuse grondgedachte grepen van Calvijn. Alleen wie zelf voor God en met God in gemeenschap staat, kan met glanzend wiekgeklep de vleugelen der vrijheid uitslaan; en de uitkomst heeft dan ook, zoo in Nederland als in Frankrijk, en niet minder in Engeland dan in Amerika geleerd, dat het despotisme van mensch over mensch geen overwinnelijker bestrijders, en omgekeerd de vrijheid van den vromen mensch geen taaier en dapperder voorvechters heeft gevonden dan onder de issus de Calvin. Iets waarvan de diepste oorzaak hierin ligt, dat de tusschenpersoon alle religie veruitwendigt en ons in vormen verstrikt; terwijl eerst waar alle tusschengestalte wegvalt, de uitverkiezing u onmiddellijk met God verbindt en de straal van het eeuwige licht u rechtstreeks uit God in de ziel doet vallen, tot de religie in absoluten zin gemaakt wordt tot een zucht van het hart.

The importance of this second point, in the question (if religion, culminating, as it does, in the confession of personal election, is incalculable. On the one hand, all religion must tend to make man free, that by a clear utterance he may express that general religious impression stamped, by God Himself, upon unconscious nature. On the other hand, every appearance of an interposing priest or enchanter in the domain of religion fetters the human spirit, in a chain which presses the more woefully the more the piety increases in fervor. In the Church of Rome, even at the present day, the dons catholiques are most closely confined in the fetters of the clerus. Only the Catholic whose piety has decreased, is able to secure for himself a partial liberty by loosening more than half-way, the tie which connects him with his church. In the Lutheran churches the clerical fetters are less confining, y%t far from being loosened, entirely. And only in churches which take their stand in Calvinism, do we find that spiritual independence which enables the believer to oppose, if need be, and for God's sake, even the most powerful office-bearer in his church. Only he who personally stands before God on his own account, and enjoys an uninterrupted communion with God, can properly display the glorious wings of liberty. And both in Holland and in France, in England as well as in America, the historic result affords most undeniable evidence of the fact that despotism has found no more invincible antagonist, and liberty of conscience no braver, no more resolute champions than the followers of Calvin. In the last analysis, the cause of this phenomenon lies in the fact that the effect of every clerical interposition invariably was, and must be, to make religion external and to smother it with sacerdotal forms. Only where all priestly 11 intervention disappears, where God's sovereign election binds the inward soul directly to God Himself, and the ray of divine light enters straightway into the depth of our heart, only there does religion, in its most absolute sense, gain its ideal realization.

The importance of this second point, in the question of religion, culminating, as it does, in the confession of personal election, is incalculable. On the one hand, 57 all religion must tend to make man free, that by a clear utterance he may express that general religious impression stamped, by God Himself, upon unconscious nature. On the other hand, every appearance of an interposing priest or enchanter in the domain of religion fetters the human spirit in a chain which presses the more woefully the more the piety increases in fervor. In the Church of Rome, even at the present day, the bons catholiques are most closely confined in the fetters of the clerus. Only the Roman Catholic whose piety has decreased is able to secure for himself a partial liberty by loosening more than halfway the tie which connects him with his church. In the Lutheran churches the clerical fetters are less confining, yet far from being loosened, entirely. And only in churches which take their stand in Calvinism, do we find that spiritual independence which enables the believer to oppose, if need be, and for God’s sake, even the most powerful office-bearer in his church. Only he who personally stands before God on his own account, and enjoys an uninterrupted communion with God, can properly display the glorious wings of liberty. And both in Holland and in France, in England as well as in America, the historic result affords most undeniable evidence of the fact that despotism has found no more invincible antagonists, and liberty of conscience no braver, no more resolute champions than the followers of Calvin. In the last analysis, the cause of this phenomenon lies in the fact that the effect of every clerical interposition invariably was, and must be, to make religion external and to smother it with sacerdotal forms. Only where all priestly 58 intervention disappears, where God’s sovereign election from all eternity binds the inward soul directly to God Himself, and where the ray of divine light enters straightway into the depth of our heart-only there does religion, in its most absolute sense, gain its ideal realization.

A importância deste segundo ponto na questão da religião, culminando, como faz, na confissão da eleição pessoal, é incalculável. Por um lado, toda religião deve inclinar-se para tornar o homem livre, para que por meio de uma clara afirmação ele possa expressar aquela impressão religiosa geral, gravada sobre a natureza inconsciente pelo próprio Deus. Por outro lado, cada apresentação de um sacerdote ou feiticeiro interpondo-se no campo da religião prende o espírito humano em uma cadeia que o oprime mais miseravelmente quanto mais sua piedade cresce em fervor.

Na Igreja de Roma, mesmo nos dias de hoje, os bons catholiques estão mais rigorosamente confinados nas prisões do clero. Somente o Católico Romano cuja piedade tem diminuído é capaz de assegurar para si mesmo uma liberdade parcial por afrouxar, parcialmente, o laço que o liga à sua igreja. Nas igrejas luteranas as prisões clericais são menos confinadoras, todavia estão longe de serem relaxadas inteiramente. Somente nas igrejas que assumem a sua posição no Calvinismo, encontramos esta independência espiritual que habilita o crente a opor-se, se necessário for, e por causa de Deus, até mesmo ao mais poderoso oficial na igreja. Somente aquele que pessoalmente permanece diante de Deus por sua própria conta, e goza uma comunhão ininterrupta com Deus, pode apropriadamente exibir as gloriosas asas da liberdade.

Tanto na Holanda, na França, na Inglaterra, bem como na América, o resultado histórico oferece a evidência mais inegável do fato que o despotismo não tem encontrado antagonistas mais invencíveis e liberdade de consciência mais corajosa, nem mais resolutos campeões que os seguidores de Calvino. Em última análise, a causa deste fenômeno encontra-se no fato de que o efeito de toda interpretação clerical invariavelmente era, e deve ser, produzir uma religião externa e sufocá-la com formas sacerdotais. Somente onde toda intervenção sacerdotal desaparece, onde a eleição soberana de Deus desde toda eternidade liga a alma interior diretamente ao próprio Deus, e onde o raio da luz divina entra imediatamente na profundeza de nosso coração, - somente ali a religião, em seu sentido mais absoluto, alcança sua realização ideal.

Поистине неоценима важность этого второго касающегося религии момента, достигающего кульминации в том, что человек исповедует свое личное избрание. С одной стороны, всякая религия должна делать человека свободным, чтобы он мог ясно выразить тот общий отпечаток, который Бог наложил на неразумное творение. С другой стороны, всякое подобие священника или шамана в религиозной сфере сковывает человеческий дух, и оковы угнетают тем сильнее, чем больше возрастает благочестие. В Римской Церкви даже сегодня добрые католики очень ограничены клиром. Только католик, чье благочестие угасло, способен обеспечить себе частичную свободу, ослабив хотя бы наполовину узы, соединяющие его с Церковью. В лютеранских церквах клерикальные узы менее стеснительны, но не исчезли полностью. Только у кальвинистов находим мы ту духовную независимость, которая позволяет верующему противостоять, если надо, во имя Бога даже самым властным служителям Церкви. Лишь тот, кто лично предстоит перед Богом и непрерывно общается с Ним, может поистине раскрыть славные крылья свободы. В Голландии и во Франции, в Англии и в Америке, исторический процесс с очевидностью показал, что деспотизм не нашел себе более несокрушимых противников, свобода совести не нашла себе более смелых и решительных сторонников, чем последователи Кальвина. Ведь всякое клерикальное посредничество неизменно и непременно делало религию внешней, закутывало ее в священническое облачение. Только там, где всякое посредничество со стороны священников исчезает, где Божие суверенное избрание от вечности связывает глубины души с Самим Богом, где лучи божественного света проникают прямо в эту глубину — только там, повторю, религия в своем самом абсолютном смысле получает идеальное осуществление ^*.

Dit brengt mij vanzelf tot het derde religieuse vraagstuk: Is de religie partieel, of is ze alles beheerschend en alles omvattend, 43 universeel in volstrekten zin? En dan moet ze wel partieel worden gesteld, door wie het doel der religie in den mensch zoekt, of ook de religieuse tusschenpersoon laat optreden. Dan toch beperkt de mensch de religie, consequent en logisch, tot dat deel van het leven, waarin hij er behoefte aan heeft, en tot die gevallen waarin de tusschenpersoon tot zijn beschikking is. In drieërlei opzicht komt dit partieel karakter dier religie uit; in het religieus orgaan waardoor, in de sfeer waarin, en in de groep van personen waaronder de religie bloeien zal. Van de eerste beperking levert de strijd van den dag het sprekend voorbeeld. De religie moet, zoo willen het de wijzen onzer eeuw, ’s menschen verstandelijk orgaan ongebruikt laten, en tot uiting komen, hetzij uitsluitend door het mystiek gevoel, hetzij eeniglijk door den practischen wil. Mystieke en ethische neigingen wil men op religieus gebied toelaten, maar het intellect moet op religieus gebied worden gemuilband. Metaphysica en dogmatiek gelden al meer als contrabande, in het agnosticisme wordt heil gezocht. Op de stroomen des gevoels is de vaart tolvrij ontsloten, het ethisch-werkzame geldt als keursteen om het echte goud te proeven, maar de metaphysica wordt als moeras geschuwd, al wat zweemt naar een axiomatisch dogma als irreligieuse contrabande afgewezen. En al heeft diezelfde Christus, dien men zelf eert als religieus genie, nog zoo beslist gezegd, dat ge „God zult liefhebben, niet alleen met heel uw hart en heel uw kracht, maar ook met heel uw verstand,” toch durft men het aan, om het verstand als religieus orgaan op nonactiviteit te stellen. — Niet universeel met heel ons wezen, partieel uit gevoel of wil alleen, zal de religie opkomen, en ten gevolge hiervan tevens de sfeer partieel zijn, waarin ze werkt. De godsdienst wordt gesloten buiten de wetenschap, buiten het erf des publieken levens, en verwezen naar de binnenkamer, naar de bidcel, naar de intimiteit van het hart. Kant beperkte haar sfeer door zijn Du sollst tot het ethische leven. De mysticisten onzer dagen bannen haar naar de schuilhoeken van het sentiment. Zoo komt in allerlei vorm de godsdienst naast het leven te staan, of heeft op het breede erf des levens slechts een zijwaarts afgelegen, privatief terrein. — En dit leidt dan vanzelf tot het 44 derde partiëele merkteeken: de religie, niet voor allen, maar enkel voor de groep der vroomgestemden onder ons geslacht. Zoo vloeit uit de beperking van het orgaan der religie, de beperking van haar sfeer, en uit de beperking van haar sfeer de beperking van haar groep of kring onder menschen voort. Zooals de kunst een eigen orgaan, een eigen sfeer, een eigen kring van aanbidders vindt, zoo ook zal het met de religie zijn. Er zijn nu eenmaal lieden zonder veel sentiment, en lieden zonder veel wilskracht, en die deswege voor de warmte der mystiek ongevoelig en tot de vrome daad onbekwaam zijn. Voor dezen heeft de religie zin noch beteekenis. Maar er zijn ook gevoelvollen met zin voor het Oneindige, en onder hen is het dat de vroomheid, en in die vroomheid de religie, zinnend en dichtend, bloeit.

This leads me, naturally, to the third religious question : Is religion partial, or is it all-subduing, and comprehensive, — universal in the strict sense of the word ? Now, if the aim of religion is found in man himself and its realization is made dependent on clerical mediators, religion cannot be but partial. In that case it follows logically that every man confines his religion to those occurrences of his life by which his religious needs are stirred, and to those cases in which he finds human intervention at his disposal. The partial character of this sort of religion shows itself in three particulars: in the religious on/an through which, in the sphere in which, and in the group of persons among which religion thrives and flourishes.

Recent controversy affords a pertinent illustration of the first limitation. The wise men of our generation maintain that religion has to retire from the precinct of the human intellect. It must seek to express itself either by means of the mystical feelings, or else by means of the practical will. Mystical and ethical inclinations are hailed with enthusiasm, in the domain of religion, but in that same domain the intellect, as leading to metaphysical hallucinations must be muzzled. Metaphysics and Dogmatics are increasingly tabooed, and Agnosticism is ever more loudly acclaimed as the solution of the great enigma. On the rivers of sentiment and of feeling, navigation is made duty-free; and ethical activity is becoming the only touch-stone for testing the religious gold; but Metaphysics are avoided as drowning us in a swamp. Whatsoever announces itself with the pretension of an axiomatic dogma, 12 is rejected as irreligious contraband. And although that same Christ Whom these very scholars honour as a religious genius has taught us most emphatically : ''Thou shalt love God, not only with all thy heart and with all thy strength, but also with all thy mind", } r et they, on the contrary, venture to dismiss our mind, or intellect, as unfit for use, in this holy domain, and as not fulfilling the requirements of a religious organ. Thus the religious organ being found, not in the whole of our being, but partially, being confined to our feelings and our will, consequently also the sphere of religious life must assume the same partial character . Tieligion was excluded from science, and its authority from the domain of public life; henceforth the inner chamber, the cell for prayer, and the secrecy of the heart should be its exclusive dwelling place. By his du solid, Kant limited the sphere of religion to the ethical life. The mystics of our own times banish religion to the retreats of sentiment, and the result is that, in many different ways, religion, once the central force of human life, is now placed alongside of it, and far from the thriving of the world, is understood to hide itself in a distant and almost private retreat.

This brings us naturally to the third characteristic note of this partial view of religion; — religion as pertaining not to all, but only to the group of pious people among our generation. Thus the limitation of the organ of religion brings about the limitation of its sphere, and the limitation of its sphere consequently brings about the limitation of its group or circle among men. Just as art is understood to have an organ of its own, a sphere of its own, and therefore, also, its own circle of devotees, so also, according to this view . must it be with religion. Tt so happens that the great bulk of the people are almost devoid of mystical feeling, and energetic strength of will. For this reason they have either no perception of the glow of mysticism, or are incapable of realty pious deeds. But there are also those whose inner life is overflowing with a sense of the Infinite, or who 13 are full of holy energy, and among such it is that piety and religion flourish most brilliantly both in their imaginative power, and in their realizing capability. —

This leads me, naturally, to the third religious question: Is religion partial, or is it all-subduing, and comprehensive, – universal in the strict sense of the word? Now, if the aim of religion be found in man himself and if its realization be made dependent on clerical mediators, religion cannot be but partial. In that case it follows logically that every man confines his religion to those occurrences of his life by which his religious needs are stirred, and to those cases in which he finds human intervention at his disposal. The partial character of this sort of religion shows itself in three particulars: in the religious organ through which, in the sphere in which, and in the group of persons among which, religion has to thrive and flourish.

Recent controversy affords a pertinent illustration of the first limitation. The wise men of our generation maintain that religion has to retire from the precinct of the human intellect. It must seek to express itself either by means of the mystical feelings, or else by means of the practical will. Mystical and ethical inclinations arc hailed with enthusiasm, in the domain of religion, but in that same domain the intellect, as leading to metaphysical hallucinations, must be muzzled. Metaphysics and Dogmatics are increasingly tabooed, 59 and Agnosticism is ever more loudly acclaimed as the solution of the Great enigma. On the rivers of sentiment and of feeling, navigation is made duty-free, and ethical activity is becoming the only touch-stone for testing the religious gold but Metaphysics is avoided as drowning us in a swamp. Whatsoever announces itself with the pretension of an axiomatic dogma, is rejected as irreligious contraband. And although that same Christ whom these very scholars honor as a religious genius has taught us most emphatically: “Thou shalt love God, not only with all thy heart and with all thy strength, but also with all thy mind”, yet they, on the contrary, venture to dismiss our mind, or intellect, as unfit for use, in this holy domain, and as not fulfilling the requirements of a religious organ.

Thus the religious organ being found, not in the whole of our being, but in part of it, being confined to our feelings and our will, consequently also the sphereof religious life must assume in consequence the same partial character. Religion is excluded from science, and its authority from the domain of public life; henceforth the inner chamber, the cell for prayer, and the secrecy of the heart should be its exclusive dwelling place. By his du sollst, Kant limited the sphere of religion to the ethical life. The mystics of our own times banish religion to the retreats of sentiment. And the result is that, in many different ways, religion, once the central force of human life, is now placed alongside of it; and, far from the thriving of the world, is understood to hide itself in a distant and almost private retreat.

This brings us naturally to the third characteristic 60 note of this partial view of religion; – religion as pertaining not to all, but only to the group of pious people among our generation. Thus the limitation of the organ of religion brings about the limitation of its sphere, and the limitation of its sphere consequently brings about the limitation of its group or circle among men. Just as art is understood to have an organ of its own, a sphere of its own, and therefore, also, its own circle of devotees, so also, according to this view, must it be with religion. It so happens that the great bulk of the people are almost devoid of mystical feeling, and energetic strength of will. For this reason they have either no perception of the glow of mysticism, or are incapable of really pious deeds. But there are also those whose inner life is overflowing with a sense of the Infinite, or who are full of holy energy, and among such it is that piety and religion flourish most brilliantly both in their imaginative power, and in their realizing capability.

Isto me leva, naturalmente, à terceira questão religiosa: A religião é parcial, ou tudo abarca, é abrangente, - universal no estrito sentido da palavra? Se o propósito da religião deve ser encontrado no próprio homem e se sua realização deve ser feita dependente de mediadores clericais, a religião não pode ser senão parcial. Neste caso, segue logicamente que cada homem limita sua religião àquelas ocorrências de sua vida pelas quais suas necessidades religiosas são despertadas, e àqueles casos em que encontra a intervenção humana à sua disposição. O caráter parcial deste tipo de religião mostra-se em três particulares: no órgão religioso através do qual, na esfera na qual, e no grupo de pessoas entre as quais a religião deve prosperar e florescer.

Uma controvérsia recente proporciona uma ilustração pertinente à primeira limitação. Os homens sábios de nossa geração sustentam que a religião deve retirar-se do recinto do intelecto humano. Deve procurar expressar-se por meio de sensações místicas, ou então, por meio de vontade prática. No campo da religião as inclinações místicas e éticas são saudadas com entusiasmo, mas neste mesmo campo o intelecto, como conduzindo a alucinações metafísicas, deve ser amordaçado. A Metafísica e a Dogmática são cada vez mais declaradas tabus, e o Agostinianismo é aclamado sempre mais espalhafatosamente como a solução do grande enigma. Sobre os rios do sentimento e da emoção, a navegação é feita livremente, e a atividade ética está se tornando a única pedra de toque para testar o ouro religioso; mas a metafísica é evitada como afogando-nos em um pântano. Tudo quanto se anuncia com a pretensão de um dogma axiomático é rejeitado como contrabando irreligioso. E embora este mesmo Cristo, que muitos eruditos honram como um gênio religioso, tenha nos ensinado enfaticamente: “Tu amarás a Deus, não apenas com todo teu coração e com toda tua força, mas também com toda tua mente”, todavia eles, pelo contrário, aventuram-se a dispensar nossa mente, ou intelecto, como inapta para uso neste campo santo, e como não preenchendo os requerimentos de um órgão religioso.

Assim é encontrado o órgão religioso não no todo de nosso ser, mas em parte dele, estando limitado a nossos sentimentos e à nossa vontade; conseqüentemente, também a esfera da vida religiosa deve assumir o mesmo caráter parcial. A religião fica excluída da ciência, e sua autoridade do campo da vida pública; doravante a câmara interior, a cela de oração e o segredo do coração deveriam ser seus lugares de habitação exclusiva. Por sua expressão du sollst52, Kant limitou a esfera da religião à vida ética. Os místicos de nossos dias baniram a religião para os abrigos do sentimento. E o resultado é que, de modos diferentes, a religião, outrora a força central da vida humana, é agora colocada ao lado dela; e é forçada a esconder-se em um lugar distante e quase privado da prosperidade do mundo.

Isto nos conduz, naturalmente, à terceira nota característica deste conceito parcial da religião, - a religião como não pertencendo a todos, mas somente ao grupo de pessoas piedosas entre nossa geração. Assim, a limitação do órgão da religião conduz à limitação de sua esfera, e a limitação de sua esfera, conseqüentemente, conduz à limitação de seu grupo ou círculo entre os homens. Do mesmo modo como se entende que a arte tem um órgão próprio dela, uma esfera própria e, portanto, também seu próprio círculo de devotos, assim também deve acontecer com a religião, segundo este conceito. Deste modo ocorre que a grande maioria das pessoas está quase destituída de sentimento místico e força de vontade energética. Por esta razão elas ou não têm percepção do brilho do misticismo, ou são realmente incapazes de atos piedosos. Mas há também aqueles cuja vida interior está transbordante com um senso do Infinito, ou que estão cheios de santa energia, e entre estes é que a piedade e a religião florescem mais brilhantemente tanto em seu poder imaginativo, como em sua capacidade de realização.

Это естественным образом приводит меня к третьему вопросу, связанному с религией: частична религия или всеохватна, всеобъемлюща, универсальна в прямом смысле слова? Если цель ее — в самом человеке, и если ее осуществление зависит от посредничества клира, то она непременно будет частичной. Человек увязывает свою религию с теми событиями своей жизни, при которых его нужда в ней обостряется, и в тех случаях, когда в его распоряжении — человеческое посредничество. Частичный характер такой религии проявляется в трех вещах: в органе, при помощи которого она должна осуществляться, в сфере, внутри которой она осуществляется, и в группе лиц, среди которых религия должна расти и процветать.

Что до органа, то хороший пример нам дадут недавние споры. Мудрецы наших дней утверждают, что религия должна оставить область человеческого разума и выражать себя или посредством мистических переживаний, или посредством практической воли. Мистический и этический элементы пылко восхваляются, а разум в той же сфере заставляют молчать, поскольку он приводит к метафизическим иллюзиям. Метафизика и догматика подпадают под все более жесткий запрет, агностицизм все громче называют решением великой загадки. В реках сантиментов и чувств можно плавать, и этическая деятельность становится единственным пробным камнем для золота веры, тогда как метафизику избегают, словно трясину. Все, претендующее открыто на роль непреложной догмы, отвергают, словно безрелигиозную контрабанду. Хотя Христос, Которого сами же современные ученые почитают как религиозного гения, говорил очень ясно: «Возлюби Бога всем сердцем твоим, и всею силой твоей, и всем разумением твоим», они пытаются отбросить наш разум как непригодный для употребления в священной сфере и не соответствующий требованиям, предъявляемым к религиозному органу.

Если орган религии находят не во всем нашем бытии, а лишь в его части, и сводят его к нашим чувствам или к нашей воле, то и сфера религии должна принять частичный характер. Религия отделена от науки, а ее авторитет удален из общественной жизни; значит, ее единственным прибежищем остается сердце. Своим Du sollst (Ты должен (нем.)) Кант ограничил сферу религии этической жизнью. Современные мистики изгнали ее в область чувства. И вот религия, некогда основная сила человеческой жизни, теперь в стороне от нее. Далеко не благоденствуя в мире, она должна, по мнению многих, прятаться в отдаленном, почти приватном убежище.

Это приводит нас естественным образом к третьей отличительной особенности частичного взгляда на религию — к мысли о том, что она является достоянием не всех, а только группы благочестивых людей. Ограничив орган религии, мы ограничили и сферу ее действия, а ограничение это естественно сужает круг людей, которые ее исповедуют. Считается, что у искусства есть свой собственный орган или своя сфера деятельности, а потому — свой круг поклонников; точно так же, по данному мнению, должно обстоять дело и с религией. Получается, что огромное множество людей почти лишено мистических переживаний и деятельной силы воли, а значит, они не могут воспринять мистического света или неспособны к истинно благочестивым делам. Но есть и те, чья внутренняя жизнь преисполнена чувством Бесконечного, они исполнены святой энергии, именно среди них благочестие, а также религия процветают ярчайшим образом в их силе воображения и деятельных способностях.

Van geheel anderen kan nam Rome al meer hetzelfde partieele standpunt in. Religie kende zij alleen in haar kerk, en de invloed der religie sterkt niet verder dan tot dat deel des levens dat door haar gewijd wordt. Wel trok ze, zooveel het ging, alle menschelijke leven binnen haar kerkelijke sfeer, maar wat daar buiten lag, en dus den doop en de besprenging met het wijwater miste, bleef van alle wezenlijk religieuse kracht verstoken. En gelijk Rome aldus een grens trok tusschen het religieuse en het onreligieuse deel van het leven, deelde ze haar eigen terrein weêr naar verschillende graden van intensiteit in, clerus en klooster als het Heilige der heiligen, de kring der practiseerende geloovigen vormde het Heilige, en wie gedoopt was, maar voorts aan de kerk zich niet stoorde, stond in den Voorhof. Een deeling en beperking, die de gewone leek dan weer op zijn beurt voortzet, door practisch negen tienden van zijn existentie buiten alle verband met de religie te plaatsen, en op zijn manier de religie partieel te maken, door ze uit de werkdagen naar de heilige dagen, uit de dagen van voorspoed naar tijden van gevaar en krankheid, en uit zijn lange leven naar de stervenssponde te verschuiven. Een partieel maken van de religie dat in het Carneval zijn stuitendste uitdrukking heeft gevonden. Geheel religie zou het alleen in den vastentijd zijn, en het vleesch mocht, eer het in die vallei der somberheden inging, zich te goed doen aan zingenot, zotheid en pret. 45

From a quite different standpoint, Rome gradually and increasingly came to favour the same partial views. She knew religion only as it existed in her own church, and considered the influence of religion to be confined to that portion of life which she had consecrated. I fully acknowledge that she tried to draw all human life as far as possible into the holy sphere, but everything outside this sphere, everything not touched by baptism, nor aspersed by her holy water, was devoid of all genuine religious efficiency. And just as Rome drew a boundary line between the consecrated and the profane sides of life, she also subdivided her own sacred precincts according to different degrees of religious intensity ;— the clergy and the cloisters constituting the Holy of Holies, the pious laity forming the Holy Place, thus leaving the Outer Court to those who, although baptized, continued to prefer to church-devotion the often sinful pleasures of the world; — a system of limitation and division, which for those in the Outer Court, ended in setting nine tenths of practical life outside of all religion. So religion was made partial, by carrying it from ordinary days to days of festival, from days of prosperity to times of danger and sickness, and from the fulness of life to the time of approaching death. A dualistic system which has found its most emphatic expression in the praxis of the Carnival, giving Religion a full -way over the soul during the weeks of Lent, but leaving to the flesh a fair chance, before descending into this vale of gloom, to empty to the dregs the full cup of pleasure, if not of mirth and folly.

From a quite different standpoint, Rome gradually and increasingly came to favor the same partial views. She knew religion only as it existed in her own Church, and considered the influence of religion to be confined to that portion of life which she had consecrated. I fully acknowledge that she tried to draw all human life as far as possible into the holy sphere, but everything outside this sphere, everything not touched by baptism, nor aspersed by her holy water, was devoid of all genuine religious efficiency. And just as Rome drew a boundary line between the consecrated and the profane sides of life, she also subdivided her own sacred precincts according to different degrees of religious intensity; – 61 the clergy and the cloister constituting the Holy of Holies, the pious laity forming the Holy Place, thus leaving the Outer Court to those who, although baptized, continued to prefer to church-devotion the often sinful pleasures of the world; – a system of limitation and division, which for those in the Outer Court, ended in setting nine tenths of practical life outside of all religion. So religion was made partial, by carrying it from ordinary days to days of festival, from days of prosperity to times of danger and sickness, and from the fulness of life to the time of approaching death. A dualistic system which has found its most emphatic expression in the praxis of the Carnival, giving Religion a full sway over the soul during the weeks of Lent, but leaving to the flesh a fair chance, before descending into this vale of gloom, to empty to the dregs the full cup of pleasure, if not of mirth and folly.

A partir de um ponto de vista completamente diferente, Roma, gradual e crescentemente, foi favorável aos mesmos conceitos parciais. Ela conhecia a religião somente como existente em sua própria Igreja, e considerava que a influência da religião deveria limitar-se àquela porção da vida que havia consagrado. Reconheço plenamente que ela tentou atrair toda vida humana, tanto quanto possível, para dentro da esfera santa, mas tudo fora desta esfera, tudo não tocado pelo batismo, nem aspergido por sua água benta, estava destituído de toda eficiência religiosa genuína. E assim, como Roma traçou uma linha divisória entre o lado consagrado e o lado profano da vida, também subdividiu seu próprio recinto sagrado segundo os diferentes graus de intensidade religiosa, - o clero e a clausura constituindo o Santo dos Santos, o laicato piedoso formando o Lugar Santo, deixando assim o Átrio para aqueles que, embora batizados, continuaram a preferir mais os prazeres pecaminosos do mundo à devoção eclesiástica, - um sistema de limitação e divisão que, para aqueles no Átrio, acabou colocando nove décimos da vida prática fora de toda religião. Assim, a religião tornou-se parcial, pela transferência de dias ordinários para dias santos, de dias de prosperidade para tempos de perigo e enfermidade, e da plenitude da vida para o tempo de aproximação da morte. Um sistema dualista que encontrou sua expressão mais enfática na praxis do Carnaval, dando à Religião um controle pleno da alma durante as semanas da Quaresma, mas deixando uma oportunidade à carne para esvaziar até a última gota o copo cheio de prazer, se não de euforia e insensatez, antes de retirar-se para o vale da contrição.

Исходя из совершенно иной точки зрения, Рим постепенно, шаг за шагом, пришел к таким же частичным взглядам. Он знал религию лишь такой, какой она была в его Церкви, и считал, что ее влияние привязано к некоторой части жизни, которую он сам и освятил. Я всецело признаю, что Рим пытался втянуть всю человеческую жизнь, насколько это было возможно, в священную сферу, но все, что вне этой сферы, все, к чему не прикоснулось крещение, все, не окропленное святой водой, было лишено какой бы то ни было сакральности. Подобно тому как Рим провел границу между освященной и мирской сторонами жизни, он разделил и свою собственную вотчину в соответствии с разным уровнем религиозной интенсивности — на клир и затвор, составляющие Святое святых, на благочестивый народ, образующий Святое место, оставляя Внешний Двор тем, кто, хотя и крещен, предпочитает греховные радости мира сего. Система ограничений и разделений для тех, кто во Внешнем Дворе, закончилась тем, что девять десятых практической жизни оказались вообще не связанными ни с какой религией. Религия стала частичной, ее перенесли с обычных дней на праздничные, с дней благоденствия — на дни бед и болезней, с полноты всей жизни — на время приближающейся смерти. Эта дуалистическая система нашла самое яркое выражение в празднестве, предоставляя религии полную власть над душой в недели Великого Поста, но великодушно дозволяя плоти перед тем, как она спустится в долину мрака, выпить до дна чашу наслаждений.

Vlak hiertegenover nu plaatst zich het Calvinisme, dat voor de religie het volstrekt universeele karakter handhaaft. Bestaat al wat er is om God, dan moet ook heel de schepping Gode eere geven. De vogelen daarboven. Zon, maan en starren in het firmament. De natuur om ons heen. Maar bovenal de mensch, die heel deze schepping en alle leven in die schepping Gode priesterlijk heeft toe te wijden. En hoe dan ook de zonde geheele stukken der schepping aan Gods eere ontrooft, de eisch en het ideaal blijft, dat alle creatuur in religie gedompeld zal zijn, religieus zal bestaan, en ten slotte als het religieuse offer op het altaar van den Almachtige zal nederliggen. Een religie die uitsluitend gevoels- of wilsreligie zal zijn, is daarom voor den Calvinist ondenkbaar. De heilige zalving van den priester der schepping moet zijn baard en kleederzoom doortrekken. Geheel zijn wezen, in alle vermogens en krachten, moet van den sensus divinitatis doortrokken zijn, en hoe zou dan zijn bewustzijn, de Logos in hem, het van God in hem stralend licht des denkens, vatbaar zijn voor uitsluiting? Zijn God wel in den ondergrond van het gevoel en in de buitenwerken van de wilsdaad, maar niet in zijn zelfbesef, in het centrum van zijn bewust en denkend wezen; zijn God wel in de wereld des gevoels en in de wereld van zijn ethisch bestaan, maar buiten de wereld der gedachte gesloten; wel in zijn zelfbesef vaste uitgangspunten voor natuur en practijk, axiomatische vastigheden voor de kennis der schepping, maar zonder vaste steunpunten in het denken omtrent den Schepper, — het stond voor den Calvinist met verloochening van den eeuwigen Logos gelijk. — En werd zoo voor het orgaan der religie het volstrekt universeel karakter in de totaliteit van alle menschelijk vermogen gehandhaafd, even beslist bepleit de Calvinist dit universeel karakter van religie voor wat haar sfeer en haar kring onder menschen aangaat. Niets is geschapen, of God schiep het met een ordinantie Gods voor alle leven, die alle leven doet opeischen, om Hem te worden toegewijd. Van een religie tot de binnenkamer, de bidcel, of de kerk beperkt, weet Calvijn niets. Met den Psalmist roept hij hemel en aarde, roept hij alle volken en natiën op, om Gode eere te geven. In alle leven is 46 God present met zijn alomtegenwoordige en almachtige kracht, en geen sfeer van menschelijk leven is er, of de religie doet er haar eisch gelden, dat God zal gedankt, dat Gods ordinantiën zullen worden geëerd, en dat door alle labora het ora ⁷⁾ zal zijn heengeweven. Waar de mensch ook sta, wat hij ook doe, waar hij ook de hand aan legge, in bedrijf, in geestesleven, in kunst en wetenschap, hij staat steeds in alles voor Gods aangezicht, hij is bezig in Gods dienst, hij heeft zijnen God te gehoorzamen en boven alles de eere zijns Gods te bedoelen. - En diensvolgens kan dan ook de religie voor den Calvinist niet tot een enkele groep of enkelen kring van menschen beperkt zijn. De religie raakt heel het menschelijk geslacht. Dat geslacht is Godes. Zijn kunstwerk. En daarom moet heel dat geslacht van de vreeze Gods doortinteld zijn, de ouden met de jongen, de lagen en de hoogen, de ingewijden en die van verre staan. Want niet alleen schiep God allen, en is voor allen alles, maar ook gaat zijn genade niet enkel partieel tot de verkorenen, maar ook in de „gemeene gratie” naar alle mensch uit. Zeker is er in de Kerk concentratie, maar die Kerk heeft vensters in haar muren, en door die vensters straalt het licht des Eeuwigen over heel zijn wereld uit. Hier is een stad op den berg, die ieder van verre ziet, hier is een zout dat alles doortrekt, en ook wie dat hooger licht niet opvangt, blijft niettemin even beslist en in alles tot het eeren van den Naam des Heeren opgeroepen. Alle partieele religie drijft de wigge van het dualisme in het leven, maar de Calvinist leeft monistisch. Alles moet één zijn, omdat één God het alles draagt, gelijk Hij het alles schiep. Ja, zelfs de zonde, als het keerbeeld der religie, kan van dat monisme niet worden uitgesloten.

Now this whole view of the matter is squarely antagonized by Calvinism, which vindicates for religion its full universal character, and its complete universal application. If everything that is exists for the sake of God, then it follows that the whole creation must give glory to Cod. The sun. 14 moon, and stars in the firmament, the birds of the air, the whole of Nature around us, but, above all, man himself, who, priestlike, must consecrate to God the whole of creation, and all life thriving in it. And although sin has deadened a large part of creation to the glory of God, the demand, — the ideal-remains unchangeable, that every creature must be immersed in the stream of religion, and end by lying as a religious offering on the altar of the Almighty. A religion confined to feeling or will is therefore unthinkable to the Calvinist. The sacred anointing of the priest of creation must reach down to his beard and to the hem of his garment. His whole being, including all his abilities and powers, must be pervaded by the sensus divinitatis, and how then could he exclude his rational consciousness, — the Xoyoi which is in him, — the light of thought which comes from God Himself to irradiate him? To possess his God for the underground world of his feelings, and in the outworks of the exertion of his will, but not in his inner self, in the very centre of his consciousness, and his thought: — to have fixed starting-points for the study of nature and axiomatic strongholds for practical life, but to have no fixed support in his thoughts about the Creator Himself, all of this was, for the Calvinist. the veiy denying of the Eternal Logos. The same character of universality was claimed by the Calvinist for the sphere of religion and its circle of influence among men. Everything that has been created was, in its creation, furnished by God with an unchangeable law of its existence. And because God has fully ordained such laws and ordinances for all life, therefore He demands that all life be consecrated to His service, in strict obedience. A religion confined to the closet, the cell, or the Church, therefore, Calvin, and with him every Calvinist, abhors. With the Psalmist, he calls upon heaven and earth, he calls upon all peoples and nations to give glory to God. God is present in all life, with the influence of His omnipresent and almighty power, and no sphere of human 15 life is conceivable in which religion does not maintain its demands that God shall be praised, that God's ordinances shall be observed, and that every labora shall be permeated with its ora in fervent and ceaseless prayer. Wherever man may stand, whatever he may do, to whatever be may apply his hand, in agriculture, in commerce, and in industry. or his mind, in tbe world of art. and science, he is. in whatsoever it may be, constantly standing before tbe fare of his God, he is employed in the service of his God, be has strictly to obey bis God, and above all, he has to aim at the glory of his God. Consequently, it is impossible for a ( 'alvinist to confine religion to a single group, or to some circles among men. Religion concerns the whole of our human race. This race is the product of God's creation. It is His wonderful workmanship, His absolute possession. Therefore the whole of mankind must be imbued with the fear of God, — old as well as young, — low as well as high, not only those who have become initiated into His mysteries, but also those who still stand afar off. For not only did God create all men, not only is He all for all men, but His grace also extends itself, not only as a special grace, to the Elect, but also as a common grace (gratia communis), to all mankind. To be sure there is a concentration of religious light and life in the Church, but then in the walls of this church, there are wide open windows, and through these spacious windows the light of the Eternal radiates over the whole world. Here is a city, set upon a hill, which every man can see afar off.— Here is a holy salt that penetrates in every direction, checking all corruption. And even he who does not yet imbibe the higher light, or maybe shuts his eyes to it, is nevertheless admonished, with equal emphasis, and in all things, to give glory to the name of the Lord. All partial religion drives the wedge of dualism into life/but the true ('alvinist never forsakes the standard of religious monism. One supreme calling must impress the stamp of one-ness upon all human life, because one God upholds and preserves it, 16 just as He created it all. Yea, even sin, the utter and absolute reverse of religion, cannot be excluded from the monism of His Providence. The ego of God sets the creation as the non-ego over against Him, and when this non-ego, in the case of man, developes into a contra-ego it will be found that, in the gloomy way of sin and misery . even the painful severance from God shall kindle the most ardent longing for His renewed Communion.

Now this whole view of the matter is squarely antagonized by Calvinism, which vindicates for religion its full universal character, and its complete universal application. If everything that is, exists for the sake of God, then it follows that the whole creation must give glory to God. The sun. moon, and stars in the firmament, the birds of the air, the whole of Nature around us, but, above all, man himself, who, priestlike, must concentrate to God the whole of creation, and all life thriving in it. And although sin has deadened a large part of creation to the glory of God, the demand, – the ideal, remains unchangeable, that every creature must be immersed in the stream of religion, and end by lying as a religious offering on the altar of the Almighty. 62 A religion confined to feeling or will is therefore unthinkable to the Calvinist. The sacred anointing of the priest of creation must reach down to his beard and to the hem of his garment. His whole being, including all his abilities and powers, must be pervaded by the sensus divinitatis, and how then could he exclude his rational consciousness, – the λόγος which is in him, – the light of thought which comes from God Himself to irradiate him? To possess his God for the underground world of his feelings, and in the outworks of the exertion of his will, but not in his inner self, in the very center of his consciousness, and his thought; to have fixed starting-points for the study of nature and axiomatic strongholds for practical life, but to have no fixed support in his thoughts about the Creator Himself, – all of this was, for the Calvinist, the very denying of the Eternal Logos.

The same character of universality was claimed by the Calvinist for the sphere of religion and its circle of influence among men. Everything that has been created was, in its creation, furnished by God with an unchangeable law of its existence. And because God has fully ordained such laws and ordinances for all life, therefore the Calvinist demands that all life be consecrated to His service, in strict obedience. A religion confined to the closet, the cell, or the church, therefore, Calvin abhors. With the Psalmist, he calls upon heaven and earth, he calls upon all peoples and nations to give glory to God. God is present in all life, with the influence of His omnipresent and almighty power, and no sphere of human life is conceivable in which religion does not 63 maintain its demands that God shall be praised, that God’s ordinances shall be observed, and that every labora shall be permeated with its ora in fervent and ceaseless prayer. Wherever man may stand, whatever he may do, to whatever he may apply his hand, in agriculture, in commerce. and in industry, or his mind, in the world of art, and science, he is, in whatsoever it may be, constantly standing before the face of his God, he is employed in the service of his God, he has strictly to obey his God, and above all, he has to aim at the glory of his God. – Consequently, it is impossible for a Calvinist to confine religion to a single group, or to some circles among men. Religion concerns the whole of our human race. This race is the product of God’s creation. It is His wonderful workmanship, His absolute possession. Therefore the whole of mankind must be imbued with the fear of God, – old as well as young, – low as well as high, – not only those who have become initiated into His mysteries, but also those who still stand afar off. For not only did God create all men, not only is He all for all men, but His grace also extends itself, not only as a special grace, to the elect, but also as a common grace (gratia communis) to all mankind. To be sure, there is a concentration of religious light and life in the Church, but then in the walls of this church there are wide open windows, and through these spacious windows the light of the Eternal has to radiate over the whole world. Here is a city, set upon a hill, which every man can see afar off. Here is a holy salt that penetrates in every direction, checking all corruption. And even he who does not yet imbibe 64 the higher light, or maybe shuts his eyes to it, is nevertheless admonished, with equal emphasis, and in all things, to give glory to the name of the Lord. All partial religion drives the wedges of dualism into life, but the true Calvinist never forsakes the standard of religious monism. One supreme calling must impress the stamp of one-ness upon all human life, because one God upholds and preserves it, just as He created it all.

Todo este conceito sobre o assunto é duramente antagonizado pelo Calvinismo, que vindica para a religião seu caráter universal pleno, e sua completa aplicação universal. Se tudo que é existe por causa de Deus, então segue-se que a criação toda deve dar glória a Deus. O sol, a lua e as estrelas no firmamento, os pássaros do céu, toda a Natureza ao nosso redor, mas, acima de tudo, o próprio homem, que, como sacerdote, deve fazer convergir para Deus toda a criação e toda vida que se desenvolve nela. E embora o pecado tenha insensibilizado grande parte da criação para a glória de Deus, a exigência, - o ideal, permanece imutável, que cada criatura deve ser submergida no rio da religião, e terminar por colocar-se como uma oferta religiosa sobre o altar do Todo-Poderoso.

Uma religião limitada a sentimentos ou vontade é, portanto, impensável para o calvinista. A sagrada unção do sacerdote da criação deve descer para sua barba e para a orla de sua vestimenta. Todo seu ser, incluindo todas as suas habilidades e poderes, deve ser impregnado pelo sensus divinitatis, e como então poderia ser excluída sua consciência racional, - o λόγος que está nele, - a luz do pensamento que vem de Deus para iluminá-lo? Para o calvinista era a própria negação do Logos Eterno possuir seu Deus no mundo subterrâneo de seus sentimentos, e nas conseqüências do exercício de sua vontade, mas não em seu eu interior, no próprio centro de sua consciência, e seu pensamento; ter estabelecido pontos de partida para o estudo da natureza e fortalezas axiomáticas para a vida prática, mas não ter estabelecido suporte em seus pensamentos acerca do próprio Criador.

O mesmo caráter de universalidade foi reivindicado pelos calvinistas para a esfera da religião e seu círculo de influência entre os homens. Tudo que tem sido criado foi, em sua criação, suprido por Deus com uma lei imutável de sua existência. E porque Deus tem ordenado plenamente tais leis e ordenanças para toda vida, o calvinista exige que toda vida seja consagrada ao seu serviço, em estrita obediência. Portanto, Calvino abomina a religião limitada ao gabinete, a cela ou à igreja. Com o salmista, ele invoca o céu e a terra, invoca todas as pessoas e nações a dar glória a Deus.

Deus está presente em toda vida com a influência de seu poder onipresente e Todo-Poderoso, e nenhuma esfera da vida humana é concebida na qual a religião não sustente suas exigências para que Deus seja louvado, para que as ordenanças de Deus sejam observadas, e que todo labora seja impregnado com sua ora em fervente e contínua oração. Onde quer que o homem possa estar, tudo quanto possa fazer, em tudo que possa aplicar sua mão - na agricultura, no comércio e na industria -, ou sua mente, no mundo da arte e ciência, ele está, seja no que for, constantemente posicionado diante da face de seu Deus, está empregado no serviço de seu Deus, deve obedecer estritamente seu Deus, e acima de tudo, deve objetivar a glória de seu Deus. Conseqüentemente, é impossível para um calvinista limitar a religião a um grupo em particular, ou algum círculo entre os homens. A religião diz respeito ao todo de nossa raça humana. Esta raça é o produto da criação de Deus. É sua obra maravilhosa, sua possessão absoluta. Portanto, a humanidade toda deve estar imbuída com o temor de Deus, - o velho tanto quanto o jovem, - o baixo tanto quanto o alto, - não somente aqueles que têm se tornado iniciados em seus mistérios, mas também aqueles que ainda permanecem muito distante. Pois Deus não apenas criou todos os homens, ele não apenas é tudo para os homens, mas sua graça também estende-se, não somente como uma graça especial ao eleito, mas também como graça comum (gratia communis) a toda humanidade.

Sem dúvida, há uma concentração de luz e vida religiosa na Igreja, mas ao mesmo tempo nas paredes desta igreja há amplas janelas abertas, e através destas janelas espaçosas a luz do Eterno tem irradiado sobre todo o mundo. Aqui está uma cidade colocada sobre um monte, a qual cada homem pode ver à distância. Aqui está um sal santo que penetra em todas as direções, reprimindo toda corrupção. E mesmo aquele que ainda não assimila a luz superior, ou talvez feche seus olhos para ela, todavia é admoestado, com igual ênfase e em todas as coisas, a dar glória ao nome do Senhor. Toda religião parcial dirige as cunhas do dualismo para dentro da vida, mas o verdadeiro calvinista nunca abandona o padrão do monismo religioso. Um chamado supremo deve imprimir a marca da unidade sobre toda vida humana, porque o Deus único a sustenta e preserva, exatamente como a criou.

Всему этому прямо противостоит кальвинизм, который отстаивает универсальность религии, ее всеобщую применимость. Если все, что есть, существует ради Бога, из этого следует, что все творение должно воздавать Ему славу — солнце, луна и звезды на тверди, птицы в воздухе, вся природа и прежде всего сам человек, который, подобно священнику, должен посвятить Богу все творение и бурлящую в нем жизнь. Грех отнял большую часть творения у славы Божией, но требование, идеал, остается тем же: весь тварный мир должен погрузиться в поток религии и лежать, словно приношение, на алтаре Всемогущего. Поэтому религия, ограниченная чувствами или волей, для кальвиниста немыслима. Все существо священнослужителя, осуществляющего святое помазание, все его способности и силы должен пронизывать sensus divinitatis. Как же может он исключить свое разумное сознание, logos, находящийся в нем, свет мысли, который пришел от Самого Бога, чтобы его просветить? Если Бог — основа всех чувств и всякого выражения воли, но Его нет во внутреннем «я», в самом центре сознания и мысли; если есть исходный пункт для изучения природы и аксиоматических основ практической жизни, но нет прочной опоры в мыслях о Самом Творце, то кальвинист сочтет это просто отрицанием предвечного Логоса.

Такую же универсальность кальвинисты провозглашают для всей сферы религии и ее влияния среди людей. Все сотворенное Бог сразу снабдил неизменными законами существования. Поскольку Он в полной мере обеспечил такими законами и установлениями всю жизнь, кальвинист и требует, чтобы вся жизнь была посвящена служению Ему в строгом послушании. Религию, ограниченную кельей или церковью, Кальвин не признавал. Вместе с псалмопевцем он призывает небо, и землю, и все народы воздать Богу славу. Бог присутствует во всей жизни через влияние Своей вездесущей и всемогущей силы. Нельзя помыслить никакую сферу человеческой жизни, в которой религия не требовала бы, чтобы мы славили Бога и чтобы всякое labora соединялось с ora в горячей и непрестанной молитве (labora — трудись, ora — молись. Автор имеет в виду правило «ora et labora»). Где бы ни находился человек, что бы он ни делал, к чему бы ни прикладывал руку, — к сельскому ли хозяйству, к торговле, к производству — или разум, в мире искусства или науки, он во всяком деле предстоит перед лицом своего Бога, служит Ему, должен строго Ему повиноваться и, главное, должен Его прославить. Тем самым для кальвиниста невозможно привязывать религию к определенной группе людей, или к определенным кругам. Религия касается всего человеческого рода. Этот род — произведение Божие, удивительное создание Его рук, Его абсолютная собственность. Поэтому весь род человеческий, целиком, должен быть исполнен страха Божиего, весь — молодые и старые, богатые и бедные, посвященные в Его тайны и те, кто еще стоит вдали от них. Бог сотворил всех людей, Он все для всех, мало того — Он посылает не только особую благодать на избранных, но и общую благодать (gratia communis) на все человечество. Конечно, религиозный свет и религиозная жизнь концентрируются в Церкви; но тогда надо сказать, что в Церкви широко распахнуты окна, и через них свет Предвечного светит всему миру. Это град, стоящий на холме, который каждый может увидеть издали. Это святая соль, которая проникает повсюду, предотвращая разложение. Даже того, кто еще не проникся высшим светом или, может быть, просто закрывает глаза, увещевают с равным усердием во всем воздавать славу имени Божиему. Всякая частичная религия вбивает в жизнь клин дуализма; истинный же кальвинист привержен религиозному монизму. Единое призвание свыше должно наложить отпечаток единости на всю жизнь человека, потому что один Бог поддерживает и сохраняет все, точно так же, как Он все сотворил.

En hiermee staan we vanzelf voor de vierde hoofdvraag in zake het wezen der Religie: Zal ze normaal, of moet ze abnormaal, d.i. soteriologisch zijn? Ik weet wel, dat gemeenlijk tegenover de soteriologische opvatting der Religie de nomistische gesteld wordt, 47 maar deze laatste onderscheiding hoort thuis in een gansch andere orde van denkbeelden. De door mij bedoelde tegenstelling geldt de vraag, of we in zake de Religie de facto te rekenen hebben met den normalen of wel met den door val in zonde abnormalen mensch, in welk laatste geval de religie vanzelf een soteriologisch karakter moet dragen. De thans veldwinnende meening kiest voor het normale standpunt. Niet alsof ons geslacht als één geheel genomen nu reeds aan de hoogste religieuse norma beantwoorden zou. Dat beweert niemand. Dat ziet ieder wel beter en anders. Empirisch stuit men veeleer op veel irreligiositeit en gebrekkige religieuse ontwikkeling. Alleen maar, juist in dit langzaam proces van den laagsten trap naar het hoogste ideaal ziet men de door het normale geëischte ontwikkeling. Het eerste spoor van religie komt dan reeds bij de dieren op. Ge ziet het in den hond die zijn meester adoreert. Met de ontkieming van den „homo sapiens” ⁸⁾ uit den chimpansee, treedt de religie in een hooger stadium. Sinds doorliep ze gansch een scala. En thans is ze bezig zich los te maken uit de windselen van kerk en dogma, om over te gaan in wat men acht een nóg hooger stadium te zijn, dat van de onbewuste voeling voor het ongekende Oneindige.

This brings us, without any further transition, to our fourth main question, viz., Must religion be normal, or soteriologically I am aware that the nomistic conception of religion is usually considered as the opposite of the soteriological, but this latter distinction belongs to another order of conceptions. The distinction which I have in mind here is concerned with the question whether in the matter of religion we must reckon de facto with man in his present condition as normal, or as having fallen into sin, and having therefore become abnormal. In the latter case religion must necessarily assume a soteriological character. Now the prevailing idea, at present, favours the view that religion has to start from man as being normal. Not of course as though our race as a whole should conform already to the highest religious norm. This nobody affirms. Everyone knows better than to make such an absurd statement. As a matter of fact, we meet with much irreligiousness, and imperfect religious development continues to be the rule. But precisely in this slow aud gradual progress from the lowest forms to the highest ideals, the development demanded this normal view of religion contends that it has found confirmation. According to this view, the first traces of religion are found in animals. They are seen in the dog who adores his master, aud as the homo sapiens developes out of the Chimpanzee, so religion only enters upon a higher stage. Since that time religion has passed through all the notes 17 of the gamut. At present it is engaged in loosening itself from the hands of Church and dogma, to pass on to what is again considered a higher stage, namely, the unconscious feeling for the Unknown Infinite.

This brings us, without any further transition, to our fourth main question, viz., Must religion be normal, or abnormal, i.e., soteriological? The distinction which I have in mind here is concerned with the question, whether in the matter of religion we must reckon de facto with man in his present condition as normal, or as having fallen into sin, and having therefore become abnormal. In the latter case religion must necessarily assume a soteriological character. Now the prevailing idea, at present, favors the view that religion has to start from man as being normal. Not of course as though our race as a whole should conform already to the highest religious norm. This nobody affirms. Everyone knows better than to make such an absurd statement. As a matt er of fact, we meet with much irreligiousness, and imperfect religious development continues to be the rule. But precisely in this slow and gradual progress from the lowest forms to the highest ideals, the development demanded by this normal view of religion contends that it has found confirmation. According to this view, the first traces of religion are 65 found in animals. They are seen in the dog who adores his master, and as the homo sapiens develops out of the chimpanzee, so religion only enters upon a higher stage. Since that time religion has passed through all the notes of the gamut. At present it is engaged in loosening itself from the bands of Church and dogma, to pass on to what is again considered a higher stage, the unconscious feeling for the Unknown Infinite. –

Isto nos conduz, sem qualquer transição adicional, a nossa quarta questão principal, a saber: Deve a religião ser normal ou anormal, isto é, soteriológica? A distinção que eu tenho em mente aqui é a que diz respeito a questão, se no assunto da religião devemos levar em conta de fato o homem em sua presente condição como normal, ou como tendo caído em pecado, e tendo, portanto, se tornado anormal. No último caso, a religião deve assumir necessariamente um caráter soteriológico. A idéia prevalecente atualmente favorece o conceito de que a religião deve partir do homem como sendo normal. Certamente não como se nossa raça, como um todo, já deveria estar conformada à mais alta norma religiosa. Isto ninguém afirma. Todos sabem muito bem que não se faz uma afirmação absurda como esta. Aliás, nos deparamos com muita irreligiosidade e o desenvolvimento religioso imperfeito continua sendo a regra. Mas, precisamente neste progresso lento e gradual das formas mais baixas para os ideais mais altos, o desenvolvimento exigido por este conceito normal de religião argumenta que ele tem encontrado confirmação. Segundo este conceito, os primeiros traços de religião são encontrados nos animais. Eles são vistos nos cachorros que adoram seus donos, e como o homo sapiens desenvolve-se do chimpanzé, somente assim a religião entra em um estágio mais alto. Desde então a religião tem passado através de todas as notas da escala. Atualmente, ela está engajada em soltar-se das ataduras da Igreja e do dogma, a pronunciar o que é de novo considerado um estágio mais alto, a saber, o sentimento inconsciente do Infinito Desconhecido.

Это прямо подводит нас к четвертому главному вопросу — должна ли религия быть естественной или «неестественной», т. е. сотериологической? Я говорю о том, должны ли мы считать настоящее состояние человека естественным, или, учитывая, что он впал в грех, полагать, что оно неестественно. В последнем случае религия с необходимостью станет сотериологической. Господствующая в настоящее время идея поощряет взгляд, что она должна бы начинать с человека, пребывающего в естественном состоянии. Никто не утверждает, конечно, что наш род уже соответствует высшим религиозным нормам. Каждый слишком хорошо знает положение дел, чтобы говорить такие нелепицы. На деле мы сплошь и рядом встречаемся с неверием, и религиозная отсталость остается обычным явлением. Подобный естественный взгляд на религию полагает, что именно медленный, постепенный прогресс от низших форм к высшим идеалам служит подтверждением его правоты. Согласно этому воззрению, зачатки религии обнаруживаются уже у животных. Их усматривают в собаке, обожающей своего хозяина, а когда человек разумный развился из шимпанзе, религия лишь взошла на более высокую ступень развития. Начиная с этого времени, она прошла через все формы своего существования и сейчас освобождает себя от церковных и догматических уз, чтобы перейти к тому, что считается высшей ступенью — к неопределенному чувству Неизвестного и Бесконечного.

Tegenover deze theorie nu staat principieel de geheel andere die, zonder de praeformatie van schier al het menschelijke in het dier te loochenen, en erkennende dat het dier naar des menschen beeld, gelijk het in Gods gedachten was, geschapen is, gelijk de mensch naar den beelde Gods, den eersten mensch in zuivere verhouding tot God, d.i. in echte religie laat optreden, en niet uit zijn schepping, maar uit zijn val in zonde, de vele lagere, onzuivere vormen der religie verklaart, die ons saam het beeld geven, niet van een proces dat uit het lage naar het hooge leidt, maar van een jammerlijke degeneratie, een degeneratie die uiteraard herstel van de ware Religie alleen mogelijk maakt in den soteriologischen weg. Ook ten opzichte van deze tegenstelling nu is de keuze van het Calvinisme beslist. Ook hier, gelijk in alles zich plaatsende 48 voor het aangezicht Gods, wordt de Calvinist zoo overweldigend door de heiligheid Gods aangegrepen, dat het schuldbesef zijn ziel verscheurt en de schrikkelijkheid der zonde hem met centenaarsgewicht op het gemoed drukt. Elke poging om de zonde als een onvolkomen stadie op den weg naar de volmaaktheid te verklaren, wekt zijn toorn als een beleediging van de majesteit Gods. Hij beleed van meet af wat Buckle in zijn Geschiedenis van Englands beschaving, uit heel ander standpunt empirisch nawees, dat wel de vormen verfijnd werden, waarin de zonde uitkomt, maar dat eeuw in eeuw uit de toestand van het menschelijk hart blijft wat die was. Op het é profundis waarin voor veertig eeuwen de ziel van een David naar God schreide, geeft nog de ontroerde ziel van elk kind van God in deze hoogverlichte eeuw een onverzwakten weerklank. De opvatting van het bederf der zonde, als de bron van alle menschelijke ellende, is dan ook nergens dieper dan bij het Calvinisme, en in wat de Calvinist de Schrift naspreekt van hel en verdoemenis, komt geen ruwheid aan het woord, maar uit zich de klaarheid van den levensernst en de moed der consequentie. Of sprak ook Hij, wiens het teederste en het wegsleependste woord was, niet zelf even beslist en herhaaldelijk van een buitenste duisternis, van een vuur dat niet te blusschen is, en van een worm die nooit sterft? Dit niet aan te durven is dan ook niets dan halfheid, het slechts half meenen van wat ge omtrent het vernielend karakter der zonde belijdt.

In die zelfervaring nu, in die empirische beschouwing van de ellende des levens, in dien hoogen indruk van de heiligheid Gods, en in dien moed der consequentie, om ze tot in haar absolute tegenstelling te belijden, wortelt bij den Calvinist voor het Zijn de onmisbaarheid der Wedergeboorte en voor het Bewustzijn de onmisbaarheid der Openbaring. Over de wedergeboorte als de regelrechte daad Gods, die het scheefgetrokken rad des levens weer recht op zijn spil zet, behoef ik hier niet uit te wijden, maar wel behoort een kort woord gezegd over de Heilige Schrift en de autoriteit dier Schrift. Zeer ten onrechte toch heeft men in de Heilige Schrift niet anders willen zien dan het formeele princiep der Gereformeerde belijdenis, terwijl toch in het echte Calvinisme de opvatting 49 veel dieper gaat. Calvijns bedoeling ligt uitgesproken in het dogma de necessitate S. Scripturae ⁹⁾, en eerst hierdoor wordt de allesbeheerschende beteekenis van de Heilige Schrift verstaan, en begrepen tevens, uit wat hoofde het critisch losrafelen van de Schrift voor den Calvinist met een prijsgeven van het Christendom zelf gelijk staat. In het Paradijs, buiten val, geen Bijbel, en evenmin een Bijbel in het Paradijs der heerlijkheid dat komt. Als de klaarheid der schepping u onmiddellijk toespreekt, en de inspraak van uw hart zuiver, en aller menschen woord oprecht, en uw oor ongerept is bij het opvangen dier klanken, waartoe zou u dan een Bijbel dienen? Wie slaat een boek over kinderliefde op, op het eigen oogenblik dat zijn kinderen om hem spelen en hij met volle teugen hun liefde kan indrinken? De tegenzin, die zich in onze dagen tegen de autoriteit der Heilige Schrift openbaart, heeft zijn grond dan ook in niets anders dan in de valsche onderstelling, dat onze religie niet soteriologisch behoeft te zijn, maar normaal kan wezen; en dan natuurlijk is een Bijbel hinderlijk, stuitend voor het gevoel, het inschuiven van een boek tusschen God en uw hart. Of wie correspondeert met zijn vrouw terwijl hij ze bij zich heeft zitten aan den huiselijken disch? De religie kent evenals de oceaan haar eb en vloed, er zijn hooge en lage standen ook in de religieuse wateren, en in onze dagen is de ebbe er even laag als de vloed hoog stond in de dagen onzer vaderen. Vandaar dat het zondebesef zoo verdwijnend flauw in de harten ritselt, en men als normaal voor lief neemt, wat in religieuser tijden diep en ernstig als geheel abnormaal en ontaard gevoeld werd. Als helder de zon haar licht in uw woning straalt, draait ge het electrisch kunstlicht uit, maar als de glans van het zonlicht schuilen gaat, staat ge voor de necessitas luminis artificiosi ¹⁰⁾, en wordt het kunstlicht in ieders woning ontstoken. En zoo nu ook hier. Als geen nevelen voor ons zielsoog den glans van het Goddelijk licht verdonkeren, wat behoefte zult ge dan hebben aan een „lamp” voor uw voet of aan een kunstlicht op uw pad? Maar zegt de historie, getuigt de empirie, getuigt uw eigen zinsbesef u, dat het licht 50 uit den hoogen schuil is gegaan, en dat ge tast in schemerdonker, dan moet er een hulplicht voor u ontstoken worden, en dát kunstlicht ontstak God u in zijn Woord.

This whole theory is opposed by that other and entirely different theory, which, without denying the preformation of so much that is human, in the animal, or the fact that (if you will allow me to say so) auimals were created after the image of man, just as man was created after the image of God, nevertheless maintains that the first man was created in perfect relations to his God. i.e. as imbued by a pure and genuine religion, and consequently explains the many low, imperfect and absurd forms of religion found in Paganism, not as the result of his creation but as the result of his Fall. These low and imperfect forms of religion their second theory understands not as a process that leads from a lower to a higher, but as a lamentable degeneration,— a degeneration, which, in the nature of the case, makes the restoration of the true religion possible only in the soteriological way. Now in the choice between these two theories Calvinism allows no hesitation. Standing himself, with this question, too, before the face of God, the Calvinist is so impressed with the holiness of God that the consciousness of guilt immediately lacerates his soul, and the terrible nature of sin presses on his heart as with an intolerable weight. Every attempt to explain sin, as an incomplete stage on the way to perfection, arouses his wrath, as an insult to the majesty of God. He confessed, from the beginning, the same truth which Buckle has demonstrated empirically in his "History of Civilization in England", viz. that the forms in which sin makes its appearance may show us a gradual refinement but the moral condition of the human heart, as such, has remained the same throughout all the centuries. To the de profundis with which, thirty centuries ago, the soul of David cried unto God, the troubled soul of every child of God in the 18 sixteenth century still sounded a response with undiminished power. The conception of the corruption of sin as the source of all human misery was nowhere more profound than in Calvin's environment. Even in the assertions which the Calvinist made, in accordance with Holy Scripture, concerning Hell and damnation, there is no coarseness, no rudeness, hut only that clearness which is the result of the utmost seriousness of life, and the undaunted courage of a deeprooted conviction of the holiness of the most High. Did not He, from Whose lips flowed the most tender, and the most winning words, — did not He, Himself also speak most decidedly and repeatedly of an "outer darkness*', of a "fire that cannot he quenched", of a "worm that dieth not"? And in this. also. Calvin was right, for to refuse to assent to these words is nothing but a lack of thoroughgoing consistency. It shews a want of sincerity in our confession of the holiness of God, and of the destructive power of sin. And on the contary, in this spiritual experience of sin, in this empirical consideration of the misery of life, in this lofty impression of the holiness of God, and in this staunchness of his convictions, which led him to follow his conclusions to the bitter end, the Calvinist found the roots of the necessity first of regeneration, for real existence, and secondly, the necessity of Revelation for clear consciousness. Now my subject does not induce me to speak in detail of regeneration, as that immediate act b}- which God, as it were, sets right again the crooked wheel of life. But it is necessary that I say a few words concerning Revelation, and the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Very improperly, the Scriptures have been represented, by Schweizer and others, as only the formal principle of the Reformed confession. The conception of genuine Calvinism lies much deeper. The meaning of Calvin was expressed in what he called the necessitas S. Script tirae; i. e. the need of Scriptural revelation. This necessitas 8. S. was for Calvin the unavoidable expression for the all-dominating authority of 19 the Holy Scriptures, and even now it is this very dogma which enables us to understand why it is that the Calvinist of to-day considers the critical analysis and the application of the critical solvent to the Scriptures as tantamount to an abandoning of Christianity itself. In Paradise, before the Fall, there was no Bible, and there will be no Bible in the future Paradise of glory. "When the transparent light, kindled by Nature, addresses us directly, and the inner word of God sounds in our heart in its original clearness, and all human words are sincere, and the function of our inner ear is perfectly performed, why should we need a Bible? What Mother loses herself in a treatise upon the "love of our children" the very moment that her own clear ones are playing about her knee, and God allows her to drink in their love with full draughts? But, in our present condition, this immediate communion with God by means of nature, and of our own heart is lost. Sin brought separation instead, and the opposition which is manifest nowadays, against the authority of the Holy Scriptures is based on nothing else than the false supposition that, our condition being still normal, our religion need not be soteriological. For of course, in that case, the Bible is not wanted, it becomes, indeed, a hindrance, and grates upon your feelings, since it intercedes a book between God and your heart. For what husband corresponds with his wife by writ, while she is sitting at the family table, beside him? Oral communication excludes writing. But like the ocean, the cm-rent of religion has its periods of high tide and low tide; and in our days this tide is low, just as, in the days of our fathers it was high. Hence it is that the sense of sin is so feeble in our hearts, and that conditions which, in times of great religious activity, every pious man felt as abnormal and degenerate, are now considered normal and proper. When the sun shines in your house, bright and clear, you turn off the electric light, but when the sun disappears, below 20 the horizon, you feel the necessitas luminis artificiosi, and the artificial light is kindled in every dwelling. Now this is the case in matters of religion. When there are no mists to hide the majesty of > the divine light from our eves, what need is there then for a lamp unto the feet, or a light upon the path ? But when history, experience and consciousness all unite in stating the fact that the light of Heaven has disappeared, and that we are groping about in the dark, then, a different, or if you will, an artificial light must be kindled for us;— and such a light God has kindled for us in His Holy Word.

Now, this whole theory is opposed by that other and entirely different theory, which, without denying the preformation of so much that is human, in the animal, or the fact that (if you will allow me to say so) animals were created after the image of man, just as man was created after the image of God, nevertheless maintains that the first man was created in perfect relations to his God, i.e., as imbued by a pure and genuine religion, and consequently explains the many low, imperfect and absurd forms of religion found in Paganism, not as the result of his creation but as the outcome of his Fall. These low and imperfect forms of religion are not to be understood as a process that leads from a lower to a higher, but as a lamentable degeneration, – a degeneration, which, in the nature of the case, makes the restoration of the true religion possible only in the soteriological way. Now in the choice between these two theories Calvinism allows no hesitation. himself, with this question, too, before the face of God, the Calvinist was so impressed with the holiness of God that the consciousness of guilt immediately lacerated his soul, and the terrible nature of sin pressed on his heart as with an intolerable 66 weight Every attempt to explain sin as an incomplete stage on the way to perfection, aroused his wrath, as an insult to the majesty of God. He confessed. from the beginning, the same truth which Buckle has demonstrated empirically in his “History of Civilization in England”, viz., that the forms in which sin makes its appearance may show us a gradual refinement, but that the moral condition of the human heart, as such, has remained the same throughout all the centuries. To the de profundis with which, thirty centuries ago, the soul of David cried unto God, the troubled soul of every child of God in the sixteenth century still sounded a response with undiminished power. The conception of the corruption of sin as the source of all human misery was nowhere more profound than in Calvin’s environment. Even in the assertions which the Calvinist made, in accordance with Holy Scripture, concerning hell and damnation, there is no coarseness, no rudeness but only that clearness which is the result of the utmost seriousness of life, and the undaunted courage of a deep-rooted conviction of the holiness of the most High. Did not He, from whose lips flowed the most tender, and the most winning words, – did not He, Himself also speak most decidedly and repeatedly of an “outer darkness”, of a “fire that cannot be quenched”, and of a “worm that dieth not”? And in this, also, Calvin was right, for to refuse to assent to these words is nothing but a lack of thoroughgoing consistency. It shows a want of sincerity in our confession of the holiness of God, and of the destructive power of sin. And on the contrary, in this spiritual experience of sin, in this empirical 67 consideration of the misery of life, in this lofty impression of the holiness of God, and in this staunchness of his convictions, which led him to follow his conclusions to the bitter end, the Calvinist found the roots of the necessity first of Regeneration, for real existence, and secondly, the necessity of Revelation, for clear consciousness.

Now my subject does not induce me to speak in detail of regeneration, as that immediate act by which God, as it were, sets right again the crooked wheel of life. But it is necessary that I say a few words concerning Revelation, and the authority of the Holy Scriptures. Very improperly, the Scriptures have been represented, by Schweizer and others, as only the formal principle of the Reformed confession. The conception of genuine Calvinism lies much deeper. The meaning of Calvin was expressed in what he called the necessitas S. Scripturae; i.e., the need of Scriptural revelation. This necessitas S. S. was for Calvin the unavoidable expression for the all-dominating authority of the Holy Scriptures, and even now it is this very dogma which enables us to understand why it is that the Calvinist of today considers the critical analysis and the application of the critical solvent to the Scriptures as tantamount to an abandoning of Christianity itself. In Paradise, before the Fall, there was no Bible, and there will be no Bible in the future Paradise of glory. When the transparent light, kindled by Nature, addresses us directly, and the inner word of God sounds in our heart in its original clearness, and all human words are sincere, and the function of our inner ear is perfectly performed, why should we need a 68 Bible? What mother loses herself in a treatise upon the “love of our children” the very moment that her own dear ones are playing about her knee, and God allows her to drink in their love with full draughts? But, in our present condition, this immediate communion with God by means of nature, and of our own heart is lost. Sin brought separation instead, and the opposition which is manifest nowadays against the authority of the Holy Scriptures is based on nothing else than the false supposition that, our condition being still normal, our religion need not be soteriological. For of course, in that case, the Bible is not wanted, it becomes, indeed, a hindrance, and grates upon your feelings, since it interposes a book between God and your heart. Oral communication excludes writing. When the sun shines in your house, bright and clear, you turn off the electric light, but when the sun disappears below the horizon, you feel the necessitas luminis artificiosi, i.e., the need of artificial light, and the artificial light is kindled in every dwelling. Now this is the case in matters of religion. When there are no mists to hide the majesty of the divine light from our eyes, what need is there then for a lamp unto the feet, or a light upon the path? But when history, experience and consciousness all unite in stating the fact that the pure and full light of Heaven has disappeared, and that we are groping about in the dark, then, a different, or if you will, an artificial light must be kindled for us; – and such a light God has kindled for us in His Holy Word.

Toda esta teoria é oposta por aquela outra e completamente diferente teoria, que, sem negar a preformação do que é simplesmente humano, no animal, ou o fato que (se vocês me permitem dizer assim) os animais foram criados segundo à imagem do homem, do mesmo modo como o homem foi criado segundo à imagem de Deus, todavia sustenta que o primeiro homem foi criado em perfeita relação com seu Deus, isto é, como imbuído de uma religião pura e genuína e, conseqüentemente, explica as formas mais baixas, imperfeitas e absurdas de religião encontradas no Paganismo, não como o resultado de sua criação, mas como a conseqüência de sua queda. Estas formas mais baixas e imperfeitas de religião não devem ser entendidas como processo que conduz de uma inferior a uma superior, mas como uma degeneração lamentável, - uma degeneração, que, segundo a natureza do caso, torna a regeneração da verdadeira religião possível somente pelo caminho soteriológico. Então, na escolha entre estas duas teorias o Calvinismo não permite hesitação. Colocando-se diante de Deus também com esta questão, o calvinista foi tão impressionado com a santidade de Deus que a consciência de culpa imediatamente dilacerou sua alma, e a natureza terrível do pecado pressionou seu coração como com um peso intolerável.

Toda tentativa de explicar o pecado como um estágio incompleto no caminho rumo a perfeição provocava sua ira, como um insulto à majestade de Deus. Ele confessou, desde o princípio, a mesma verdade que Buckle tem demonstrado empiricamente em sua “História da Civilização na Inglaterra”, a saber, que as formas nas quais o pecado se apresenta pode mostrar-nos um refinamento gradual, mas que a condição moral do coração humano, como tal, continua o mesmo através de todos os séculos. Ao de profundis com que, trinta séculos antes, a alma de Davi gritou para Deus, a alma perturbada de cada filho de Deus no décimo sexto século ainda ressoou uma resposta com igual força. Em parte alguma a concepção sobre a corrupção do pecado como a fonte de toda miséria humana foi mais profunda que no ambiente de Calvino. Mesmo nas declarações que o calvinista fez a respeito do inferno e da maldição de acordo com a Santa Escritura, não há aspereza, nem grosseria, mas apenas aquela clareza que é o resultado da maior seriedade de vida, e a coragem destemida de uma convicção da santidade do Altíssimo profundamente enraizada. Não foi ele, de cujos lábios fluíram as palavras mais compassivas e vitoriosas, - não foi ele, ele mesmo, que também fala mais decidida e repetidamente de uma “treva exterior”, de um “fogo que não pode ser apagado”, e de um “verme que não morre”? E nisto, também, Calvino estava certo, pois recusar concordar com estas palavras é nada mais do que uma completa falta de consistência. Isto mostra uma falta de sinceridade em nossa confissão sobre a santidade de Deus, e sobre o poder destrutivo do pecado. E pelo contrário, nesta experiência espiritual do pecado, nesta consideração empírica da miséria da vida, nesta sublime impressão da santidade de Deus, e nesta firmeza de suas convicções, que o levou a seguir suas conclusões até a morte, o calvinista encontrou primeiramente a raiz da necessidade de Regeneração, para a verdadeira existência; e secundariamente, a necessidade de Revelação, para clara consciência.

Meu assunto não me induz a falar em detalhes da regeneração, como aquele ato imediato pelo qual Deus, por assim dizer, endireita novamente a roda torta da vida. Mas é necessário que eu diga umas poucas palavras acerca da Revelação, e da autoridade das Santas Escrituras. Muito impropriamente, as Escrituras têm sido descritas por Schweizer e outros somente como o princípio formal da confissão reformada. A concepção do Calvinismo genuíno jaz muito mais fundo. O sentido de Calvino foi expresso naquilo que chamou de necessitas S. Scripturae; i.e., a necessidade da revelação escritural. Esta necessitas S. Scripturae foi para Calvino a expressão inevitável para a autoridade toda dominante das Santas Escrituras, e mesmo agora é este mesmo dogma que habilita-nos a entender porque é que o calvinista de hoje considera a análise crítica e a aplicação do solvente crítico53 à Escritura como equivalente ao abandono do próprio Cristianismo.

No paraíso, antes da queda, não havia Bíblia, e não haverá Bíblia no paraíso de glória futuro. Quando a luz transparente brilha através da natureza endereçada diretamente a nós, a palavra interior de Deus soa em nosso coração em sua clareza original, todas as palavras humanas são sinceras, e a função de nosso ouvido interior é perfeitamente desempenhada, por que deveríamos necessitar de uma Bíblia? Qual mãe perde seu tempo em um tratado sobre o “amor por nossas crianças” no momento que seus próprios amados estão brincando sobre seus joelhos, e Deus lhe permite beber de seu amor com plenos goles? Mas, em nossa condição atual, esta comunhão imediata com Deus por meio da natureza e de nosso próprio coração está perdida. O pecado trouxe como substituto a separação, e a oposição que é atualmente manifestada contra a autoridade das Santas Escrituras está baseada em nada mais do que a falsa suposição de que, sendo nossa condição ainda normal, nossa religião não precisa ser soteriológica. Pois, certamente neste caso, a Bíblia não é desejada, de fato ela se torna um obstáculo, e produz um som desagradável sobre nossos sentimentos, visto que ela interpõe um livro entre Deus e nosso coração. A comunicação oral exclui a escrita. Quando o sol brilha em sua casa, brilhante e claro, você desliga a luz elétrica, mas quando o sol desaparece no horizonte, você sente a necessitas luminis artificiosi, i.e., a necessidade de luz artificial, e a luz artificial está brilhando em cada habitação.

Este é o caso em matéria de religião. Quando não há nevoeiro para esconder a majestade da luz divina de nossos olhos, que necessidade há então de uma lâmpada para os pés, ou de uma luz para o caminho? Mas quando a História, a experiência e a consciência, todas declarando unidas o fato de que a luz pura e plena dos céus tem desaparecido, e que estamos andando às cegas nas trevas, então, uma diferente, ou se vocês preferirem, uma luz artificial deve ser acesa para nós, - e esta luz Deus acendeu para nós em sua Santa Palavra.

Этой теории противостоит совершенно иная теория. Не отрицая, что в животных есть что-то свойственное и человеку или что (позвольте мне так выразиться) животные сотворены по человеческому образу, как человек сотворен по образу Божиему, она утверждает, что первый человек находился в совершенных взаимоотношениях с Богом, то есть был наделен чистой и истинной верой. Тем самым множества низких, несовершенных, нелепых форм религии, обнаруживаемых в язычестве, она считает не результатом творения человека, а следствием его падения. Эти низкие и несовершенные формы надо понимать не как процесс, ведущий от низшего к высшему, а как плачевное вырождение, которое по своей природе делает восстановление истинной религии возможным лишь сотериологическим образом. Так вот, в выборе между этими двумя теориями кальвинизм не позволяет себе колебаться. Задавая этот вопрос перед лицом Божиим, кальвинист так потрясен Его святостью, что осознание вины раздирает его душу и страшная природа греха тяжко давит на сердце. Всякая попытка объяснить грех как незавершенную ступень на пути к совершенству вызывает у него гнев, поскольку рассматривается им как оскорбление величия Божиего. Он исповедует с самого начала ту же самую истину, которую Бокль эмпирически доказал в своей «Истории цивилизации в Англии»: формы, в которых грех предстает перед нами, могут свидетельствовать о постепенном его смягчении, но нравственное состояние человеческого сердца остается неизменным. На восклицание de profundis («Из глубины» (лат.)), которым Давид взывал к Богу тридцать веков назад, бедная душа каждого чада Божиего, живущего в XVI веке, откликается с той же силой. Представление о том, что разлагающее воздействие греха — источник всех наших несчастий, нигде не было более глубоким, чем в окружении Кальвина. Даже в утверждениях кальвинистов, сделанных в соответствии с Библией, об аде и осуждении нет никакой жестокости, есть лишь та ясность, которую порождает предельная серьезность жизни и неустрашимая отвага глубоко укоренившегося убеждения в святости Всевышнего. Не Он ли, произнесший самые нежные и самые торжественные слова, Сам говорит решительно и многократно о «внешней тьме», об «огне неугасимом» и о «черве, который не умирает»?

И в этом Кальвин был прав, ибо, не соглашаясь с этими словами, мы выказываем непоследовательность, а значит, не совсем искренне исповедуем святость Божию и не осознаем разрушительную силу греха. В этом духовном опыте греха, в эмпирическом размышлении о бедствиях жизни, в трепете и преклонении перед святостью Божией, в твердости убеждений, заставляющих действовать в соответствии со своими взглядами, к чему бы это ни приводило, кальвинист нашел причину необходимости возрождения, без которого нет истинной жизни, и необходимости Откровения, без которого мы не поймем себя.

Предмет моей лекции не позволяет мне подробно говорить о возрождении как прямом деянии Божием, посредством которого Бог заново выпрямляет искривившееся колесо жизни. Однако я должен сказать несколько слов об Откровении и об авторитете Священного Писания. Швейцер и другие весьма некорректно представляют Писание только как формальный принцип реформатского вероисповедания. Подлинный кальвинизм лежит много глубже. То, что Кальвин имел в виду, выражено в его словах о necessitas S. Scripturae (Необходимости Св. Писания (лат.)), то есть о потребности в библейском откровении. Для Кальвина она неизбежно выражала господствующий над всем авторитет Священного Писания, и даже сейчас именно эта догма дает нам способность понять, почему сегодняшний кальвинист считает критический анализ Писания равносильным отмене христианства. В раю перед грехопадением не было никакой Библии, и никакой Библии не будет в будущем раю славы. Зачем нам нужна Библия, когда отчетливый свет природы обращается к нам непосредственно, слово Божие звучит в нашем сердце в своей первоначальной ясности, человеческие слова искренни, и слух наш верен? Какая мать читает трактат «О любви к нашим детям», когда ее собственные дети играют у нее на коленях, и Бог позволяет ей в полной мере наслаждаться их любовью? Но в нашем настоящем состоянии утеряно непосредственное общение с Богом через природу и сердце. Грех заменил это разделением, и нынешнее противление авторитету Священного Писания основано ни на чем ином, кроме как на ложном предположении, что наше состояние все еще нормально и спасать нас незачем. Конечно, в этом случае Библия не нужна, она даже мешает, полагая себя между Богом и сердцем. Зачем письмо, если можно побеседовать? Когда солнце светит в вашем доме в полную силу, вы выключаете электричество, но когда оно исчезнет за горизонтом, вы чувствуете necessitas luminis artificiosi, т. е. потребность в искусственном свете, и зажигаете его. Точно так же в религии. Когда нет тумана, затмевающего божественный свет, какая нужда в светильнике? Но когда история, опыт и сознание разом свидетельствуют, что чистый и полный небесный свет исчез и мы блуждаем во тьме, надо зажечь другой, если хотите — искусственный свет. Бог возжег его в Своем Святом Слове.

De noodzakelijkheid van het geloof aan die Heilige Schrift rust daarom voor den Calvinist niet op redeneering, maar op het onmiddellijk getuigenis van den Heiligen Geest, op het testimonium Spiritus Sancti. Zijn inzicht in de inspiratie is afgeleid, en afgeleid is elke canonische verklaring van de Schrift, maar nietafgeleid, doch onmiddellijk, werkt de magnetische kracht waarmee die Schrift zijn ziel, als de magneet het staal, aantrekt en aan zich kleven doet. En dit gaat noch magisch noch ondoorgrondelijk mystiek toe, doch alzoo dat God eerst zijn hart wederbaart, door die wedergeboorte een onverzoenlijken strijd tusschen zijn hart en de leugenachtige wereld om hem heen doet ontstaan, en alsnu hem in die Schrift een wereld van gedachten, een wereld van krachten, een wereld van leven ontsluit, die op zijn herboren hart past, er meê overeenstemt, en er als de ware, wezenlijke wereld bij hoort. Het doen zien, het doen tasten van de identiteit, die het herboren leven van zijn eigen hart met die wereld van de Heilige Schrift vertoont, is hetgeen dit testimonium Spiritus Sancti in zijn hart tot stand brengt. Hij wil zijn God weer bezitten, hij zoekt den Heilige, al wat in hem is dorst naar den Oneindige, welnu buiten die Schrift ontwaart hij slechts schaduwlijnen, eerst door het prisma dier Schrift naar den Hooge opziende ontdekt hij zijn God weer wezenlijk. En daarom legt hij der wetenschap geen band aan. Laat critiseeren wie critiseeren wil. Ook die critiek draagt de belofte in zich van verdieping van ons inzicht in de Schrift. Alleen het prisma zelf dat de Goddelijke lichtstraal voor hem brak in grijpbare tinten, laat geen goed Calvinist zich uit de hand slaan. Geen beroep op de verlossing der ziel, geen heenwijzing naar de vruchten van den Heiligen Geest, volstaat voor de necessitas, die het soteriologische standpunt der Religie met zich brengt. Het leven in de entitas hebben we met de plant en het dier, het leven in het mystieke „zijn” met het kind en met den slaper gemeen: wat ons als volwassen, wakkere menschen op het hoogst onderscheidt is het klare bewustzijn, en daarom, zal de Religie, als 51 onze hoogste levensfunctie, ook in die hoogste potenz van het bewustzijn werken, dan stelt de soteriologische reliige naast de necessitas palingeneseos ¹¹⁾ van zelf de necessitas van een hulplicht dat in ons schemerdonker ontstoken worde, en dat van God zelf, door menschenhand ontstoken kunstlicht, straalt ons toe uit de Heilige Schrift.

For the Calvinist, therefore, the necessity of the Holy Sriptures does not rest in ratiocination, but on the immediate testimony of the Holy Spirit, — on the testimonium spiritus Saudi. His insight into inspiration is the product of bistorical deduction, and so is also every canonical declaration of the Scriptures. But the magnetic power with which the Scripture influences his soul, and draws it to itself, just as the magnet draws t he steel, is not derived, but immediate. All of this takes place in a manner, which, is not magical, nor unfathomably mystical, but clear, and easy to be understood. God regenerates us, — that is to say he rekindles in our heart the lamp sin had blown out. The necessary consecpience of this regeneration is an irreconciliable conflict between the inner world of our heart and the world outside, and this conflict is ever the more intensified the more the regeneration principle pervades our consciousness. Now, in the Bible, God reveals, to the regenerate, a world of thought, a world of energies, a world of full and beautiful life, which stands in direct opposition to his ordinary world, but which proves to agree in a wonderful way with the new life that has sprung up in his heart. So the regenerate begins to guess the identity of what is stirring in the depth of his own soul, and of what is revealed to him in Scripture, thereby learning both the inanity of the world around him. and the divine 21 reality of the world of the Scriptures, and as soon as this has become a certainty to him, he has personally received the testimony of the Hohj Spirit. Everything that is in him thirsted for the Father of all Lights and Spirits. Outside the Scripture, he discovered only vague shadows. But now as he looks upward, through the prism of the Scriptures, he rediscovers his Father and his God. For this reason he puts no shackles on science. If a man wants to criticize, — let him criticize. Such criticism even holds the promise that it will deepen our own insight into the structure of the scriptural edifice. Only no Calvinist ever allows the critic to dash out of his hand, for a moment, the prism itself which broke up the divine ray of light into its brilliant tints and colours. No appeal to the grace bestowed inwardly, no pointing to the fruits of the Holy Ghost, can enable him to dispense with the necessitas which the soteriological standpoint of religion among sinners carries with it. As mere entities we share our life with plants and animals. Unconscious life we share with the children, and with the sleeping man, and even with the man who has lost his reason. That which distinguishes us, as higher beings, and as wide awake men is our full self-consciousness, and therefore, if religion, as the highest vital function, is to operate also in that highest sphere of self-consciousness, it must follow that soteriological religion next to the necessitas of inward palingenesis demands also the necessitas of an assistant light of revelation to be kindled in our twilight. And this assistant light, coming from God Himself, but handed to us by human agency, beams upon us in His holy Word.

For the Calvinist, therefore, the necessity of the Holy Scriptures does not rest in ratiocination, but on the 69 immediate testimony of the Holy Spirit, – on the testimonium Spiritus Sancti. Our theory of inspiration is the product of historical deduction, and so is also every canonical declaration of the Scriptures. But the magnetic power with which the Scripture influences the soul, and draws it to herself, just as the magnet draws the steel, is not derived, but immediate. All of this takes place in a manner which is not magical, nor unfathomably mystical, but clear, and easy to be understood. God regenerates us, – that is to say, He rekindles in our heart the lamp sin had blown out. The necessary consequence of this regeneration is an irreconcilable conflict between the inner world of our heart and the world outside, and this conflict is ever the more intensified the more the regenerative principle pervades our consciousness. Now, in the Bible, God reveals, to the regenerate, a world of thought, a world of energies, a world of full and beautiful life, which stands in direct opposition to his ordinary world, but which proves to agree in a wonderful way with the new life that has sprung up in his heart. So the regenerate begins to guess the identity of what is stirring in the depth of his own soul, and of what is revealed to him in Scripture, thereby learning both the inanity of the world around him, and the divine reality of the world of the Scriptures, and as soon as this has become a certainty to him, he has personally received the testimony of the Holy Spirit. Everything that is in him thirsted for the Father of all Lights and Spirits. Outside the Scripture, he discovered only vague shadows. But now as he looked upward, through the prism of the Scriptures, he rediscovers his Father and his God. – For 70 this reason he puts no shackles on science. If a man wants to criticize, let him criticize. Such criticism even holds the promise that it will deepen our own insight into the structure of the scriptural edifice. Only no Calvinist ever allows the critic to dash out of his hand, for a moment, the prism itself which breaks up the divine ray of light into its brilliant tints and colors. No appeal to the grace bestowed inwardly, no pointing to the fruits of the Holy Ghost, can enable him to dispense with the necessitas which the soteriological standpoint of religion among sinners carries with it. As mere entities we share our life with plants and animals. Unconscious life we share with the children, and with the sleeping man, and even with the man who has lost his reason. That which distinguishes us, as higher beings, and as wide awake men, is our full self-consciousness, and therefore, if religion, as the highest vital function, is to operate also in that highest sphere of self-consciousness, it must follow that soteriological religion, next to the necessitas of inward palingenesis, demands also the necessitas of an assistant light, of revelation to be kindled in our twilight. And this assistant light coming from God Himself, but handed to us by human agency, beams upon us in His holy Word.

Para o calvinista, portanto, a necessidade das Santas Escrituras não repousa no raciocínio, mas no testemunho imediato do Espírito Santo, - sobre o testemonium Spiritus Sancti. Nossa teoria sobre a inspiração é o produto de dedução histórica, e assim também é cada declaração canônica das Escrituras. Não obstante, o poder magnético com o qual a Escritura influencia a alma e a atrai para si, tal como o imã atrai o aço, não é derivado, mas imediato. Tudo isto acontece de um modo que não é mágico, nem insondavelmente místico, mas claro e fácil de ser entendido. Deus nos regenera, - isto é, ele reacende em nosso coração a lâmpada que o pecado tinha apagado. A conseqüência necessária desta regeneração é um conflito irreconciliável entre o mundo interior de nosso coração e o mundo exterior, e este conflito é tanto mais intenso quanto mais o princípio regenerativo prevalecer em nossa consciência.

Então, na Bíblia, Deus revela ao regenerado um mundo de pensamento, um mundo de energia, um mundo de vida plena e bela, que coloca-se em direta oposição a este mundo ordinário, mas que prova concordar de um modo maravilhoso com a nova vida que tem surgido em seu coração. Assim, o regenerado começa a avaliar a identidade do que está em ativo no fundo de sua própria alma, e do que é revelado a ele na Escritura, por esse meio aprendendo tanto sobre a futilidade do mundo ao seu redor, como sobre a realidade divina do mundo das Escrituras, e assim que isto se torna uma certeza para ele, ele tem recebido pessoalmente o testemunho do Espírito Santo. Tudo que está nele anseia pelo Pai de todas as Luzes e Espíritos. Fora da Escritura ele descobriu somente sombras vagas. Mas agora que ele olhou para cima, através do prisma das Escrituras, redescobriu seu Pai e seu Deus. Por esta razão ele não coloca algemas na ciência. Se alguém deseja criticar, deixe criticar. Até mesmo este ato de criticar sustenta a promessa que ele aprofundará nosso próprio discernimento sobre a estrutura do edifício da Escritura. Apenas nenhum calvinista jamais permite ao crítico tirar de sua mão, por um momento, o próprio prisma que fraciona o raio de luz divino em suas matizes e cores brilhantes. Nenhum apelo à graça aplicada no interior, nada que aponte para o fruto do Espírito Santo, pode habilitá-lo a dispensar a necessitas que o ponto de vista soteriológico da religião entre pecadores carrega consigo. Como simples entidades nós compartilhamos nossa vida com as plantas e os animais. A vida inconsciente nós compartilhamos com as crianças, com o homem adormecido, e até mesmo com o homem que perdeu sua razão. Aquilo que nos distingue como seres superiores e como homens amplamente conscientes, é nossa plena autoconsciência, e portanto, se a religião, como a mais alta função vital, deve operar também nesta esfera mais alta da autoconsciência, deve seguir que a religião soteriológica, junto com a necessitas da palingênesis interior também exige a necessitas de uma luz assistente, da revelação estar brilhando em nosso crepúsculo. E esta luz assistente vinda do próprio Deus, mas dada a nós pela agência humana, brilha sobre nós em sua Santa Palavra.

Поэтому для кальвиниста необходимость Священного Писания основана не на рассуждениях, а на непосредственном свидетельстве Святого Духа — на testimonium Spiritus Sancti. Наша теория богодухновенности есть плод исторической дедукции, и таковы все канонические утверждения Библии. Сила, с которой она влияет на душу, привлекая ее, как магнит притягивает сталь, не производна, а непосредственна. Все это происходит не каким-то магическим или неизъяснимо мистическим способом; Писание ясно, понять его легко. Бог возрождает нас. Иными словами, Он зажигает в наших сердцах светильник, угашенный грехом. Отсюда непременно следует непримиримый конфликт между внутренним миром нашего сердца и миром вне нас, конфликт тем более острый, чем больше возрождающее начало проникает в наше сознание. Бог открывает возрожденным в Библии мир мысли, мир энергии, мир насыщенной и прекрасной жизни, которая прямо противостоит повседневному миру, но удивительно согласуется с новой жизнью, возникшей в их сердцах. Возрожденный начинает догадываться о тождественности того, что оживает в глубине его души, тому, что открыто ему в Писании, тем самым познавая и суетность этого мира, и божественную реальность мира библейского. Как только он убедится в этом, он сам, на личном уровне, принимает свидетельство Святого Духа. Все в нем жаждет Отца Светов. Вне Писания он видит лишь смутные тени. Теперь, когда он смотрит ввысь сквозь призму Писания, он вновь открывает своего Отца и Бога. Поэтому он и не заковывает науку в кандалы. Если кому угодно критиковать, пусть критикует; такая критика даже может углубить наше видение Библии. Однако никакой кальвинист не позволит, чтобы критик выбил у него из рук саму призму, которая разлагает божественный луч на блестящие оттенки и цвета. Никакие ссылки на ниспосланную нам благодать, никакие слова о плодах Святого Духа не дадут ему права пренебрегать necessitas (необходимость (лат.)), которая здесь, среди грешников, сопутствует сотериологическому отношению к религии. Как творения, мы разделяем нашу жизнь с растениями и животными. Бессознательную жизнь мы разделяем с детьми, со спящими и даже с лишенными разума. Как высших существ и разумных людей нас отличает полное самосознание; и, если религия как высшая жизненная функция должна действовать в высшей сфере самосознания, то отсюда следует, что сотериологическая религия, наряду с necessitas внутреннего возрождения требует necessitas вспомогательного света, откровения, который надо зажечь в наших сумерках. Этот вспомогательный свет, приходящий от Самого Бога, но переданный нам через человека, сияет нам в Его Святом Слове.

Saamvattende wat we vonden, mag ik alzoo vaststellen, dat het Calvinisme in de vier groote problemen der Religie, telkens met een kenmerkend dogma, diekeuze doet, die ons nóg het meest bevredigt, en ons den weg tot de rijkste ontwikkeling ontsluit. De religie niet in utilitairen of eudaemonistischen zin om den mensch, maar om God en God alleen, ziedaar haar dogma van Gods souvereiniteit. In de religie geen tusschenpersoon tusschen God en de ziel, maar alle religie rechtstreeks door God in de ziel gewerkt, ziedaar het leerstuk der uitverkiezing. De religie niet partieel, maar universeel, aldus spreekt het zich uit in het dogma der algemeene genade. En eindelijk, de religie, in onzen zondigen toestand, niet normaal, maar soteriologisch, aldus luidt het antwoord in het dubbele dogma van de palingenesie en de necessitas S. Scripturae.

Summing up the results of our investigations thus far, I may express my conclusion as follows. In each one of the four great problems of religion, Calvinism has expressed its conviction in an appropriate dogma, and each time has made that choice which even now, after three centuries, satisfies the most ideal wants, and leaves the way open 22 for an ever richer development. First, it regards religion, not in an utilarian, or eudaimonistic sense, as existing for the sake of man, but for God, and for God alone. This is its dogma of God's sovereignty. Secondly In religion there must be no intermediation of any creature between God and the soul; — all religion is the immediate work of God Himself, in the inner heart. This is the doctrine of Election. Thirdly, religion is not partial but universal : —this is the dogma of common or universal grace. And, finally, in our sinful condition, religion cannot be normal, but has to be soteriological ; — this is its position in the twofold dogma of the necessity of regeneration, and of the necessitas S. Scripturae.

Summing up the results of our investigations thus far, I may express my conclusion as follows. In each one of the four great problems of religion, Calvinism has expressed its conviction in an appropriate dogma and each time has made that choice which even now, after three centuries, satisfies the most ideal wants, and leaves the way open for an ever-richer development. 71 First, it regards religion, not in an utilitarian, or eudaemonistic sense, as existing for the sake of man, but for God, and for God alone. This is its dogma of God’s Sovereignty. Secondly, in religion there must be no intermediation of any creature between God and the soul; – all religion is the immediate work of God Himself, in the inner heart. This is the doctrine of Election. Thirdly, religion is not partial but universal; – this is the dogma of common or universal grace. And, finally, in our sinful condition, religion cannot be normal, but has to be soteriological; – this is its position in the twofold dogma of the necessity of Regeneration, and of the necessitas S. Scripturae.

Resumindo o resultado de nossa investigação até aqui, eu posso expressar minha conclusão como segue. Em cada um dos quatro grandes problemas da religião, o Calvinismo tem expresso sua convicção em um dogma apropriado e cada vez tem feito aquela escolha que mesmo agora, após três séculos, satisfaz a procura mais ideal e deixa o caminho aberto para um desenvolvimento sempre mais rico. Primeiro, ele considera a religião, não no sentido utilitário ou eudomístico, como existindo por causa do homem, mas por Deus e para Deus somente. Este é seu dogma da Soberania de Deus. Secundariamente, na religião não deve haver nenhuma intermediação de qualquer criatura entre Deus e a alma, - toda religião é a obra imediata do próprio Deus no coração interior. Esta é a doutrina da Eleição. Em terceiro, a religião não é parcial mas universal, - este é o dogma da graça comum ou universal. E, finalmente, em nossa condição pecaminosa, a religião não pode ser normal, mas deve ser soteriológica, - esta é sua posição no duplo dogma da necessidade de Regeneração, e da necessitas Sola Scripturae.

Подводя итог нашего исследования, я могу выразить свое заключение следующим образом: применительно к каждой из четырех главных проблем религии кальвинизм проявил свою приверженность соответствующим догмам, и каждый раз делал такой выбор, который даже сейчас, по истечении трех столетий, удовлетворяет самые высокие запросы и оставляет открытым путь для дальнейшего развития. Во-первых, он рассматривает религию не в утилитарном или эвдемонистическом смысле, как существующую ради человека, но как существующую ради Бога и одного только Бога. Это его догма о Суверенности Божией. Во-вторых, не должно быть никаких тварных посредников между Богом и душой; Бог трудится Сам в глубинах сердца. Это учение об Избрании. В третьих, религия не частична, но всеобъемлюща; это догма об общей или универсальной благодати. Наконец, в нашем греховном состоянии религия не может быть естественной, она должна быть сотериологической; это двойная догма о необходимости Возрождения и о необходимости Св. Писания.

Van de Religie als zoodanig kom ik thans tot de Kerk, als haar georganiseerden Openbaringsvorm, en schets u achtereenvolgens de Calvinistische opvatting omtrent haar wezen, haar verschijning en het doel van haar optreden.

Having considered Religion as such, and coming now to tin- Church, as its organized form, or its phenomenal appearance, I shall present, in successive stages, the Calvinistic conception of the essence, the manifestation and the purpose of the Church of Christ upon earth.

Having considered Religion as such, and coming now to the Church, as its organized form, or its phenomenal appearance, I shall present, in three successive stages, the Calvinistic concept of the essence, the manifestation and the purpose of the Church of Christ upon earth.

Tendo considerado a Religião como tal, e vindo agora para a Igreja em sua forma organizada, ou sua aparência fenomenal, eu apresentarei, em três estágios sucessivos, a concepção calvinista sobre a essência, a manifestação e o propósito da Igreja de Cristo sobre a terra.

Рассмотрев религию как таковую и переходя теперь к Церкви как ее организованной форме или ее видимому проявлению, я представлю в три последовательных этапа кальвинистскую концепцию сущности, проявления и цели Церкви Христовой на земле.

Naar heur wezen is de Kerk voor den Calvinist een geestelijk organisme, dat hemel en aarde omvat, maar dat in den hemel, en niet op aarde, zijn middelpunt en het uitgangspunt voor zijn levensactie bezit. God schiep den kosmos om zich zelfs wille, geocentrisch plaatste Hij het geestelijk centrum van dien kosmos in onze planeet, en alle rijken der natuur op deze aarde culmineeren in ons menschelijk geslacht, dat, als één geheel genomen, beeld Gods moet zijn en Hem priesterlijk heel zijn schepping heeft op te dragen. De mensch staat in die schepping als koning, 52 priester en profeet. En of nu al de zonde dit hoog bestel verstore, God zet het door. Alzoo lief heeft Hij de wereld, dat Hij haar in zijn eengeboren Zoon zichzelf hergeeft, en ons geslacht weer inzet in het eeuwige leven. Allerlei takken en bladeren van den stam van ons menschelijk geslacht mogen voor altoos zijn afgevallen, die stam zelf wordt gered, en bloeit op zijn nieuwen wortel in Christus volheerlijk op. De wedergeboorte redt niet enkele eenlingen, die straks als een aggregaat worden saamgevoegd, maar behoudt het organisme zelf van ons geslacht. Het herboren menschelijk leven vormt daarom één sooma, ¹²⁾ één organisch geheel, waarvan Christus het Hoofd is, en waarvan de unio mystica cum Christo ¹³⁾ de saamhoudende band is. Eens in de parousie breekt dat nieuwe organisme in heel de schepping uit; nu schuilt het nog geestelijk, en kan op aarde slechts zijn silhouet doen doorschemeren. Dit “nieuwe Jeruzalem” zal eens van God uit den hemel nederdalen, maar nu is het nog in het onzichtbare teruggetrokken. Het wezenlijk heiligdom is nu daarboven. Daarboven is het altaar der Verzoening en het reukaltaar der gebeden. Daarboven is Christus als de eenige Hoogepriester die het altaar in het heiligdom bedient.

In its essence, for the Calvinist, the Church is a spiritual organism, including Heaven and earth, but having at present, its centre, and the starting-point for its action, not upon earth, but in Heaven. This is thus to be understood: God created the Cosmos geocentrically, i. e. He placed the spiritual centre of this Cosmos on our planet, and caused all the divisions of the kingdom of nature, on this earth, to culminate in man, upon whom, as the bearer of His image He called to consecrate the Cosmos to His glory. In God's creation, therefore, man stands as the prophet priest and king, and although sin has disturbed these high designs, yet God pushes them onward. He so loves His world that He has given Himself to it, in the person of His Son, and thus He has again brought our race and through our race. His whole Cosmos, into a renewed contact with eternal life. To be sure, many 23 branches and leaves off the tree of the human race shall fall away, yet the tree itself shall be saved ; on its newroot in Christ, it shall once more blossom gloriously. For regeneration does not save a few isolated individuals, finally to be joined together mechanically as an aggregate heap ; Regeneration saves the organism, itself, of our race. And therefore all regenerate human life, forms one organic body, of which Christ is the Head, and whose members are bound together by their mystical union with Him. But not before the Parousia, shall this new all-embracing organism manifest itself as the centre of the cosmos; at present it is hidden. Here, on earth it is only as it were its silliouet that can be dimly discerned. In the Future, fhi* new Jerusalem shall descend from God, out of Heaven, but at present it withdraws its beams from our sight in the mysteries of the invisible. And therefore the true sanctuary is now above; — on high are both the Altar of Atonement, and the incense Altar of Prayer; and on high is Christ, as the only priest who, according to Melchizedek ordinance, ministers at the Altar, in the sanctuary, before God.

In its essence, for the Calvinist, the Church is a spiritual organism, including heaven and earth, but having at present its center, and the starting-point for its action, not upon earth, but in heaven. This is to be understood thus: God created the Cosmos geocentrically, i.e., He placed the spiritual center of this Cosmos on our planet, and caused all the divisions of the kingdoms of nature, on this earth, to culminate in man, upon whom, as the bearer of His image He called to consecrate the Cosmos to His glory. In God’s creation, 72 therefore, man stands as the prophet, priest and king, and although sin has disturbed these high designs, yet God pushes them onward. He so loves His world that He has given Himself to it, in the person of His Son, and thus He has again brought our race, and through our race, His whole Cosmos, into a renewed contact with eternal life. To be sure, many branches and leaves fell off the tree of the human race, yet the tree itself shall be saved; on its new root in Christ, it shall once more blossom gloriously. For regeneration does not save a few isolated individuals, finally to be joined together mechanically as an aggregate heap. Regeneration saves the organism, itself, of our race. And therefore all regenerate human life forms one organic body, of which Christ is the Head, and whose members are bound together by their mystical union with Him. But not before the second Advent shall this new all-embracing organism manifest itself as the center of the cosmos. At present it is hidden. Here, on earth, it is only as it were its silhouette that can be dimly discerned. In the Future, this new Jerusalem shall descend from God, out of heaven, but at present. it withdraws its beams from our sight in the mysteries of the invisible. And therefore the true sanctuary is now above. On high are both the Altar of Atonement, and the incense-Altar of Prayer; and on high is Christ, as the only priest who, according to Melchizedek’s ordinance, ministers at the Altar, in the sanctuary, before God.

Para o calvinista, a Igreja em sua essência é um organismo espiritual, incluindo céu e terra, mas na atualidade tendo seu centro e o ponto de partida para sua ação, não sobre a terra, mas no céu. Isto deve ser entendido assim: Deus criou o Cosmos geocentricamente, i.e., ele colocou o centro espiritual deste universo em nosso planeta, e produziu todas as divisões dos reinos da natureza, sobre esta terra, para culminar no homem, a quem, como o portador de sua imagem, ele chamou para consagrar o Cosmos para sua glória.

Na criação de Deus, portanto, o homem atua como o profeta, sacerdote e rei, e embora o pecado tenha perturbado estes altos desígnios, todavia Deus os leva adiante. Ele ama seu mundo de tal modo que tem dado a si mesmo a ele, na pessoa de seu Filho, e assim, novamente, tem conduzido nossa raça e, através de nossa raça, todo seu Cosmos para um contato renovado com a vida eterna. Certamente muitos ramos e folhas caíram da árvore da raça humana, todavia a própria árvore será salva; em sua nova raiz em Cristo, uma vez mais florescerá gloriosamente. Pois a regeneração não salva uns poucos indivíduos isolados para serem finalmente unidos mecanicamente como uma pilha agregada. A regeneração salva o próprio organismo de nossa raça. E, portanto, toda vida humana regenerada forma um corpo orgânico do qual Cristo é a Cabeça, e cujos membros são mantidos juntos por sua união mística com ele. Mas este novo organismo todo-abrangente não se manifestará como o centro do cosmos antes do segundo advento. Na atualidade ele está oculto. Aqui, na terra, é apenas, por assim dizer, sua silhueta que pode ser obscuramente discernida.

No futuro, esta nova Jerusalém descerá de Deus, dos céus, mas no presente ela esconde seu brilho de nossa visão nos mistérios do invisível. E, portanto, o verdadeiro santuário está agora acima. Lá em cima estão tanto o Altar da Expiação como o Altar do Incenso da Oração; e lá em cima está Cristo como o único sacerdote que, segundo a ordem de Melquisedeque, ministra no Altar, no santuário, diante de Deus.

По своей сути Церковь для кальвиниста — духовный организм, включающий небо и землю, центр которого, отправная точка — не на земле, но на небе. Понимать это следует так: Бог создал мироздание геоцентричным, т. е. поместил духовный его центр на нашей планете, все разнообразие ее природного царства завершил высшей точкой, человеком, который носит Его образ и потому призван освятить мироздание во имя Его славы. Поэтому в Божием творении человек предстает как пророк, священник и царь; и хотя грех испортил эти высокие замыслы, Бог все же продолжает претворять их в жизнь. Он так возлюбил Свой мир, что отдал за него Самого Себя в лице Своего Сына, и тем самым связал наш род, а через него — и весь мир с вечной жизнью. Хотя с дерева рода человеческого опадают ветки и листья, само оно не погибнет и даже зацветет, опираясь на свой новый корень во Христе. Ведь возрождение спасает не нескольких отдельных лиц, чтобы в конце концов механически сгрести их вместе, а сам организм нашего рода. Поэтому вся возрожденная жизнь образует единое тело, глава которого — Христос, а члены соединены друг с другом через мистический союз с Ним. Этот новый всеохватывающий организм станет центром мироздания, но произойдет это не прежде Второго Пришествия. Сейчас это сокрыто. Здесь, на земле — только его едва различимые очертания. В будущем этот новый Иерусалим спустится от Бога, с небес, но теперь он скрывает свои лучи от нашего взора в тайниках невидимого. Истинное святилище — еще на небесах. Там и Алтарь Искупления, и Алтарь Молитвенного Воскурения; там и Христос, единственный первосвященник, который по чину Мелхиседека совершает службу у Алтаря, в святилище, перед Богом.

In de Middeleeuwen nu had de kerk dit haar hemelsch geestelijk wezen steeds meer uit het oog verloren. Ze was in haar wezen wereldsch geworden. Het heiligdom was weer op aarde, het altaar weer van steen geworden, een priesterlijke hiërarchie had zich voor de bediening van dat altaar gevormd, en toen moest ze wel een offerande op aarde begeeren, en vond die in het onbloedige offer van de Mis. En daartegen nu is het Calvinisme in verzet gekomen, niet om het priesterschap en het altaar en het offer in beginsel te bestrijden, want het priesterschap is onvergankelijke, en wie zonde kent, kan niet buiten het offer der verzoening, maar om al deze wereldsche kramerij weg te rapen, en de geloovigen op te roepen, dat ze hun oogen mochten opheffen naar boven, naar het wezenlijke heiligdom, waar Christus het outer bedient. Niet tegen het sacerdotium, maar tegen het sacerdotalisme ging de 53 strijd, en principiëel is die strijd alleen door Calvijn ten einde toe volstreden. Lutherschen en Episcopalen behielden op aarde het altaar, alleen het Calvinisme dorst het aan, het geheel te doen verdwijnen. En zoo ook, bij de Episcopalen hield het aardsche priesterschap, zelfs hiërarchisch, stand, in Luthersche landen werd de landvorst Opperste Bisschop, en behield men geestelijk standsverschil, maar het Calvinisme proclameerde de absolute gelijkheid van al wie in den dienst der kerk optrad, en weigerde aan haar voorgangers een ander karakter toe te kennen, dan de qualiteit van Dienaren. Wat onder de Oud-Testamentische bedeeling der schaduwen profetisch aanschouwelijk onderwijs bood, stond, nu de vervulling gekomen was, aan de glorie van den Christus in den weg, en vernederde het hemelsche wezen der kerk. En daarom kon het Calvinisme niet rusten, eer dit aardsche klatergoud ophield het oog te boeien. Eerst door uitbanning van den laatsten korrel van het sacerdotalistisch zuurdeeg, kon de kerk op aarde weer de Voorhof worden, van waar de geloovigen opzagen en uitzagen naar het heiligdom bij God. De Westminster-Confession drukt dit hemelsche, heel ons geslacht omvangende, wezen der kerk zoo schoon uit, als ze zegt: “De kerk is het onzichtbare lichaam van alle verkorenen, die er ooit geweest zijn, zijn, of immer zijn zullen, onder Christus als onder een Hoofd verzameld, en vormende alzoo het lichaam van Hem die zelf alles in allen vervult.” Eerst zoo was het dogma van de onzichtbare kerk religieus geheiligd, en in haar kosmologische, eeuwige beteekenis verstaan. Het wezenlijke, ook de kerk van Christus, kon thans niet op aarde zijn. Hier toefde telkens hoogstens één enkel geslacht van geloovigen in den Voorhof, maar de geslachten van den aanbeginne der wereld hadden deze aarde verlaten, ze waren nu daarboven. Daar was ons burgerschap. Daar het wezenlijke, en daarom keerde al wie het wezen der kerk op aarde zocht, de orde om. Wie hier nog toefde, was eo ipso pelgrim, hiermeê uitdrukkende dat hij uit den Voorhof naar het Heiligdom toog. En in verband hiermede sneed het Calvinisme nu tevens elke voorstelling af, alsof er na het sterven nog mogelijkheid van redding en overgang bleef, voor wie niet hier reeds met Christus in den hemel gezet was. Geen zielmissen voor de dooden 54 op aarde, noch ook in ethischen trant, een roepstem tot bekeering aan de overzij van het graf. Al deze processueele overgangen toch sneden de absolute tegenstelling tusschen het wezen der kerk in den hemel, en het haar verdonkerende hier op aarde af. Niet van hier schemerde haar wezen naar boven, maar van boven schemerde het naar de kerk hier op aarde dood. Er hing als een gordijn voor het oog, dat het heldere, volle inzien in het wezen der kerk op aarde belette. En daarom al wat hier op aarde mogelijk bleef, was gemeenschap met die wezenlijke kerk door een leven in den geest, en het genieten in de schaduwbeelden die zich op het doorzichtig gordijn voor ons afteekenden. Niet dus een reëele kerk op aarde en achter het gordijn alleen het product onzer verbeelding, maar omgekeerd Christus in ons vleesch in het onzienlijke ingegaan, bij hem, om hem, in hem de wezenlijke kerk, en het wezen dier kerk op ons inwerkende door den Heiligen Geest.

Now, in the middle ages, the Church had more and more lost sight of this heavenly spiritual character;— she had become worldly in her nature. The Sanctuary was again brought back to earth, the Altar was rebuilt of stone, and a priestly hierarchy had reconstituted itself for the ministrations of the Altar. Next of course it was necessary also to renew the tangible sacrifice on earth, and this at last brought the church to inveut the unbloody offering of the Mass. Now against all this, Calvinism opposed itself, not to contend against priesthood on principle, or against altars as such, or against sacrifice in itself, because the office of priest cannot perish, and everyone knowing the fact of sin realizes in his own heart, the absolute need of a propitiatory sacrifice, but in order to do away with all this worldly paraphernalia, and to call believers to lift up their eyes again, on high, to the real sanctuary, where 24 Christ, our only priest, ministers at the only real altar. The battle was waged, not against the sacerdotmm, but against the sacerdotalism, and Calvin alone fought this battle through to the end, with thorough .consistency. Lutherans and Episcopalians rebuilt a kind of altar, on earth; Calvinism alone dared to put it away, entirely. Consequently, among the Episcopalians, the earthly priesthood was retained, even in the form of a hierarchy : in Lutheran lands the sovereign became summits episcopus and the divisions of ecclesiastical ranks were maintained; but Calvinism proclaimed the absolute equality of all who engaged in the service of the church, and refused to ascribe to its leaders and officebearers any other character than that of Ministers, (i.e. servants.) That which, under the shadows of the Old Testament dispensation, furnished prophetical and visible instruction, now that the types were fulfilled, had become to Calvin, a detriment to the glory of Christ, and lowered the heavenly nature of the Church. Therefore, Calvinism could not rest until this worldly tinsel had ceased to charm and attract the eye. Only when the last grain of the sacerdotal leaven had been eliminated, could the Church on earth again become the outer court, from which believers could look up and onward to the real sanctuary of the living God.

The Westminster Confession beautifully ets forth this heavenly all-embracing nature of the Church, when it says : — "The Catholic or Universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect that have been, are, or shall be, gathered into one, under Christ the Head, thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all." Only thus was the dogma of the invisible church religiously consecrated and apprehended in its cosmological, and enduring significance. For, of course, the reality and fulness of the Church of Christ cannot exist on earth. Here is found, at most, one generation of believers at a time, in the portal of the Temple;— all pre- 25 vious generations, from the beginning and foundation of the world, had left this earth, and had gone up on high. Therefore, those who remained here, were, eo ipso, pilgrim*, meaning thereby that they were marching from the portal unto the Sanctuary itself, no possibility of salvation after death being left for those who had not been united to Christ, during this present life. No room could be left for masses for the dead, nor for a call to repenteuce on the other side of the grave, as German Theologians are now advocating. For all such processional, and gradual transitions, were regarded by Calvin as destroying the absolute contrast between the essence of the Church in Heaven, and its imperfect form, here on earth. The church on earth does not send up its light to Heaven, but the Church in Heaven must send its light down to the Church on earth. There is now, as it were, a curtain stretched, before the eye, which hinders it from penetrating while on earth, into the real essence of the Church. Therefore, all that remains possible to us on earth is hist, a mystical communion with that real Church, by means of the Spirit, and in the second place the enjoyment of the shadows which are displaying themselves on the transparent curtain before us. Accordingly, no child of God should imagine that the real Church is here on earth, and that behind the curtain there is only an ideal product of our imagination ; but, on the contrary, he has to confess that Christ in human form, in our flesh, has entered into the invisible, behind the curtain; and that, with Him, around Him, and in Him, our Head, is the real church, the real and essential sauctuary of our salvation.

Now, in the middle ages, the Church had more and more lost sight of this celestial character; – she had become worldly in her nature. The Sanctuary was again 73 brought back to earth, the altar was rebuilt of stone, and a priestly hierarchy had reconstituted itself for the ministrations of the altar. Next of course it was necessary to renew the tangible sacrifice on earth, and this at last brought the church to create the unbloody offering of the Mass. Now against all this, Calvinism opposed itself, not to contend against priesthood on principle, or against altars as such, or against sacrifice in itself, because the office of priest cannot perish, and everyone knowing the fact of sin realizes in his own heart the absolute need of a propitiatory sacrifice; but in order to do away with all this worldly paraphernalia, and to call believers to lift up their eyes again, on high, to the real sanctuary, where Christ, our only priest, ministers at the only real altar. The battle was waged, not against sacerdotium, but against sacerdotalism, and Calvin alone fought this battle through to the end, with thorough consistency. Lutherans and Episcopalians rebuilt a kind of altar, on earth; Calvinism alone dared to put it away, entirely. Consequently, among the Episcopalians the earthly priesthood was retained, even in the form of a hierarchy; in Lutheran lands the sovereign became summus episcopus and the divisions of ecclesiastical ranks were imitated; but Calvinism proclaimed the absolute equality of all who engaged in the service of the church, and refused to ascribe to its leaders and officebearers any other character than that of Ministers, (i.e., servants). That which, under the shadows of the Old Testament dispensation, furnished intuitive instruction by types and symbols, now the types were fulfilled, had become to Calvin a detriment 74 to the glory of Christ, and lowered the heavenly nature of the Church. Therefore, Calvinism could not rest until this worldly tinsel had ceased to charm and attract the eye. Only when the last grain of the sacerdotal leaven had been eliminated, could the Church on earth again become the outer court, from which believers could look up and onward to the real sanctuary of the living God in heaven.

The Westminster Confession beautifully sets forth this heavenly all-embracing nature of the Church, when it says: – “The Catholic or Universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect that have been, are or shall be, gathered into one, under Christ the Head, thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all”. Only thus was the dogma of the invisible church religiously consecrated and apprehended in its cosmological, and enduring significance. For, of course, the reality and fulness of the Church of Christ cannot exist on earth. Here is found, at most, one generation of believers at a time. in the portal of the Temple, all previous generations, from the beginning and foundation of the world, had left this earth, and had gone up on high. Therefore, those who remained here, were, eo ipso, pilgrims, meaning thereby that they were marching from the portal unto the Sanctuary itself, no possibility of salvation after death remaining for those who had not been united to Christ during this present life. No room could be left for masses for the dead, nor for a call to repentance on the other side of the grave, as German Theologians are now advocating. For all such 75 processional and gradual transitions were regarded by Calvin as destroying the absolute contrast between the essence of the Church in Heaven, and its imperfect form, here on earth. The Church on earth does not send up its light to heaven, but the Church in heaven must send its light down to the Church on earth. There is now, as it were, a curtain stretched before the eye, which hinders it from penetrating while on earth into the real essence of the Church. Therefore, all that remains possible to us on earth is first, a mystical communion with that real Church, by means of the Spirit, and in the second place, the enjoyment of the shadows which are displaying themselves on the transparent curtain before us. Accordingly no child of God should imagine that the real Church is here on earth, and that behind the curtain there is only an ideal product of our imagination; but, on the contrary, he has to confess that Christ m human form, in our flesh, has entered into the invisible, behind the curtain; and that, with Him, around Him, and in Him, our Head is the real Church, the real and essential sanctuary of our salvation.

Na Idade Média, a Igreja perdeu mais e mais a visão deste caráter celestial, - tornando-se mundana em sua natureza. O Santuário novamente foi trazido de volta para a terra, o altar foi reconstruído com pedras, e uma hierarquia sacerdotal se reconstituiu para a ministração do altar. A seguir, certamente, foi necessário renovar o sacrifício tangível na terra, e isto finalmente levou a igreja a criar a oferta sem sangue da Missa. Então, o Calvinismo se opôs contra tudo isto, não para contender em princípio contra o sacerdócio, ou contra o altar como tal, ou contra o sacrifício em si, porque o ofício do sacerdote não pode perecer, e todos que conhecem o fato do pecado compreendem em seu próprio coração a absoluta necessidade de um sacrifício propiciatório; mas para livrar-se de toda esta parafernália mundana, e para chamar os crentes a erguerem seus olhos novamente para cima, para o verdadeiro santuário, onde Cristo, nosso único sacerdote, ministra no único e verdadeiro altar. A batalha foi travada não contra o sacerdotium, mas contra o sacerdotalismo54, e somente Calvino sustentou esta batalha até o fim com completa consistência.

Os Luteranos e os Episcopais reconstruíram um tipo de altar sobre a terra; somente o Calvinismo ousou colocá-lo inteiramente longe. Conseqüentemente, entre os Episcopais o sacerdócio terreno foi mantido até mesmo na forma de uma hierarquia; nas terras Luteranas o soberano tornou-se o summus episcopus e a divisão de classes eclesiásticas foi imitada; mas o Calvinismo proclamou a absoluta igualdade de todos que estão engajados no serviço da igreja, e recusou atribuir a seus líderes e oficiais qualquer outro caráter senão aquele de Ministros (i.e., servos). Aquilo que, sob a sombra da dispensação do Velho Testamento, fornecia instrução intuitiva pelos tipos e símbolos, agora que os tipos estavam cumpridos, tinha se tornado para Calvino um detrimento para a glória de Cristo, e rebaixava a natureza celestial da Igreja. Portanto, o Calvinismo não poderia descansar até que este ouropel mundano tivesse deixado de encantar e atrair os olhos. Somente quando o último resquício do fermento sacerdotal tiver sido eliminado, poderá a Igreja sobre a terra novamente tornar-se o pátio exterior, do qual os crentes poderão olhar para cima e para frente para o verdadeiro santuário do Deus vivo no céu.

A Confissão de Westminster descreve belamente esta natureza celestial todo-abrangente, quando diz: “A Igreja Católica ou Universal, que é invisível, consiste do número total dos eleitos que já foram, dos que agora são e dos que ainda serão reunidos em um só corpo, sob Cristo, seu Cabeça; ela é a esposa, o corpo, a plenitude daquele que enche tudo em todas as coisas.” Deste modo, o dogma da igreja invisível foi consagrado religiosamente e apreendido em seu significado cosmológico e permanente. Pois, certamente, a realidade e plenitude da Igreja de Cristo não podem existir sobre a terra. Aqui é encontrada, no máximo, uma geração de crentes por vez, no portal do Templo, - todas as gerações anteriores, desde o começo e fundação do mundo, deixaram esta terra e subiram lá para cima. Portanto, aqueles que permaneceram aqui são, eo ipso, peregrinos, querendo dizer com isso que eles estão marchando do portal para o Santuário em si, não restando nenhuma possibilidade de salvação após a morte para aqueles que não foram unidos a Cristo durante esta presente vida.

Nenhuma espaço poderia ser deixado para missa pelos mortos, nem para uma chamada ao arrependimento do outro lado da sepultura, como os teólogos alemães estão advogando agora. Pois todas as transições, processional e gradual, foram consideradas por Calvino como destruindo o contraste absoluto entre a essência da Igreja no Céu, e sua forma imperfeita aqui na terra. A Igreja sobre a terra não faz subir luz para o céu, mas a Igreja no céu deve fazer sua luz descer para a Igreja na terra. Há agora, por assim dizer, uma cortina estendida diante dos olhos que os impede de penetrar, enquanto na terra, na verdadeira essência da Igreja. Portanto, tudo que é possível para nós sobre a terra é primeiro, uma comunhão mística com aquela Igreja verdadeira por meio do Espírito, e em segundo lugar, o gozo das sombras que estão se manifestando na cortina transparente diante de nós. Conseqüentemente, nenhum filho de Deus deveria imaginar que a verdadeira Igreja está aqui na terra, e que atrás da cortina há apenas um produto ideal de nossa imaginação; mas, pelo contrário, ele deve confessar que Cristo em forma humana, em nossa carne, entrou no invisível, atrás da cortina; e que com ele, ao redor Dele, e nele, nossa cabeça, está a verdadeira Igreja, o verdadeiro e essencial santuário de nossa salvação.

Однако в средние века Церковь все более теряла это из вида, становясь обмирщенной. Святилище перенесли на землю, алтарь сложили из камня, и священническая иерархия восстановила себя для служения алтарю. Естественно, пришлось возобновить и осязаемое жертвоприношение на земле, и в конце концов Церковь придумала бескровное приношение мессы. Именно против всего этого и восстал кальвинизм. Не против священства, не против алтарей, не против жертвоприношений — служение священника не может исчезнуть, и всякий, знающий грех, чувствует нужду в умилостивительной жертве; но против всех этих мирских атрибутов, чтобы верующие снова подняли глаза к небесам, к истинному святилищу, где Христос, наш единственный первосвященник, служит у единственно истинного алтаря. Они восстали не против sacerdotium (священства (лат.)), а против sacerdotalism (сацердотализма (лат.))², и только один Кальвин вел эту битву от начала до конца с неукоснительной последовательностью. Лютеране и епископалы снова сложили на земле что-то вроде алтаря; одни кальвинисты посмели снести его полностью. Тем самым у епископалов сохранилось земное священство, даже иерархия, а в лютеранских землях правитель стал summus episcopus (верховным епископом (лат.)), и в церкви появилось что-то вроде сословных различий. Кальвинизм же провозгласил абсолютное равенство всех, занятых в церковном служении, и согласился только на то, чтобы служители были служителями, слугами. То, что через образы и символы Ветхого Завета люди познали интуитивно, теперь, когда образы получили реальное воплощение, стало для Кальвина умалением Христовой славы, принижающим небесную природу Церкви. Поэтому кальвинизм не мог остановиться, пока мирская мишура привлекала и очаровывала взор. Только когда были устранены последние зерна священнической закваски, Церковь на земле снова смогла стать Внешним двором, из которого верные могли глядеть ввысь, на реальное святилище живого Бога.

Вестминстерское Исповедание великолепно описывает небесную всеобъемлющую природу Церкви, когда говорит: «Католическая или Вселенская Церковь, являясь невидимой, состоит из полного числа избранных, которые были, есть и будут собраны воедино, под их Главою Христом. Она — невеста, тело, полнота Того, Который наполняет все во всем». Только таким образом догма о невидимой Церкви была религиозно освящена и воспринята в своем космологическом и непреходящем значении. Конечно, действительность и полнота Церкви Христовой не может существовать на земле. Здесь находится, в лучшем случае, одно поколение верующих, в данное время стоящих во вратах Храма, тогда как все предыдущие поколения, с начала и основания мира, покинули эту землю и переместились на небеса. Поэтому те, кто остается здесь, — странники. Это значит, что они идут от ворот к самому Святилищу; у тех, кто не был присоединен к Христу в этой жизни, нет никакой возможности спастись после смерти. Кальвинизм не оставляет места ни мессам за умерших, ни призывам умерших к покаянию, которые отстаивают теперь немецкие теологи. Все эти постепенные переходы, по мнению Кальвина, уничтожают абсолютный контраст между сущностью небесной Церкви и ее несовершенной формой здесь, на земле. Церковь на земле не посылает своего света ввысь на небо, но Церковь на небе посылает свой свет земной Церкви. Перед нашим взором — словно бы завеса, которая мешает ему проникнуть отсюда, с земли, в истинную сущность Церкви. Поэтому здесь мы можем только, во-первых, вступить в мистический союз с реальной Церковью посредством Духа и, во-вторых, довольствоваться тенями, мелькающими на прозрачной завесе. Никто из детей Божиих не должен думать, что истинная Церковь — здесь на земле, а там, за завесой — только идеальный плод нашего воображения. Напротив, мы должны верить, что Христос в человеческой природе, в нашей плоти, вошел в невидимое за завесой; и с Ним, вокруг Него, и в Нем, Нашем Главе находится истинная Церковь, реальное и истинное святилище нашего спасения.

Staat zoo het wezen der kerk van Christus, in haar strekking voor de herschepping van heel ons menschelijk geslacht en in haar cosmologische beteekenis, die slechts op de wederkomst van Christus wacht, om door te breken, helder voor ons, dan komt nu haar verschijningsvorm op aarde aan de orde. Als zoodanig nu toont ze ons een “vergadering van geloovigen,” een schare van in vereeniging optredende belijders, die kerkelijk saâmleven in gehoorzaamheid aan de ordinantiën, die Christus hun hiervoor gaf. Er is niet een “Heilsanstalt,” die genade als medicijn uitdeelt, er is niet een mystieke geestelijke orde, die de leeken magisch bewerkt. Er zijn niets dan geloovige, belijdende personen, die zich krachtens den sociologischen drang van alle religie vereenigen, en, in onderworpenheid aan Christus als hun Koning daarboven, pogen saâm te leven. Dat is op aarde de kerk. Niet het gebouw. Niet de instelling. Niet een geestelijke stand. De kerk zijn voor Calvijn de belijdende personen zelven, alleen maar niet elk op zich zelf, maar allen saam vereenigd; en vereenigd niet naar eigen goedvinden, maar naar de ordinantiën van Christus. Het 55 algemeene priesterschap der geloovigen op aarde gerealiseerd. Verstaat mij wel. ’k Zeg niet: vrome personen groepsgewijs voor religieuse doeleinden zich vereenigend. Dat zou op zic hzelf nog niets met de kerk gemeen hebben. De wezenlijke, hemelsche, onzichtbare kerk moet in de aardsche kerk doorschemeren en uitkomen; zoo niet, dan hebt ge wel een vereeniging, maar geen kerk. De wezenlijke kerk is het lichaam van Christus, waarvan de herboren personen leden zijn. En daarom kan die kerk op aarde niet anders bestaan dan uit de in Christus ingelijfden, die onder hem buigen, bij zijn Woord leven, en zich houden aan zijn ordinantiën, en daarom een kerk het Woord predikende, het Sacrament bedienende, de Tuchtoefenende; in alles staande voor het aangezichte Gods.

After having thus clearly grasped the nature of the Church, in its bearing upon the re-creation both of our human race and of the Cosmos as a whole, let us now turn our attention to its form of manifestation, here on earth. 26 As such it displays, unto us, different congregations of believers, groups of confessors, living in some ecclesiastical union, in obedience to the ordinances of Christ Himself. The Church on earth is not an institution for the dispensation of grace, as if it were a dispensary of spiritual medicines. There is no mystical, spiritual order, gifted with mystical powers to operate with a magical influence upon laymen. There are only regenerated and confessing individuals, who, in accordance with the Scriptural command, and under the influence of the sociological element of all religion, have formed a society, and are endeavouring to live together in subordination to Christ as their king. This, alone, is the Church on earth,— not the building, — not the institution,— not a spiritual order. For Calvin, the Church is found in the confessing individual* themselves, — not in each individual separately, but in all of them taken together, and united, not as they themselves see fit, but according to the ordinances of Christ. In the church on earth, the universal priesthood of believers must lie realized. Do not misunderstand me. I do not say: The Church consists of pious persons united in groups for religious purposes. That, in itself, would have nothing in common with the church. The real, heavenly, invisible church must manifest itself in the earthly church. If not, you will have a society, but no church. Now the real, essential church is and remains the body of Christ, of which regenerate persons are members. Therefore the Church on earth consists only of those who have been incorporated into Christ, who bow before Him, live in His Word, and adhere to His ordinances; and for this reason the church on earth has to preach the Word, administer the sacraments, and exercise discipline, and in everything to stand before the face of God.

After having thus clearly grasped the nature of the Church, in its bearing upon the re-creation both of our human race and of the Cosmos as a whole, let us now turn our attention to its form of manifestation, here on earth. As such it displays, unto us. different local congregations of believers, groups of confessors, living in some ecclesiastical union, in obedience to the ordinances of Christ Himself. The Church on earth 76 is not an institution for the dispensation of grace, as if it were a dispensary of spiritual medicines. There is no mystical, spiritual order gifted with mystical powers to operate with a magical influence upon laymen. There are only regenerated and confessing individuals, who, in accordance with the Scriptural command, and under the influence of the sociological element of all religion, have formed a society, and are endeavoring to live together m subordination to Christ as their king. This, alone, is the Church on earth, – not the building, – not the institution, – not a spiritual order. For Calvin, the Church is found in the confessing individuals themselves, – not in each individual separately, but in all of them taken together, and united, not as they themselves see fit, but according to the ordinances of Christ. In the Church on earth. the universal priesthood of believers must be realized. Do not misunderstand me. I do not say: The Church consists of pious persons united in groups for religious purposes. That, in itself, would have nothing in common with the Church. The real, heavenly, invisible Church must manifest itself in the earthly Church. If not, you will have a society, but no church. Now the real essential Church is and remains the body of Christ, of which regenerate persons are members. Therefore the Church on earth consists only of those who have been incorporated into Christ, who bow before Him, live in His Word, and adhere to His ordinances; and for this reason the Church on earth has to preach the Word, to administer the sacraments, and to exercise discipline, and in everything to stand before the face of God. 77

Após ter compreendido claramente a natureza da Igreja em sua importância quanto a recriação tanto de nossa raça humana como do Cosmos como um todo, vamos voltar nossa atenção para sua forma de manifestação, aqui na terra. Como tal, ela se apresenta para nós em diferentes congregações locais de crentes, grupos de confessores, vivendo em alguma união eclesiástica em obediência às ordenanças do próprio Cristo. A Igreja na terra não é uma instituição para a dispensação da graça, como se fosse uma despensa de medicamentos espirituais. Não há ordem mística, espiritual, dada com poderes místicos para operar com uma influência mágica sobre os leigos. Há somente indivíduos regenerados e confessos, que, de acordo com a ordem Escriturística, e sob a influência do elemento soteriológico de toda religião, tem formado uma sociedade e estão se esforçando para viver juntos em subordinação a Cristo como seu rei. Somente isto é a Igreja na terra, - não o edifício, - nem a instituição, - nem uma ordem espiritual. Para Calvino, a Igreja é encontrada nos próprios indivíduos confessos, - não em cada indivíduo separadamente, mas em todos eles juntos e unidos, não como eles mesmos têm por bem, mas segundo as ordenanças de Cristo. O sacerdócio universal dos crentes deve ser realizado na Igreja sobre a terra.

Não me entendam mal. Não estou dizendo: A Igreja consiste de pessoas piedosas unidas em grupos com propósitos religiosos. Isto, em si mesmo, nada teria em comum com a Igreja. A Igreja verdadeira, celestial, invisível deve manifestar-se na Igreja terrena. Se não, vocês terão uma sociedade, mas não uma igreja. Então a verdadeira essência é e continua sendo o corpo de Cristo, do qual as pessoas regeneradas são membros. Portanto, a Igreja na terra consiste somente daqueles que têm sido incorporados a Cristo, que curvam-se diante dele, vivem em sua Palavra, e mantêm-se fiéis a suas ordenanças; e por esta razão a Igreja na terra deve pregar a Palavra, administrar os sacramentos, e exercer a disciplina e em tudo colocar-se perante a face de Deus.

После того как мы поняли природу Церкви и ее значимость для нашего человеческого рода и для всей вселенной, обратим внимание на то, как проявляется она на земле. Она представлена в виде местных общин, конгрегаций тех, кто исповедует веру, живет в определенном церковном единстве и повинуется установлениям Самого Христа. Церковь на земле — не учреждение, распределяющее благодать, она не ведает духовным врачеванием. Нет никакой таинственной, духовной касты, наделенной властью оказывать магическое влияние на мирян. Есть только возрожденные и исповедующие свою веру люди, которые по заповеди Писания и под влиянием социального элемента в религии образовали сообщество и стремятся жить вместе, повинуясь Христу как своему Царю. Церковь — только это, а не здания, не учреждение, не духовная каста. Для Кальвина Церковь пребывает в самих исповедниках веры — не в каждом отдельно, а во всех вместе, объединенных не по своему разумению, а по установлению Христа. В Церкви на земле должно осуществляться всеобщее священство верных. Поймите меня правильно. Я не говорю, что Церковь состоит из благочестивых, объединенных для каких-нибудь религиозных целей. Это само по себе еще никак не Церковь. В земной Церкви должна проявлять себя истинная, небесная, невидимая Церковь. Если это не так, у вас — просто сообщество, а не Церковь.

Истинная, действительная Церковь была и будет Телом Христовым, члены которого — возрожденные люди. Поэтому Церковь на земле состоит только из тех, кто привит ко Христу, кто преклонился перед Ним, живет Его Словом, покоряется Его установлениям. Такая земная Церковь должна проповедовать Слово, совершать таинства, осуществлять дисциплину и во всем предстоять перед Лицом Божиим.

Dit bepaalt tevens de regeering dezer kerk op aarde. Die regeering gaat van den hemel, van den Christus uit. Hij regeert zijn kerk door het Woord dat hij haar gaf en door den Heiligen Geest, die in haar leden werkt. En voorts is er van hoogheid onder de geloovigen geen sprake. Er zijn alleen Dienaren, die dienen, leiden, regelen. Een in hart en nieren presbyteriaansch regiment. uit de gemeente, de macht door Christus in haar gelegd, in de dienaren opkomende, en aan haar door broederen bediend. Monarchaal is Christus’ Koningschap, maar de regeering der kerk op aarde democratisch in merg en been. Dus ook niet de ééne plaatselijke kerk over de andere heerschappij voerende, maar alle kerken gelijk in rang en niet dan confederatief in synodaal verband aaneengesloten. Doch hiermede is dan ook de differentieering der kerken, en zoo ook haar verschil in zuiverheid, vanzelf gegeven. Is de kerk een genade-instituut, dat door een hiërarchisch priesterdom den schat uitdeelt, dan drukt die hiërarchie onder alle natie en volk op alle kerkelijke leven eenzelfde stempel. Maar is de kerk de vergadering der geloovigen, komen de kerken uit de personen der belijders op, om zich zoo eerst door confederatie tot eenheid te verbinden, dan brengt de schakeering in het leven van zelf ook op kerkelijk terrein veelvormigheid, en moet zich het allen gemeenschappelijk leven wel zuiverder in de ééne dan in de andere kerk belichamen. Ik zeg niet, dat de Calvinistische theologen dit aanstonds geproclameerd hebben. De zonde der heerschzucht sloop 56 ook onder hen in, en, ook afgescheiden van dien zondigen trek, sprak het vanzelf dat ze in theorie steeds aan elke kerk den eisch van hun ideaal bleven stellen. Maar dit verkleint in niets de hooge beteekenis van het feit, dat zij door de kerk, niet in een hiërarchie of “Anstalt,” maar in de personen der belijders te zoeken, het beginsel zelf der vrijheid op kerkelijk erf tot uitgangspunt kozen. Immers krachtens dat beginsel stond er op aarde geen andere macht boven de plaatselijke kerken, dan deze kerken zelven door hare confederatie oprichtten. Dies nu moest het verschil dat mensch en mensch scheidt, ook als wigge in de eenheid der uitwendige kerk dringen. Verschillen van landaard en zeden, verschillen van neiging en gemoedsleven, verschillen van diepte of oppervlakkigheid, moesten er toe leiden, om hier de ééne, daar de andere zijde van het ééne zelfde beeld der waarheid meer eenzijdig in het oog te doen vatten. Vandaar de vele denominatiën of gezindheden waarin het kerkelijk leven, krachtens dit beginsel, is uiteengegaan. Denominatiën, die in niet geringe mate, van de rijke, diepe en volle Calvinistische Belijdenis mogen zijn afgeweken, of zelfs op meer dan één punt vijandig tegen haar over kwamen te staan, maar die ook zoo toch al te zaam haar onstaan danken aan het terugdringen van het sacerdotalisme, en aan de erkenning van de kerk als „vergadering der geloovigen”, waarin het Calvinisme ten deze zijn grondgedachte uitsprak. — Dat hieruit veel onheilige concurrentie, soms ook schuldige afdwaling kon opkomen, spreekt vanzelf. Nog neemt de worsteling tusschen deze verschillende demoninatiën soms een bedenkelijken vorm aan, maar ook na een historie van drie eeuwen mag getuigd, dat deze veelvormigheid, die van de practijk van het Calvinistisch beginsel onafscheidelijk is, den bloei van het godsdienstig leven veel sterker bevorderd heeft, dan de afgedwongen eenheid, waarin Rome heil zocht. Een vrucht die ook voor de toekomst van deze worsteling te wachten is, indien maar het beginsel van kerkelijke vrijheid niet in kerkelijk indifferentisme ontaardt, en geen kerk die nog in merg en been Calvinistisch is, aflate van haar roeping, om de eere harer beginselen aan anderen aan te bevelen.

This at the same time determines the form of government of this church on earth. This government, like the church itself, originates in Heaven, in Christ. He most effectually governs His church by means of the Holy Spirit, by whom He works in His members. Therefore, all being equal under 27 Him, there can be no distinctions of rank among believers; there are only ministers, who serve, lead and regulate; a thoroughly Presbyterian form of government; the Church power descending directly from Christ Himself, into the congregation, ascending from the congregation to the ministers, and by them being administered unto the brethren. So the sovereignty of Christ remains absolutely monarchical, but the government of the Church on earth becomes democratic to its bones and marrow; a system leading logically to this other sequence, that all believers and all congregations being of an equal standing, no Church may exercise any dominion over another, but that all Churches are of equal rank, and as manifestations of one and the same body, can only be united synod ically, i. e. by way of confederation. Now let me draw your attention to another most important consequence of this same principle, viz. to the multiformity of denominations as the necessary result of the differentiation of the churches, according to the different degrees of their purity. If the church is considered to be an institute of grace, independent of the believers, or an institute in which a hiearchical priest hood distributes the treasury of grace entrusted to him, the result must be that this hierarchy extends itself through all nations and imparts the same stamp to all forms of ecclesiastical life. But if the church consists in the congregation of believers, if the churches are formed by the union of confessors, and are united only in the way of confederation, then the differences of climate and of nation, of historical past, and of disposition of mind come in to exercise a widely variegating influence, and multiformity in ecclesiastical matters must be the result. A result, therefore, of very far-reaching importance, because it annihilates the absolute character of every visible Church, and places them all side by side, as differing in degrees of purity, but always remaining manifestations of one holy and catholicchurch of Christ in Heaven. I do not say that Calvinistic 28 theologians have proclaimed this full consequence from the beginning. The desire for ruling power lurked also at the door of their heart, and even apart from this dangerous disposition it was right and natural for them theoretically to judge each church according to the standard of their own ideals. But this does not in the least detract from the great significance of the fact that by regarding the Church, not as a hierarchy or institution, but as the gathering of individual confessors, they started for the life of the church, as well as for the life of the state, and civil society, from the principle not of compulsion, but of liberty. For, of course by virtue of this starting-point there was no other church-power superior to the local churches, save only what the churches themselves constituted, by means of their confederation. Hence it followed of necessity that the natural and historic differences between men should also, wedgelike, force their way into the phenomenal life of the church upon earth. National differences of morals, differences of disposition and of emotions, different degrees in depth of life and insight, necessarily resulted in emphasizing first one, and then another side of the same truth. Hence the numerous sects and denominations into which the external church-life has fallen by virtue of this principle. So on our side there are denominations which may have departed from the rich deep and Ml Calvinistic Confession, in no small degree, even such as bitterly oppose more than one capital article of our confession; yet they all owe their origin to a deep-rooted opposition to sacerdotalism, and to the acknowledgment of the church as the '-congregation of believers," the truth in which Calvinism expressed its fundamental conception. And although this fact unavoidably led to much unholy rivalry, and even to sinful errors of conduct ; yet, after an experience of three centuries it must be confessed that this multiformity, which is inseparably connected with the fundamental thought of Calvinism, has been much more 29 favourable to the growth and prosperity of religious life than the compulsory uniformity in which Rome sought the very basis of its strength. And fruit is to be expected more abundantly still in the future, provided only that the principle of ecclesiastical liberty does not degenerate into indifference, and that no church, which, in its name and confession still upholds the Calvinistic banner, omits to fulfil its holy mission of recommending to others the superiority of its principles.

This at the same time determines the form of government of this Church on earth. This government, like the Church itself, originates in Heaven, in Christ. He most effectually rules, governs His Church by means of the Holy Spirit, by whom He works in His members. Therefore, all being equal under Him, there can be no distinctions of rank among believers; there are only ministers, who serve, lead and regulate; a thoroughly Presbyterian form of government; the Church power descending directly from Christ Himself, into the congregation, concentrated from the congregation in the ministers, and by them being administered unto the brethren. So the sovereignty of Christ remains absolutely monarchical, but the government of the Church on earth becomes democratic to its bones and marrow; a system leading logically to this other sequence, that all believers and all congregations being of an equal standing, no Church may exercise any dominion over another, but that all local churches are of equal rank, and as manifestations of one and the same body, can only be united synodically, i.e., by way of confederation.

Now let me draw your attention to another most important consequence of this same principle, viz., to the multiformity of denominations as the necessary result of the differentiation of the churches, according to the different degrees of their purity. If the Church is considered to be an institute of grace, independent of the believers, or an institute in which a hierarchical priesthood distributes the treasury of grace entrusted to it, the result must be that this hierarchy itself extends through all nations, and imparts the same stamp 78 to all forms of ecclesiastical life. But if the Church consists in the congregation of believers, if the churches are formed by the union of confessors, and are united only in the way of confederation, then the differences of climate and of nation, of historical past, and of disposition of mind come in to exercise a widely variegating influence, and multiformity in ecclesiastical matters must be the result. A result, therefore, of very far-reaching importance, because it annihilates the absolute character of every visible church, and places them all side by side, as differing in degrees of purity, but always remaining in some way or other a manifestation of one holy and catholic Church of Christ in Heaven.

I do not say that Calvinistic theologians have proclaimed this full consequence from the beginning. The desire for ruling power lurked also at the door of their heart, and even apart from this dangerous disposition it was right and natural for them theoretically to judge each church according to the standard of their own ideals. But this does not in the least detract from the great significance of the fact that by regarding their church, not as a hierarchy or institution, but as the gathering of individual confessors, they started for the life of the church, as well as for the life of the state, and civil society, from the principle not of compulsion, but of liberty. For, of course, by virtue of this starting-point, there was no other church-power superior to the local churches, save only what the churches themselves constituted, by means of their confederation. Hence it followed of necessity that the natural and historic differences between men should also, wedge-like, force their 79 way into the phenomenal life of the church upon earth. National differences of morals, differences of disposition and of emotions, different degrees in depth of life and insight, necessarily resulted in emphasizing first one, and then another side of the same truth. Hence the numerous sects and denominations into which the external church-life has fallen by virtue of this principle. So on our side there are denominations which may have departed from the rich, deep and full Calvinistic Confession, in no small degree, even such as bitterly oppose more than one capital article of our Confession; yet they all owe their origin to a deep-rooted opposition to sacerdotalism, and to the acknowledgment of the Church as the “congregation of believers”, the truth in which Calvinism expressed its fundamental conception. And although this fact unavoidably led to much unholy rivalry, and even to sinful errors of conduct; yet, after an experience of three centuries it must be confessed that this multiformity, which is inseparably connected with the fundamental thought of Calvinism, has been much more favorable to the growth and prosperity of religious life than the compulsory uniformity in which others sought the very basis of its strength. And fruit is to be expected more abundantly still in the future, provided only that the principle of ecclesiastical liberty does not degenerate into indifference, and that no church, which, in its name and confession still upholds the Calvinistic banner, omits to fulfil its holy mission of recommending to others the superiority of its principles.

Isto ao mesmo tempo determina a forma de governo dessa Igreja na terra. Este governo, como a própria Igreja, origina-se no Céu, em Cristo. Mais efetivamente, ele dirige, governa sua Igreja por meio do Espírito Santo, por quem opera em seus membros. Portanto, sendo todos iguais debaixo dele, não pode haver distinção de classes entre os crentes; há somente ministros que servem, guiam e regulam; uma forma completamente Presbiteriana de governo; o poder da Igreja descendo diretamente do próprio Cristo, para a congregação, da congregação concentrado nos ministros, e por eles sendo administrado aos irmãos. Deste modo, a soberania de Cristo mantêm-se absolutamente monárquica, mas o governo da Igreja na terra torna-se democrático para seus ossos e medulas; um sistema que conduz logicamente a este outro resultado, que todos os crentes e todas as congregações estando numa posição igual, nenhuma Igreja pode exercer qualquer domínio sobre uma outra, mas que todas as igrejas locais são da mesma classe, e como manifestações de um e o mesmo corpo somente podem estar unidas sinodalmente, i.e., por meio de confederação.

Deixem-me chamar sua atenção para outra conseqüência muito importante deste mesmo princípio, a saber, para a multiformidade de denominações como a conseqüência necessária da diferenciação das igrejas, segundo os diferentes graus de sua pureza. Se a Igreja deve ser considerada uma instituição da graça, independente dos crentes, ou uma instituição na qual o sacerdócio hierárquico distribui o tesouro da graça confiado a ela, o resultado deve ser que esta mesma hierarquia se estende através de todas as nações, e confere a mesma marca a todas as formas de vida eclesiástica. Mas, se a Igreja consiste na congregação de crentes, se são formadas pela união dos confessores e estão unidas somente por meio da confederação, então as diferenças de clima e de nação, de passado histórico e de disposição mental contribuem para exercer uma influência que produz variedade, e a multiformidade em questões eclesiásticas deve ser a conseqüência. Uma conseqüência, portanto, de alcance muito mais importante, porque aniquila o caráter absoluto de cada igreja visível e coloca todas lado a lado, como diferindo em graus de pureza, mas mantendo sempre de um modo ou de outro uma manifestação da santa e católica Igreja de Cristo no Céu.

Não estou dizendo que os teólogos calvinistas têm proclamado esta plena conseqüência desde o começo. O desejo pelo poder governante também espreitava à porta de seus corações, e mesmo separados desta disposição perigosa era certo e natural para eles julgar teoricamente cada igreja segundo o padrão de seus próprios ideais. Mas isto de modo algum deprecia o grande significado do fato que por considerarem suas igrejas, não como uma hierarquia ou instituição, mas como a assembléia de indivíduos confessores, deram início à vida da igreja, bem como à vida do estado e da sociedade civil, a partir do princípio de liberdade e não de compulsão. Pois, certamente, em virtude de seu ponto de partida, não havia outro poder eclesiástico superior às igrejas locais, salvo somente o que as próprias igrejas constituíam por meio de sua confederação. Daqui, necessariamente, seguiu-se que as diferenças naturais e históricas entre os homens também deveriam, como uma cunha, forçar seu caminho na vida fenomenal da igreja sobre a terra. Diferenças nacionais de moral, de disposição e de emoções, diferentes graus na profundidade da vida e discernimento, necessariamente resultaram no enfatizar primeiro um e então o outro lado da mesma verdade. Daí as numerosas seitas e denominações nas quais a vida externa da igreja tem desaguado em virtude deste princípio.

Assim, de nossa parte, há denominações que podem ter se afastado, em grau não pequeno da rica, profunda e plena Confissão calvinista, como tal, até amargamente fazendo oposição a mais de um artigo capital de nossa Confissão; todavia todas elas devem sua origem a uma oposição profundamente enraizada ao sacerdotalismo e ao reconhecimento da Igreja como a “congregação de crentes”, a verdade na qual o Calvinismo expressou sua concepção fundamental. E embora este fato tenha conduzido inevitavelmente a muita rivalidade ímpia, e até mesmo a pecaminosos erros de conduta; ainda, após uma experiência de três séculos deve ser confessado que esta multiformidade, que está inseparavelmente ligada ao pensamento fundamental do Calvinismo, tem sido muito mais favorável ao crescimento e prosperidade da vida religiosa que a uniformidade compulsória na qual outros procuraram a própria base de sua força. E o fruto ainda mais abundante deve ser esperado no futuro, somente na condição de que este princípio de liberdade eclesiástica não se degenere em indiferença, e que nenhuma igreja, que, em seu nome e confissão ainda sustente a bandeira calvinista, omita-se no cumprimento de sua santa missão de recomendar a outros a superioridade de seus princípios.

Все это определяет и форму управления земной Церковью. Оно, как и сама Церковь, имеет начало на небесах, во Христе. Он самым действенным образом правит, руководит Своей Церковью посредством Святого Духа, через Которого действует в Своих членах. Поскольку все равны перед Ним, не может быть никаких иерархических различий между верными; есть лишь служители, которые и служат, и руководят, и управляют. Вот истинно пресвитерианская форма управления, когда церковная власть ниспосылается прямо от Христа общине, сосредоточивается в служителях общины, и через них распространяется на братьев. Власть Христа остается абсолютной, Он правит Один, как монарх, но управление Церковью на земле — совершенно демократическое. Эта система логически и неизбежно приводит к тому, что, поскольку все верующие и все общины в равном положении, никакая церковь не может каким-либо образом господствовать над другой. Напротив, все местные церкви, обладая равным положением и будучи проявлением одного и того же тела, могут объединяться лишь в конфедерацию.

Теперь позвольте мне обратить ваше внимание на другое важное следствие того же самого принципа — на разнообразие деноминаций как неизбежный результат дифференциации [протестантских] церквей в соответствии с различным уровнем их чистоты. Если Церковь рассматривается как институт, независимый от верующих, в котором иерархическое священство распределяет сокровища благодати, вверенные ему, иерархия эта неизбежно сама распространяет себя на все народы и налагает один и тот же отпечаток на все формы церковной жизни. Если же Церковь — это община верующих, а церкви основаны союзом исповедующих веру и объединяются только конфедеративно, тогда различия климата и народа, исторического прошлого и манеры мышления оказывают немалое влияние, а это порождает многообразие в церковных делах. Это далеко идущие последствия, ведь они отменяют абсолютность любой видимой церкви и помещают их рядом друг с другом. Они различаются по степени чистоты, но всегда остаются в той или иной мере проявлением святой вселенской Церкви Христовой, которая на Небесах.

Я не хочу сказать, что кальвинистские теологи знали о таких последствиях с самого начала. Им была ведома тяга к власти, да и помимо этого искушения они считали правильным и естественным судить о каждой церкви, исходя из своего собственного идеала. Но это ни в какой мере не умаляет огромного значения того, что, рассматривая свою церковь не как иерархию или институт, а как собрание верующих, они начинали в церковной жизни, как и в жизни государства и общества, не с принципа насилия, а с принципа свободы. В силу этого начального принципа не было никакой церковной власти выше власти местных церквей, не считая, конечно, тех институтов, которые сами церкви могли образовать, объединившись в конфедерацию. Отсюда с необходимостью следует, что естественные и исторические различия между людьми врежутся, словно клин, в видимую жизнь земной Церкви. Национальные различия в нравах, в образе мыслей и чувств, различия в уровнях глубины их жизни неизбежно выражаются в том, что подчеркивается то одна, то другая сторона одной и той же истины. Отсюда проистекает многочисленность сект и деноминаций, на которые распалась внешняя церковная жизнь. У нас, к примеру, есть деноминации, которые в немалой степени отделились от насыщенного, глубинного и полного кальвинистского вероисповедания, а порой даже пылко противостоят не одной статье нашего вероисповедания; и все же все они обязаны своим происхождением глубоко укоренившейся оппозиции клерикализму и пониманию Церкви как «общины верных», то есть истине, в которой кальвинизм выразил свою основную концепцию. Хотя это неизбежно ведет к мирскому соперничеству и даже греховным ошибкам, все же, после опыта трех столетий, можно признать, что многообразие, нераздельно соединенное с основной идеей кальвинизма, благоприятней для роста и процветания религиозной жизни, чем насильственное однообразие, в котором другие искали главную опору. Следует ожидать более обильных плодов, если только принцип церковной свободы не выродится в безразличие, и никакая церковь, которая своим именем и исповеданием вздымает кальвинистское знамя, не пренебрежет святой миссией, то есть не перестанет представлять другим превосходство своих принципов.

Nog één punt moet hierbij in het licht gesteld. De opvatting 57 van de kerk als de „vergadering der geloovigen,” kon de voorstelling ingang doen vinden, als waren de geloovigen hier te nemen afgescheiden van hun kinderen. Toch is dit de leer van het Calvinisme volstrekt niet. Zijn belijdenis van den kinderdoop leert het wel anders. De geloovigen die saam vergaderen, snijden den natuurlijken band met hun kroost niet af, maar heiligen dien, en brengen hun kinderen in hun kerk mede, waar deze eerst als volwassenen uit gaan, zoo ze niet gelooven. Dit is het Calvinistisch dogma van het Verbond. Een gewichtig stuk der belijdenis, dat uitspreekt, hoe de kerk niet buiten het menschelijk geslacht staat, maar de wedergeboren kern van dat geslacht in zich draagt, en daarom met de natuurlijke organische voortteeling van dat geslacht hand aan hand gaat. Verbond en Kerk zijn niet hetzelfde. Het Verbond bindt kerk en geslacht saam, en het is God-zelf die in zijn Verbondstrouw den samenhang tusschen de Kerk en ons menschelijk geslacht bezegelt. De Tucht houdt dan dit Verbond heilig, waar de geslachts-samenhang de kerk verbasteren zou. Van een Volkskerk kan daarom op Calvinistisch standpunt nooit sprake zijn. Een nationale kerk, die één enkel volk omvat, is een heidensche, hoogstens een Joodsche gedachte. De kerk van Christus is oecumenisch. Niet een enkel land, heel de wereld is haar territoir. En toen de Luthersche reformatie, naar de instigatie der vorsten, de kerken nationaliseerde, en ook Gereformeerde kerken zich hierdoor verlokken lieten, nam men niet een hooger standpunt in, dan waarop Rome met haar wereldkerk stond, maar daalde tot lager standpunt af. En de Synode van Dordrecht, en de Synode van Westminster hebben dan ook tegenover deze hinderlijke zelfverlaging het oecumenisch karakter der Gereformeerde kerken geëerd.

Still another point must be brought forward in this connection. The conception of the Church as the "congregation of believers" might lead to the conception that it included the believers only, without their children. This, however, is by no means the teaching of Calvinism : itteaching on the subject of infant baptism showing quite the contrary. Believers who meet together do not thereby sever the natural bond that binds them to their offspring. On the contrary, they consecrate this bond, arid by baptism incorporate their children in the communion of their church, and these minors are kept in this Church communion until, when of age, they become themselves confessors, or sever themselves from the church by their unbelief. This is the so-important Calvinistic dogma of the Covenant; a prominant article of our confession, showing that the waters of the Church do not flow outside the natural stream of human life, but cause the life of the church to proceed hand in hand with the natural organic reproduction of succeeding generations. Covenant and Church are inseparable, — the covenant binding the church to the race, and God Himself sealing in it the connection between the life of grace, and the life of nature. Of course Church discipline must come in here, in order to preserve the purity of this Covenant as soon as the mutual permeating of grace by nature tends to lower the purity of the Church. From the Calvinistic view T point, therefore, it is impossible to speak of a nationalChurch, as being destined to embrace all the inhabitants of the whole 30 country. A national Church, i. e. a church comprising only one nation, is a Heathen, or at most, a Jewish conception. The Church of Christ is not national but ecumenical. No1 one single state, but the whole world is its domain. And when the Lutheran Reformers at the instigation of their sovereigns, nationalized their churches, and Calvinistic churches allowed themselves to deviate in the same track, they did not ascend to a higher conception than that of Rome's world-church, but descended to distinctly lower ground. Happily I may conclude by bearing witness that both the Synod of Dort, and the not less venerable Westminster Assembly, have honoured again the ecumenical character ofour Reformed Churches, thereby censuring as unpardonable, every deviation from the only right principle.

Still another point must be brought forward in this connection. The conception of the Church as the 80 “congregation of believers” might lead to the conception that it included the believers only, without their children. This, however, is by no means the teaching of Calvinism; its teaching on the subject of infant baptism showing quite the contrary. Believers who meet together do not thereby sever the natural bond that binds them to their offspring. On the contrary, they consecrate this bond, and by baptism incorporate their children in the communion of their church, and these minors are kept in this Church communion until, when of age, they become themselves confessors, or sever themselves from the church by their unbelief. This is the all-important Calvinistic dogma of the Covenant; a prominent article of our confession, showing that the waters of the Church do not flow outside the natural stream of human life, but cause the life of the Church to proceed hand in hand with the natural organic reproduction of mankind in its succeeding generations. Covenant and Church are inseparable, – the Covenant binding the Church to the race, and God Himself sealing in it the connection between the life of grace and the life of nature. Of course, Church discipline must come in here, in order to preserve the purity of this Covenant as soon as the interpermeation of grace by nature tends to lower the purity of the Church. From the Calvinistic point of view, therefore, it is impossible to speak of a national Church as being destined to embrace all the inhabitants of a whole country. A national Church, i.e., a Church comprising only one nation, and that nation entirely, is a Heathen, or at most, a Jewish conception. The Church of Christ is not national but ecumenical. Not 81 one single state, but the whole world is its domain. And when the Lutheran Reformers at the instigation of their sovereigns, nationalized their churches, and Calvinistic churches allowed themselves to deviate into the same track, they did not ascend to a higher conception than that of Rome’s world-church, but descended to distinctly lower ground. Happily I may conclude by bearing witness that both our Synod of Dordt, and your not less venerable Westminster Assembly, have honored again the ecumenical character of our Reformed Churches, thereby censuring as umpardonable, every deviation from the only right principle.

Ainda deve ser apresentado outro ponto nesta relação. A concepção da Igreja como a “congregação de crentes” poderia conduzir à concepção que ela incluía apenas os crentes, sem seus filhos. Isto, contudo, de modo algum é o ensinamento do Calvinismo; seu ensino sobre o assunto do batismo infantil mostra exatamente o contrário. Os crentes que congregam juntos não rompem por isso a ligação natural que os une a seus descendentes. Pelo contrário, consagram sua união, e pelo batismo incorporam seus filhos na comunhão de sua igreja, e estes menores são guardados nesta comunhão eclesiástica até que, quando maior de idade, eles próprios tornem-se confessores, ou aqueles que rompem com a igreja por sua incredulidade. Este é o importante dogma calvinista do Pacto; um artigo proeminente de nossa confissão, mostrando que as águas da Igreja não fluem fora do rio natural da vida humana, mas faz sua vida prosseguir de mãos dadas com a reprodução orgânica natural da humanidade em suas gerações seguintes. Pacto e Igreja são inseparáveis, - o Pacto unindo a Igreja à raça, e o próprio Deus selando nele a relação entre a vida da graça e a vida da natureza.

Certamente, a disciplina da Igreja deve vir aqui, a fim de preservar a pureza desse Pacto, quando a interpermeação da graça pela natureza tende a diminuir a pureza da Igreja. Do ponto de vista calvinista, portanto, é impossível falar de uma Igreja nacional como sendo destinada a abraçar todos os habitantes de um país. Uma Igreja nacional, isto é, uma Igreja abrangendo somente uma nação, e toda aquela nação, é uma concepção pagã, ou no máximo, uma concepção judaica. A Igreja de Cristo não é nacional mas ecumênica. Não um estado em particular, mas o mundo todo é seu domínio. E quando os reformadores Luteranos instigados por seus soberanos nacionalizaram suas igrejas, e as igrejas calvinistas permitiram-se desviar para o mesmo caminho, eles não subiram para uma concepção superior àquela da Igreja mundial de Roma, mas desceram à base nitidamente mais baixa. Felizmente, posso concluir pelo paciente testemunho que tanto nosso Sínodo de Dort, quando sua não menos venerável Assembléia de Westminster, têm novamente honrado o caráter ecumênico de nossas Igrejas Reformadas, censurando com isso como imperdoável todo desvio do único princípio certo.

И еще одно стоит обсудить в этой связи. Концепция Церкви как «общины верных» могла бы привести к мысли, что Церковь включает только верующих, но не их детей. Это совершенно не то, чему учит кальвинизм, и наше учение о крещении младенцев показывает как раз обратное. Верующие, которые собираются вместе, не разрывают тем самым естественных уз, связывающих их с потомством. Наоборот, они освящают эту связь, посредством крещения включают своих детей в общение своей церкви, где те и пребывают до тех пор, пока не станут сами исповедовать веру или не отделят себя от Церкви через неверие. Это — чрезвычайно важная кальвинистская догма о Завете; одна из главных статей нашего исповедания, показывающая, что воды Церкви не текут вне природного потока человеческой жизни; церковная жизнь должна идти нога в ногу с естественным воспроизводством человечества в сменяющих друг друга поколениях. Завет и Церковь нераздельны: Завет привязывает Церковь к роду, и Сам Бог запечатлевает связь между благодатной и природной жизнью. Конечно, нужна церковная дисциплина, чтобы предохранить чистоту Завета, ибо воздействие природы на благодать снижает церковную чистоту. Поэтому с кальвинистской точки зрения нельзя сказать, что национальная Церковь предназначена охватить всех обитателей данной страны. Национальная Церковь, т. е. Церковь, охватывающая только одну нацию, но нацию целиком, — языческая или, в лучшем случае, иудейская концепция. Церковь Христова — не национальная, а вселенская. Территория ее господства — не одно государство, а целый мир. Когда лютеранские реформаторы по настоянию правителей национализировали свои церкви, и кальвинистские церкви позволили себе уклониться на тот же самый путь, они не встали выше католического представления о всемирной Церкви, но, очевидно, опустились ниже его. К счастью, могу сказать, поскольку сам это видел, что и наш Дортский Синод, и ваша не менее почтенная Вестминстерская Ассамблея, вновь признали вселенский характер наших Реформатских Церквей и тем самым осудили всякое отклонение от единственно правильного принципа.

En is u zoo het wezen der kerk en haar verschijningsvorm geschetst, zoo vraag ik in de derde plaats uw aandacht voor het doel van het optreden der kerk op aarde. Ik zwijg daarbij van de scheiding van kerk en staat. Die komt vanzelf aan de orde in mijn volgende lezing. Thans bepaal ik mij tot het doel dat 58 de kerk zich ziet aangewezen. Dat doel nu is niet menschelijk egoïstisch: het gereedmaken van de geloovigen voor den hemel. Een wedergeboren kind dat in de wieg sterft, gaat zonder eenige voorbereiding ten hemel in. Waar de Heilige Geest de kiem van eeuwig leven in de ziel plantte, waarborgt de volharding der heiligen de zekerheid van eeuwig heil. Neen, de kerk is er om Gods wil. Wedergeboorte is wel genoeg voor den verkorene, om zeker te zijn van zijn eeuwig lot, maar niet genoeg, opdat God de eere van zijn werk onder menschen hebbe. Daartoe moet op de wedergeboorte de bekeering volgen, en tot deze bekeering moet de kerk uitdrijven door den Dienst van het Woord. In den wedergeborene smeulde wel de vonk, maar eerst in den bekeerde slaat uit die vonk de vlam op, en die vlam is het licht, dat de wereld moet zien glinsteren, om uw Vader die in de hemelen is te verheerlijken; en zoowel uw bekeering als uw heiligmaking in goede werken dragen dan alleen het verheven karakter, dat Jezus eischt, als ge er niet in hoofdzaak uw eigen garantie voor den hemel, maar de verheerlijking van uw God meê bedoelt.

Uw kerk moet in de tweede plaats die vlam sterken en verhelderen door de gemeenschap der heiligen en door het Sacrament. Eerst de samenvoeging van honderden waskaarsen op denzelfden luchter doet den vollen glans van het kaarslicht uitstralen, en zoo ook moet de gemeenschap der heiligen de vele kleine lichten samenvoegen, opdat het ééne den glans van het andere verhooge, en Christus wandelen kunne in het midden der zeven kandelaren. En onderwijl Christus aldus in het midden van de zeven kandelaren wandelt, verheldert hij sacramenteel den lichtgloed die van elk geloovige uitgaat. Zoo ligt het doel der kerk niet in u, maar in de eere van Gods naam. Vandaar dan ook de streng geestelijke culte die het Calvinisme Gode in zijn kerk wil zien opgedragen. Zelfs Von Hartmann, de ongeloovige philosoof, had er oog voor, hoe de culte te religieuzer wordt naarmate ze den moed heeft meer het uitwendig schijnsel te versmaden, en alleen het geestelijk schoon der ziel in den Eeredienst te doen uitkomen. Zinlijke eeredienst strekt om den mensch religieus te streelen, en alleen de zuiver geestelijke eeredienst van 59 het Calvinisme bedoelt loutere aanbidding in niets dan geest en waarheid. — Van gelijke strekking moet de Tucht zijn, dat onmisbare bestanddeel in alle Calvinistisch kerkelijk leven. Een Tucht die ingesteld is, niet enkel om schandaal af te snijden, noch enkel en zelfs niet in de eerste plaats om te wilde ranken te besnoeien, maar opdat het Verbonds Gods heilig worde gehouden, en de indruk dat God te rein van oogen is om het kwade te aanschouwen, diep ook buiten de kerk in de wereld gevestigd worde. — En daarbij komt dan in de laatste plaats de Dienst der Barmhartigheid in het alleen door Calvijn begrepen en in eere herstelde Diaconaat. Dat kent noch Rome, noch de Grieksche, noch de Luthersche, noch de Episcopale kerk. Uitsluitend het Calvinisme heeft het Diaconaat, als onmisbaar bestanddeel van het kerkelijk leven, weer in eere gebracht. Doch ook in dit Diaconaat gaat het hoog beginsel door dat het niet u, die aalmoezen uitreikt, maar alleen Hem, die de harten tot weldadigheid beweegt, in zijn kerk verheerlijken zal. De Diakenen zijn niet uw Dienaren, maar Dienaren Christi. Wat gij hun toevertrouwt, wordt door u als rentmeester van zijn goed aan Christus teruggegeven, en in zijn naam als zijn goed aan de armen van Christus uitgereikt. Een arme, die zijn Diaken, of den gever alleen dankzegt, verloochent den Christus, die zelf in het Diaconaat de goddelijke gever is, en die het aan zijn armen toonen wil, dat hij niet enkel voor de ziel, maar ook voor de nooden des lichaams, d.i. voor den geheelen mensch en voor geheel het leven, de Christus Consolator is, de Redder door God in zijn gemeente besteld.

Alzoo past dan in het Calvinisme de grondgedachte der Kerk volkomen op de grondgedachte der Religie. Alle egoïsme en eudaemonisme blijft in beide ten einde toe uitgebannen. Het is vóór als na een Religie en een Kerk om Gods wille, en niet ter wille van den mensch. Uit God is de oorsprong der Kerk, door Godontvangt ze haar verschijningsvorm, en in het: tot God, ligt van den aanvang tot het einde toe haar doel.

Having thus far given an outline of the nature of the ( 'liurch, and the form of its manifestation, let me now draw your attention in the last place to the purpose of its appearance on earth. I shall not say anything for the present on the separation of Church and state. This will naturally find place in the next Lecture. At present. I confine myself to the purpose that has been assigned to the Church in its pilgrimage through the world. That purpose cannot be human— egoistic, to prepare the believer for Heaven. A regenerate child, dying in the cradle, goes straight to Heaven, without any further preparation and wheresoever the Holy Ghost has kindled the spark of Eternal life in the soul, the perseverance of the saints assures the certainty of eternal salvation. Nay, upon earth also, the Church xists merely for the sake of God. Regeneration is sufficient for the elect man, to make him sure of his eternal destiny, but it is not enough to satisfy, the glory of God in His work among men. For the glory of our God it is necessary to have regeneration, followed by conversion, and to this conversion the Church must contribute, 31 by means of the preaching of the Word. In the regenerate man glows the spark, but only in the converted man does the spark burst into a blaze, and that blaze radiates the light from the church into the world, that, according to our Lord's commandment, our Father, which is in Heaven, may be glorified. And both our conversion and our sanctification in good works are only then marked by the lofty character which Jesus demands, when we make them serve, in the first place, not the guarantee of our own salvation, but rather the glorifying of God. In the second place, the Church must fan this blaze, and make it brighter, by the communion of the saints and by the Sacraments. Only when hundreds of candles are burning from one candelabrum, can the full brightness of the soft candle-light strike us, and in the same way it is the communion of saints which has to unite the many small lights of the single believers so that they may mutually increase their brightness, and Christ, walking in the midst of the seven candlesticks, may sacramentally purify the glow of their brightness to a still more brilliant fervour. Thus the purpose of the Church does not lie in us, but in God, and in the glory of His name. — From this solemn purpose originates, in the same way, the severely spiritual cultus which Calvinism tried te restore in the services of the Church. Even Von Hartman, the far-fromChristian philosopher, perceived that cultus becomes more religious just in proportion as it has the courage to despise all external show, and the energy to evolve itself from symbolism, in order to clothe itself in beauty of a much higher order, — the inward, spiritual beauty of the worshipping soul. Sensual church services tend to soothe and flatter man religiously, and only the purely spiritual service of Calvinism aims at the pure worship of God, and at adoration of Him in spirit and in truth. — The same tendency leads our church discipline, that indispensible element of every genuine Calvinistic church activity. Church discipline was also instituted in the first place, not to prevent 32 scandals, nor even primilarily to prune the wild branches, but rather to preserve the sanctity of the Covenant of God, and ever to impress upon the outside world the solemn fact that God is too pure to look upon evil. — Finally we have the service of Church philanthropy, in the Diaconate which Calvin alone understood, and restored to its primordial honor. Neither Rome nor the Greek Church, neither the Lutheran nor the Episcopal Church, caught the real meaning of the Diaconate. Calvinism alone has restored the Diaconate to its place of honor, as an indispensable and constitutive element of ecclesiastical life. But. in this Diaconate, also, the lofty principle must prevail that it may not glorify those who give alms, but only the name of Him who moves the hearts of the people to liberality. The Deacons are not our servants, but servants of Christ. That which we commit to them we simply give back to Christ, as stewards of what is His property ; and in His name it must be distributed to His poor, — our brothers and sister The poor church -member, who thanks the Deacon and the giver, but not Christ, actually denies Dim who is the real and divine Giver, and who through his deacons, purposes to make it manifest that He is a Savior, not for the soul alone, but also for the body, — or to express it more pointedly, that for the whole man, and for the whole of life He is the Christus Consolator, the heavenly Redeemer, anointed and appointed by God Himself, for our fallen race, from all eternity. And so, as you see, the result proves incontestably that in Calvinism, the fundamental conception of the Church fits perfectly to the fundamental idea of Religion. All egoism and eudaimonism are excluded from both, even unto the end. Always and ever we have a Religion, and a Church, for the sake of God, and not for the sake of man. The origin of the Church is in God, its form of manifestation is from God, and from beginning to end, its purpose is and remains to magnify God's glory.

Having thus far given an outline of the nature of the Church, and the form of its manifestation, let me now draw your attention in the last place to the purpose of its appearance on earth. I shall not say anything for the present on the separation of Church and State. This will naturally find place in the next Lecture. At present I confine myself to the purpose that has been assigned to the Church in its pilgrimage through the world. That purpose cannot be human or egoistic, to prepare the believer for Heaven. A regenerate child, dying in the cradle, goes straight to Heaven, without any further preparation and wheresoever the Holy Ghost has kindled the spark of Eternal life in the soul, the perseverance of the saints assures the certainty of eternal salvation. Nay, upon earth also, the Church exists merely for the sake of God. Regeneration is sufficient for the elect man, to make him sure of his eternal 82 destiny, but it is not enough to satisfy the glory of God in His work among men. For the glory of our God it is necessary to have regeneration followed by conversion, and to this conversion the Church must contribute, by means of the preaching of the Word. In the regenerate man glows the spark, but only in the converted m,m does the spark burst into a blaze, and that blaze radiates the light from the Church into the world, that, according to our Lord’s commandment, our Father, which is in Heaven, may be glorified. And both our conversion and our sanctification in good works are only then marked by the lofty character which Jesus demands, when we make them serve, in the first place, not as the guarantee of our own salvation, but rather the glorifying of God. In the second place, the Church must fan this blaze, and make it brighten, by the communion of the saints and by the Sacraments. Only when hundreds of candles are burning from one candelabrum, can the full brightness of the soft candlelight strike us, and in the same way it is the communion of saints which has to unite the many small lights of the single believers so that they may mutually increase their brightness, and Christ, walking in the midst of the seven candlesticks, may sacramentally purify the glow of their brightness to a still more brilliant fervour. Thus the purpose of the Church does not lie in us, but in God, and in the glory of His name.

From this solemn purpose originates, in the same way, the severely spiritual cultus which Calvinism tried to restore in the services of the Church. Even Von Hartman, the far-from-Christian philosopher, perceived 83 that cultus becomes more religious just in proportion as it has the courage to despise all external show, and the energy to evolve itself from symbolism, in order to clothe itself in beauty of a much higher order, – the inward, spiritual beauty of the worshipping soul. Sensual church services tend to soothe and flatter man religiously, and only the purely spiritual service of Calvinism aims at the pure worship of God, and at adoration of Him in spirit and truth. – The same tendency leads our church discipline, that indispensable element of every genuine Calvinistic church activity, Church discipline was also instituted in the first place, not to prevent scandals, not even primarily to prune the wild branches, but rather to preserve the sanctity of the Covenant of God, and ever to impress upon the outside world the solemn fact that God is too pure to look upon evil. – Finally we have the service of Church philanthropy, in the Diaconate which Calvin alone understood, and restored to its primordial honor. Neither Rome nor the Greek Church, neither the Lutheran nor the Episcopal Church, caught the real meaning of the Diaconate. Calvinism alone has restored the Diaconate to its place of honor, as an indispensable and constitutive element of ecclesiastical life. But, in this Diaconate, also, the lofty principle must prevail that it may not glorify those who give alms, but only the name of Him who moves the hearts of the people to liberality. The Deacons are not our servants, but servants of Christ. That which we commit to them we simply give back to Christ, as stewards of what is His property; and in His name it must be distributed to His poor, – our brothers and 84 sisters. The poor church member, who thanks the Deacon and the giver, but not Christ, actually denies Him Who is the real and divine Giver, and Who through His Deacons, purposes to make it manifest that for the whole man, and for the whole of life He is the Christus Consolator, the Heavenly Redeemer, anointed and appointed by God Himself, for our fallen race, from all eternity. And so, as you see, the result proves incontestably that in Calvinism, the fundamental conception of the Church fits perfectly to the fundamental idea of Religion. All egoism and eudaemonism are excluded from both, even unto the end. Always and ever we have a Religion, and a Church, for the sake of God, and not for the sake of man. The origin or the Church is m God, its form of manifestation is from God, and from beginning to end, its purpose is and remains to magnify God’s glory.

Tendo dado até aqui um esboço da natureza da Igreja, e da forma de sua manifestação, deixem-me agora chamar sua atenção, em último lugar, para o propósito de seu surgimento na terra. Por enquanto, não direi algo sobre a separação entre Igreja e o Estado. Isto naturalmente encontrará seu lugar na próxima Palestra. Presentemente, limito-me ao propósito que tem sido atribuído à Igreja em sua peregrinação através do mundo. Este propósito não pode ser humano ou egoísta, preparar o crente para o Céu. Uma criança regenerada, agonizando no berço, vai direto para o Céu sem qualquer preparação a mais, e onde quer que o Espírito Santo tenha acendido o brilho da vida eterna na alma, a perseverança dos santos assegura a certeza da salvação eterna. Mais ainda, também sobre a terra, a Igreja existe simplesmente por causa de Deus. A regeneração é suficiente para o homem eleito, para torná-lo seguro de seu destino eterno, mas ela não é suficiente para satisfazer a glória de Deus em sua obra entre os homens. Para a glória de nosso Deus é necessário haver a regeneração seguida pela conversão, e a Igreja deve contribuir para esta conversão através da pregação da Palavra. No homem regenerado resplandece a centelha, mas somente no homem convertido a centelha irrompe em uma chama, e esta chama irradia a luz da Igreja no mundo, para que, segundo a ordem de nosso Senhor, nosso Pai que está no Céu possa ser glorificado. E ambas, nossa conversão e nossa santificação em boas obras, são marcadas pelo sublime caráter que Jesus exige somente quando as fazemos servir, em primeiro lugar, não como a garantia de nossa própria salvação, mas antes a glorificação de Deus.

Em segundo lugar, a Igreja deve atiçar esta chama e fazê-la brilhar pela comunhão dos santos e pelos sacramentos. Somente quando centenas de velas estão acesas em um candelabro pode o brilho pleno da suave luz de vela atingir-nos, e o mesmo acontece com a comunhão dos santos que deve unir as muitas pequenas luzes dos crentes individuais, de modo que eles possam aumentar seu resplendor mutuamente e Cristo andando no meio dos sete castiçais pode purificar sacramentalmente o brilho de seu resplendor até o fervor mais brilhante. Assim, o propósito da Igreja não se encontra em nós, mas em Deus e na glória de seu nome.

Deste solene propósito origina-se, do mesmo modo, os cultos rigorosamente espirituais que o Calvinismo tentou restaurar no serviço da Igreja. Até mesmo Von Hartman, longe de ser um filósofo cristão, percebeu que os cultos tornavam-se mais religiosos exatamente na proporção em que tinham a coragem de desprezar toda demonstração externa e a energia para evoluir do simbolismo, a fim de revestir-se da beleza de uma ordem superior, - a beleza interior, espiritual, da alma adorando. Serviço eclesiástico sensual tende a confortar e adular o homem religiosamente, somente o serviço puramente espiritual do Calvinismo objetiva a adoração pura a Deus e sua adoração em espírito e verdade.

A mesma tendência conduz nossa disciplina eclesiástica àquele elemento indispensável de toda genuína atividade eclesiástica calvinista. A disciplina eclesiástica também foi instituída, em primeiro lugar, não para prevenir escândalos, nem mesmo primariamente para podar ramos maus, mas antes para preservar a santidade do Pacto de Deus, e sempre imprimir sobre o mundo exterior o fato solene de que Deus é muito puro de olhos para ver o mal.

Finalmente, temos o serviço filantrópico da Igreja, no Diaconato o qual somente Calvino entendeu e restaurou à sua primeira honra. Nem Roma, nem a Igreja Grega, nem as Igrejas Luterana e Episcopal, alcançaram o verdadeiro significado do Diaconato. Somente o Calvinismo tem restaurado o diaconato ao seu lugar de honra, como elemento indispensável e construtivo da vida eclesiástica. Mas, neste Diaconato o princípio sublime também deve prevalecer, que ele não pode glorificar aquele que dá esmola, mas somente o nome daquele que move o coração das pessoas para a liberalidade.

Os Diáconos não são nossos servos, mas servos de Cristo. Aquilo que nós confiamos à guarda deles, simplesmente devolvemos a Cristo como mordomos daquilo que é sua propriedade; e em seu nome deve ser distribuído a seus pobres, - nossos irmãos e irmãs. O membro pobre da igreja que agradece ao Diácono e ao doador, mas não a Cristo, realmente nega aquele que é o verdadeiro e divino doador e que através de seus Diáconos, propôs tornar manifesto que para o homem integral e para todos os aspectos da vida ele é o Christus Consolator, o Redentor Celestial, ungido e apontado pelo próprio Deus para nossa raça caída desde toda eternidade. E assim, como vocês vêem, o resultado prova incontestavelmente que no Calvinismo, a concepção fundamental sobre a Igreja ajusta-se perfeitamente à idéia fundamental da Religião. Até mesmo em sua finalidade, todo egoísmo e eudomonismo são excluídos de ambas. Sempre e sempre temos uma Religião e uma Igreja, por causa de Deus e não por causa do homem. A origem da Igreja está em Deus, sua forma de manifestação é de Deus, e desde o começo até o fim, seu propósito é e continua sendo magnificar a glória de Deus.

Обозначив таким образом природу Церкви и форму ее проявления, позвольте мне теперь привлечь ваше внимание к ее цели на земле. Я не буду сейчас говорить о разделении Церкви и государства, это естественным образом будет сделано в следующей лекции. Здесь я ограничусь рассмотрением миссии, порученной Церкви в ее странствии по миру. Эта цель не может быть человеческой или эгоистичной. Она состоит в том, чтобы приготовить верующего к небесам. Возрожденный младенец, умерший в колыбели, идет прямо на небо без всякой дальнейшей подготовки, и где бы Святой Дух ни возжег в душе свет вечной жизни, неотступность святых обеспечивает вечное спасение. Церковь и на земле существует только ради Бога. Возрождения достаточно для избранного человека, чтобы дать ему уверенность в его вечной судьбе, но его недостаточно, чтобы удовлетворить Божию славу в Его трудах среди людей. Для славы нашего Бога необходимо, чтобы за возрождением следовало обращение, и в это обращение Церковь должна внести свой вклад посредством проповеди Слова. В возрожденном человеке сияет искра, но лишь в обращенном она разгорается в пламя, и это пламя посылает свет от Церкви в мир, чтобы, согласно заповеди Господней, прославился наш Отец. И наше обращение, и наше освящение в добрых делах — только тогда становятся знаками праведности, которой требует Иисус, когда мы воспринимаем их не как гарантию нашего спасения, а, скорее, как возможность прославить Бога.

Далее, Церковь должна лелеять это пламя и поддерживать его свечение через общение святых и через таинства. Совокупное сияние мягкого света свечей может поразить нас лишь тогда, когда на одном подсвечнике их сотни; точно так же общение святых должно объединить множество огоньков, зажженных в каждом верующем. Они взаимно усиливают свое свечение, а Христос, шествуя среди семи светильников, очищает его так, что они ярко сияют. Словом, цель Церкви не в нас, а лишь в Боге и в славе Его имени.

Из этой же возвышенной цели возникает строго духовный культ, который кальвинизм пытался восстановить в служении Церкви. Даже фон Гартман, философ далекий от христианства, понял, что культ становится все более религиозным в той мере, в какой у него хватает мужества отказаться от внешней, показной пышности, и силы уйти от символизма, чтобы облечься в красоту высшего порядка — внутреннюю, духовную красоту поклоняющейся Богу души. Церковь, действующая на чувства, стремится ублажать человека посредством религии, и только чисто духовная кальвинистская служба нацелена на чистое поклонение Богу в духе и истине.

Та же самая тенденция управляет нашей церковной дисциплиной, обязательным элементом всякой подлинно кальвинистской церковной деятельности. Дисциплина эта тоже установлена в первую очередь не для того, чтобы предотвращать соблазны, и даже не для того, чтобы отсекать сухие ветви, а для того, чтобы предохранить святость Завета и всегда напоминать внешнему миру о том, что Бог так возвышенно чист, что мы не вправе обращаться ко злу.

Наконец, у нас есть благотворительность, которую осуществляет диаконат, тоже осмысленный лишь Кальвином и восстановленный в своем первоначальном достоинстве. Ни Рим, ни православие, ни лютеране, ни Епископальная церковь не уловили его истинного смысла. Только кальвинизм вернул диаконату почетное положение как необходимому составному элементу церковной жизни. Но в диаконате тоже должен преобладать высокий принцип, чтобы он не прославлял дающих милостыню, а славил имя лишь Того, Кто располагает сердца людей к щедрости. Диаконы — не наши слуги, а слуги Христовы. То, что мы передаем им как попечителям Его собственности, мы просто возвращаем Христу, и во Имя Его это нужно распределять среди Его бедных, — нашим братьям и сестрам. Бедный член церкви, благодарящий диакона и дарителя, а не Христа, в сущности, отрекается от истинного и божественного Даятеля, Который через Своих диаконов хочет показать, что для всякого человека и на всю жизнь Он — Christus Consolator (Христос Утешитель (лат.)), Небесный Искупитель, от вечности помазанный и посланный Самим Богом падшему человечеству. Как видите, конечный результат неопровержимо доказывает, что в кальвинизме основополагающее понимание Церкви совершенно соответствует базисной идее религии. Из той и из другой совершенно исключаются эгоизм и эвдемонизм. Религия и Церковь везде и всегда существуют ради Бога, а не ради человека. Происхождение Церкви — в Боге, форма ее проявления — от Бога, и с начала до конца цель ее — возвеличивать Божию славу.

De vrucht der Religie voor de Levenspractijk, of wilt ge, het standpunt door het Calvinisme in het moreele vraagstuk ingenomen, 60 is het derde of laatste hoofddeel, waarmêe deze lezing over het Calvinisme en de Religie vanzelf den haar gestelden eindpaal bereikt. En dan is wel het eerste, dat ons hier boeit de schijnbare tegenspraak tusschen een Belijdenis, die naar men beweert den zedelijken prikkel geheel afstompt, en een practijk in het leven, die in zedelijken ernst boven de practijk van alle andere religiën uitging. De Antinomiaan en de Puritein, als onkruid en vette tarwe op dezen akker dooreengemengd, maar zoo, dat het aanvankelijk allen schijn heeft, als werd de Antinomiaan logisch uit de Belijdenis geboren, en als kon de Puritein alleen bij gelukkige inconsequentie de warmte van zijn zedelijken ernst tegenover de alles bevriezende kilheid van het dogma der praedestinatie beveiligen. Van Roomsche en Luthersche, van Remonstrantsche en Libertijnsche zijde is het dan ook altoos weer aan het Calvinisme voor de voeten geworpen, dat zijn onverbiddelijk vasthouden aan de absolute voorbeschikking, geculmineerd in de volharding der heiligen, slap in de practijk, ruim in de conscientie, en los in den wandel moest maken. Maar het Calvinisme antwoordt op die klacht niet door redeneering tegenover redeneering, maar door stil en ootmoedig, een wereldbekend feit tegenover zoo valsche Consequenzmacherei te stellen, en vraagt u, wat de overige religiën op het stuk van hoogen levensernst tegen het Puritanisme hebben over te stellen. „Zullen we dan de zonde doen, opdat de genade te meerder worde?” werd door die zelfde Consequenzmacherei reeds aan den heiligen apostel voorgeworpen, en toen in de 16e eeuw de Heidelbergsche Catechismus de vraag had te weerleggen: „Maakt dan deze leer geen zorgelooze en goddelooze menschen?” sprak ook uit deze vraag niets anders dan een repetitie van denzelfden laster. Zeker, het aanhouden, en zelfs koesteren van inwonende zonde, en ten slotte zelfs het Antinomianisme, greep keer op keer de Calvinistische Belijdenis als een schild aan, waarachter het zijn wereldzin verstak, en waarmeê het zijn vleeschelijken lust dekte. Maar zoomin het abstract nastamelen van een belijdenis ooit iets met Religie uitstaande had, zijn deze napraters der Calvinistische Confessie ooit Calvinisten in hun hart geweest. Calvinist in het hart is alleen hij, die persoonlijk in de eigen ziel door de Majesteit van den Almachtige aangegrepen en 61 voor de overweldigende kracht zijner eeuwige Liefde bezwijkend, die majestueuse liefde in het geloof van door Hem uitverkoren te zijn, en Hem alzoo alles te danken te hebben, tegenover Satan en de wereld en den wereldzin van zijn eigen hart belijden dorst; en zulk een kon niet anders dan voor God en zijn Woord beven, en vond in de vreeze des Heeren van zelf het beginsel ook voor zijne levenspractijk. Nomistisch heeft men het Calvinisme deswege genoemd, en het daarom van de soteriologische religiën afgezonderd, doch ten onrechte. Nomistisch is wie door wetsvolbrenging zijn heil verzekeren wil, terwijl het Calvinisme nooit anders dan geheel soteriologisch uit den hoogheiligen persoon van Christus en zijn oneindige verdienste het heil den zondaar doet toevloeien. Maar dit heeft het, dat het den geloovige niet alleen in zijn kerk, maar ook in zijn persoonlijk, huiselijk, maatschappelijk en staatkundig leven voor het aangezichte Gods stelt. God imponeert den Calvinist in heel zijn menschelijk bestaan. Hij is pelgrim, niet als toog hij een wereld door die hem niet aanging, maar pelgrim in dien zin, dat hij op elk punt van den langen weg te rekenen heeft met dien God vol majesteit, die hem aan het einde van den weg opwacht. Voor de poorte die hem den ingang in de eeuwigheid ontsluit, ligt het laatste oordeel, en dat oordeel is een breede, over alles zich uitstrekkende toetsing, of de lange pelgrimsweg, naar den eisch van Gods ordinantiën, en met een hart dat God zoekt, is afgeloopen.

33 Now finally, I come to the fruit of religion in our practical life, or the position taken by Calvinism in the question of morals; — the third and last division, with which this lecture on Calvinism and Religion will naturally conclude.

Here, the first thing that attracts our attention is the apparent contradiction between a confession, which, it is alleged, blunts the edge of moral incentives, and a practice, which, in moral earnestness exceeds the practice of all other religions. The Antinomian and the Puritan seemed to be mingled in this field like tares and wheat, so that at first sight it seemed as though the Antinomian were the logical result of the Calvinistic confession, and as though it were only by a fortunate inconsistency that the Puritan could infuse the warmth of his moral earnestness, into the all congealing chill emanating from the dogma of predestination. Romanists, Lutherans, Remonstrants and Libertines have ever charged against Calvinism that its absolute doctrine of predestination, culminating in the perseverance of saints, must necessarily result in a too easy conscience and a dangerous laxity of morals. But Calvinism answers this charge, not by opposing reasoning against reasoning, but by putting a fact of world-wide reputation over against this false deduction of fictitious consequences. It simply asks : — "What rival moral fruits have other religions to oppose if we point to the high moral earnestness of the Puritans?" "Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound*' is the old diabolical whisper which the evil spirit hurled against the Holy Apostle himself in the childhood of the Christian Church. And when, in the sixteenth century the Heidelburg Catechism had to defend Calvinism against the shameful charge; — "Does not this doctrine lead to caieless and ungodly lives?" Ursinus and Olevianus had to deal with nothing else than the echoing and monotonous repetition of the same old slander. Certainly the ungodly lust to persist in, and even to foster, indwelling sin, yea even Antinomionism itself, again and again abused the 34 Calvinistic confession, seizing it like a shield, to hide the carnal appetites of the unconverted heart. But as little as the mechanical repetition of a written confession had ever anything in common with genuine religion, just so little may the Calvinistic Confession he made responsible for those reverberating stone pillars, echoing Calvin's fomulas, but without a grain of Calvinistic earnestness in their heart. He only is the real Calvinist, and may raise the Calvinistic banner, who in his own soul, personally, has been struck by the Majesty of the Almighty, and yielding to the over powering might of his eternal Love, has dared to proclaim this majestic love, over against Satan, and the world, and the worlclliness of his own heart, in the personal conviction of being chosen by Cod Himself, and therefore of having to thank Him and Him alone, for every grace everlasting. Such an one could not but tremble before the might and the majesty of Cod. as a matter of course accepting His Word as the ruling principle of His conduct in life; — a principle which has led so far that for its strong attachment, to the Scriptures. Calvinism has been censured, as being nnuiiiistic religion, but without any warrant. Nomistic is the appropriate name for a religion which proclaims salvation to be attained by the fulfilment of the law, while Calvinism, on the fother hand, in a thoroughly soteriological sense, never derived salvation but from Christ and the atoning fruit of His merits.

But it remained the special trait of Calvinism that it placed the believer before the face of God, not only in His church, but also in his personal, family, social, and political life. The majesty of God, and the authority of God press upon the Calvinist in the whole of his human existence. He si a pilgrim, not in the sense that he is marching through a world with which he has no concern, but in the sense that at every step of the long way he must remember his responsibility to that God so full of majesty, who awaits him at his journey's end. In front of the Portal which 35 opens for him, on the entrance into Eternity, stands the Last Judgment, and that judgment shall be one broad and comprehensive test, to ascertain whether the long' pilgrimage has been accomplished with a heart that aimed at God's glory, and in accordance with the ordinances of the Most High.

Now finally, I come to the fruit of religion in our practical life, or the position taken by Calvinism in the question of morals; – the third and last division, with which this lecture on Calvinism and Religion will naturally conclude.

Here, the first thing that attracts our attention is the apparent contradiction between a confession, which, it is alleged, blunts the edge of moral incentives, and a practice, which, in moral earnestness exceeds the practice of all other religions. The Antinomian and the Puritan seemed to be mingled in this field like tares and wheat, so that at first sight it seemed as though the Antinomian were the logical result of the Calvinistic confession, and 85 as though it were only by a fortunate inconsistency that the Puritan could infuse the warmth of his moral earnestness into the all-congealing chill emanating from the dogma of predestination. Romanists, Lutherans, Arminians and Libertines have ever charged against Calvinism that its absolute doctrine of predestination, culminating in the perseverance of saints, must necessarily result in a too easy conscience and a dangerous laxity of morals. But Calvinism answers this charge, not by opposing reasoning against reasoning, but by putting a fact of world-wide reputation over against this false deduction of fictitious consequences. It simply asks: – “What rival moral fruits have other religions to oppose if we point to the high moral earnestness of the Puritans?” “Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound” is the old diabolical whisper which the evil spirit hurled against the Holy Apostle himself in the childhood of the Christian Church. And when, in the sixteenth century the Heidelberg Catechism had to defend Calvinism against the shameful charge: – “Does not this doctrine lead to careless and ungodly lives?”. Ursinus and Olevianus had to deal with nothing less than the echoing and monotonous repetition of the same old slander. Certainly the ungodly lust to persist in, and even to foster, indwelling sin, yea, even Antinomianism itself, again and again abused the Calvinistic confession, seizing it like a shield, to hide the carnal appetites of the unconverted heart. But as little as the mechanical repetition of a written confession had ever anything in common with genuine religion, just so little may the Calvinistic Confession be made responsible for those reverberating 86 stone pillars, echoing Calvin’s formulae, but without a grain of Calvinistic earnestness in their heart. He only is the real Calvinist, and may raise the Calvinistic banner, who in his own soul, personally, has been struck by the Majesty of the Almighty, and yielding to the overpowering might of his eternal Love, has dared to proclaim this majestic love, over against Satan and the world, and the worldliness of his own heart, in the personal conviction of being chosen by God Himself, and therefore of having to thank Him and Him alone, for every grace everlasting. Such a one could not but tremble before the might and the majesty of God, as a matter of course accepting His Word as the ruling principle of His conduct in life; – a principle which has led so far that for its strong attachment to the Scriptures, Calvinism has been censured as being a nomistic religion, but without any warrant. Nomistic is the appropriate name for a religion which proclaims salvation to be attained by the fulfilment of the law, while Calvinism, on the other hand, in a thoroughly soteriological sense, never derived salvation but from Christ and the atoning fruit of His merits.

But it remained the special trait of Calvinism that it placed the believer before the face of God, not only in His church, but also in his personal, family, social, and political life. The majesty of God, and the authority of God press upon the Calvinist in the whole of his human existence. He is a pilgrim, not in the sense that he is marching through a world with which he has no concern, but in the sense that at every step of the long way he must remember his responsibility to that God 87 so full of majesty, Who awaits him at his journey’s end. In front of the Portal which opens for him, on the entrance into Eternity, stands the Last Judgment; and that judgment shall be one broad and comprehensive test, to ascertain whether the long pilgrimage has been accomplished with a heart that aimed at God’s glory, and in accordance with the ordinances of the Most High.

Finalmente, vou para o fruto da religião em nossa vida prática, ou a posição tomada pelo Calvinismo nas questões de moral, - a terceira e última divisão, com a qual esta palestra sobre o Calvinismo e Religião naturalmente concluirá.

Aqui, a primeira coisa que chama nossa atenção é a aparente contradição entre uma confissão que é alegada, embota o corte dos incentivos morais, e uma prática que na seriedade moral excede a prática de todas as outras religiões. O Antinominiano e o Puritano pareciam estar misturados neste campo como joio e trigo, de modo que, a primeira vista, parecia que o Antinominiano era o resultado lógico da confissão calvinista, e como se fosse apenas por uma feliz inconsistência que o Puritano poderia infundir o ardor de sua seriedade moral na frieza congelante que emana do dogma da predestinação. Romanistas, Luteranos, Arminianos e Libertinos sempre têm acusado o Calvinismo de que sua doutrina da absoluta predestinação, culminando na perseverança dos santos, necessariamente deve resultar numa consciência muito condescendente e num perigoso descuido moral. Mas, o Calvinismo responde esta acusação não opondo razão contra razão, mas colocando um fato de reputação mundial em contraste com esta falsa dedução de conseqüências fictícias. Ele simplesmente pergunta: “Quais frutos morais rivais as outras religiões têm para contrapor, se nós apontamos para a alta seriedade moral dos Puritanos?” “Continuaremos em pecado para que a graça possa abundar” é o velho sussurro diabólico que o espírito maligno proferiu contra o próprio Santo Apóstolo na infância da Igreja Cristã. E quando, no décimo sexto século o Catecismo de Heidelberg foi obrigado a defender o Calvinismo contra a vergonhosa acusação: “Esta doutrina não conduz a vidas descuidadas e ímpias?” Ursino e Oleviano tiveram de lidar com nada menos do que a repetição ecoante e monótona da mesma velha calúnia. Certamente a luxúria ímpia insiste em viver em pecado, e até mesmo a fomentar tal vida, além disso, até mesmo o próprio Antinominianismo, muitas vezes, abusou da confissão calvinista, aproveitando-se dela como um escudo, para esconder os apetites carnais do coração não convertido. Mas, assim como a repetição mecânica de uma confissão escrita sempre tem algo tão pouco em comum com a genuína religião, assim também a Confissão calvinista pode ser feita muito pouco responsável por aqueles reverberantes pilares de pedra que ecoam a fórmula de Calvino, mas sem uma única partícula da seriedade calvinista em seu coração.

Somente é verdadeiro calvinista e pode levantar a bandeira calvinista, aquele que em sua própria alma, pessoalmente, tem sido tocado pela Majestade do Altíssimo, e submisso ao poder esmagador de seu amor eterno tem ousado proclamar este amor majestoso em oposição a Satanás, ao mundo e o mundanismo de seu próprio coração, na convicção pessoal de ser escolhido pelo próprio Deus e, portanto, devendo agradecer a ele e a ele somente por toda graça eterna. Tal pessoa não poderia senão temer diante do poder e da majestade de Deus, naturalmente aceitando sua Palavra como o princípio regulador de sua conduta na vida – por seu forte apego às Escrituras, um princípio que até agora o tem guiado, o Calvinismo tem sido censurado como sendo uma religião nomista, mas sem qualquer razão. Nomista é o nome apropriado para uma religião que proclama que a salvação é alcançada pelo cumprimento da lei, enquanto que o Calvinismo, por outro lado, num sentido completamente soteriológico, nunca derivou a salvação senão de Cristo e a expiação como fruto de seus méritos.

Porém, permaneceu a característica especial do Calvinismo que colocou o crente diante da face de Deus, não apenas em sua igreja, mas também em sua vida pessoal, familiar, social e política. A majestade e a autoridade de Deus exercem pressão sobre o calvinista no todo de sua existência humana. Ele é um peregrino, não no sentido que está marchando através de um mundo com o qual não tem relação, mas no sentido que, a cada passo do longo caminho, deve lembrar-se de sua responsabilidade para com aquele Deus tão cheio de majestade que o espera no fim de sua jornada. Em frente ao Portal que se abre para ele, na entrada da Eternidade, está o Último Julgamento; e este julgamento será um teste amplo e compreensivo para verificar se a longa peregrinação foi completada com um coração que visou a glória de Deus, e de acordo com as ordenanças do Altíssimo.

В завершение я перейду к плодам религии в нашей практической жизни, или к нравственной позиции кальвинизма, — третьему и последнему разделу, которым эта лекция естественным образом завершится.

Первая особенность, привлекающая наше внимание, — видимое противоречие между исповеданием, которое, как говорят, притупляет стремление к нравственному совершенствованию, и реальной жизнью, которая по своему серьезному отношению к нравственности превосходит все остальные религии. Антиномиане и пуритане перемешаны на этом поле, словно плевелы и пшеница, так что на первый взгляд кажется, что антиномианство — логическое следствие кальвинистского исповедания, и что лишь по счастливой непоследовательности пуритане смогли вдохнуть теплоту своей нравственной серьезности в замораживающий все холод, истекающий из догмы о предопределении. Католики, лютеране, арминиане и либертинцы всегда обвиняли кальвинизм в том, что доктрина абсолютного предопределения, достигающая кульминации в неотступности святых, должна неизбежно вести к ослаблению совести и пренебрежению нравственными требованиями. Кальвинизм не отвечает аргументом на аргумент, а демонстрирует свою известную всему миру репутацию, противоречащую ошибочно выведенным следствиям. Он просто спрашивает: «Какие плоды могут противопоставить нам другие религии, если мы укажем на высокую нравственность пуритан?» «Будем ли пребывать в грехе, чтобы изобиловала благодать?!» — старая уловка беса, которую злой дух нашептывал самому апостолу во времена младенчества Церкви. Когда в XVI столетии Гейдельбергский катехизис должен был защищать кальвинизм от позорного обвинения в том, что это учение «ведет к беспечности и безбожной жизни», то Урсин и Олевиан должны были иметь дело лишь с непрестанным повторением той же старой клеветы. Конечно, нечестивое стремление упорствовать в грехе и даже лелеять его, более того — даже сам антиномианизм снова и снова злоупотребляют кальвинистским вероисповеданием, прикрывая им, как щитом, плотские желания необращенного сердца. Но как механическое повторение написанного исповедания имеет мало общего с подлинной религией, так и кальвинистское исповедание не отвечает за тех, кто повторяет формулы Кальвина, но не имеет в сердце и зернышка кальвинистской серьезности. Истинный кальвинист, имеющий право поднять кальвинистское знамя, — лишь тот, кто лично, в собственной душе, был поражен величием Божиим и, уступая всепреодолевающей мощи Его вечной любви, посмел провозгласить эту могущественную любовь против сатаны и мира, и обмирщения своего собственного сердца, глубоко веря, что он избран Самим Богом, и потому должен благодарить Его одного за эту вечную благодать. Такой человек непременно трепещет перед мощью и величием Божиим и, само собой разумеется, руководствуется Его Словом в жизни. Это привело к тому, что из-за его приверженности Писанию кальвинизм назвали без какого-либо основания законнической религией. Это применимо к религии, провозглашающей, что спасение должно достигаться исполнением закона, а кальвинизм, наоборот, всегда считал, что спасение — только от Христа, как искупительный плод Его заслуг.

Особая черта кальвинизма — то, что он помещает верующего перед лицом Божиим не только в Церкви, но и в личной, семейной, общественной и политической жизни. Величие Божие и авторитет Бога влияют на кальвиниста во всей его земной жизни. Он — странник, не в том смысле, что он проходит по миру, до которого ему нет дела, а в том, что на каждом шагу своего долгого пути он должен помнить о своей ответственности перед исполненным величия Богом, Который ждет его в конце странствий. Перед вратами, открывающимися ему при входе в Вечность, предстоит Последний Суд, и это всеохватное и всеобъемлющее испытание покажет, совершал ли он странствие, сердечно желая славы Божией и повинуясь установлениям Всевышнего.

Wat nu is voor den Calvinist het geloof in die ordinantiën Gods? Niets anders dan de onwrikbaar in het hart gefundeerde overtuiging, dat alle leven eerst door God uitgedacht, en eerst daarna door God verwezenlijkt is, en dat deswege in alle geschapen leven een van God voor dat leven bestelde wet ligt. Geen leven buiten u in de natuur, of in dat leven ordeningen, die men thans natuurwetten noemt, een woord dat we aannemen, mits er niet wetten van de natuur, maar wetten voor de natuur onder verstaan worden. Evenzoo ordeningen des hemels voor het firmament boven, en ordeningen der aarde beneden, waardoor die aarde staan blijft, omdat, gelijk de Psalmist zegt, die ordeningen Gods knechten zijn. Alzoo dus ook ordeningen Gods voor mijn lichaam, voor het bloed dat 62 door mijn aderen stroomt en voor de ademhaling der longen. En zoo voortgaande, ordeningen Gods voor mijn denken in de logica, ordeningen Gods in mijn verbeeldingsleven op aesthetisch terrein, en zoo ook ordeningen, ordinantiën Gods voor alle menschelijk leven op zedelijk gebied. Niet enkele summiere, algemeene geboden, die het concrete telkens aan mij zelven ter beslissing overlaten, maar gelijk Gods ordinantie even goed den loop der kleinste asteroïde als den stand der machtigste zonnen beheerscht, zoo ook Gods ordinantiën op zedelijk terrein tot in het kleinste en bijzonderste afdalend, en mij aanzeggend hoe God het wil. En die ordinantiën Gods in de machtigste vraagstukken en in de schijnbaar nietigste levensuitingen op mij aandringend, niet als artikelen van een wetboek, niet als regelen, die ik uit een boek lees, niet als een codificatie van het leven, die ook maar één oogenblik buiten God autoriteit en vastigheid zou bezitten, maar als de constante wil van den alomtegenwoordigen en almachtigen God, die op elk gegeven oogenblik het zoo verordent, het zoo bestelt, en met die zedelijke bepaling op mij aandringt. Niet als Kant klimt de Calvinist redeneerend uit het Du sollst tot het denkbeeld van een wetgever op; maar omdat hij voor God staat, God voelt in heel zijn existentie, dáárom beluistert hij dat Du sollst, dat in de natuur, in zijn lichaam, in zijn denkend, en zoo ook in zijn handelend bestaan, telkens rechtstreeks van dien God naar hem uitgaat. En naar die ordinantiën voegt hij zich, niet uit dwang, niet als waren ze hem een juk, dat hij van zich af zou willen schudden, maar met diezelfde gewaarwording waarmeê ge een gids volgt in een u onbekend land, inziende dat hij den weg weet en gij niet, en dat uit dien hoofde, hem te volgen alleen veilig is. Gelijk ge bij gestoorde ademhaling alles inspant, om de ademhaling weer normaal, d.i. naar Gods ordinantie te maken, en u verruimd gevoelt als dit u gelukt, zoo ook streeft de geloovige bij elke stoornis in zijn zedelijk leven er naar, om ijlings weer de geestelijke ademhaling, die naar de geboden Gods is, te herstellen, omdat hij zich dan eerst weer vrij gevoelt, en weet dat hij vooruit kan. Van een onderscheid tusschen gewone en Christelijke geboden weet hij daarom niet. Verbeeld u, God zou het eerst anders gewild hebben en nu in Christus zoo. Alsof Hij niet de eeuwig Onveranderlijke 63 ware, die van de ure der schepping af en tot in alle eeuwigheid een zelfde vaste, zedelijke wereldorde gewild en gemainteneerd heeft. Zeker, de Christus heeft het stof waarmede de zonde die wereldorde bedekt had, er afgevaagd en ze weer in haar oorspronkelijke reinheid voor ons doen schitteren. De Christus heeft de eeuwige Liefde Gods die in deze wereldorde spreekt, weer voor ons blootgelegd. Bovenal de Christus sterkt ons het vermogen om in die wereldorde te wandelen. Maar die wereldorde zelve blijft, voor als na, wat ze van den aanbeginne was, en geldt niet alleen voor den geloovige, alsof de ongeloovige met minder volstaan kon, maar geldt voor al wat mensch heet in alle menschelijke verwikkeling.

Hier dus geen philosopheren over een dusgenaamd zedelijk leven, alsof wij dit hadden uit te vinden en te regelen, maar een zich stellen onder den indruk van Gods Majesteit en onder de majesteit van zijn ordinantie en gebod. Vandaar alle ethische studie voor den Calvinist gebaseerd op de wet van Sinaï, niet alsof toen pas, en toen nieuw, de zedelijke wereldorde geschapen was, maar om in die wet van Sinaï de authentieke uitdrukking te eeren van wat God den mensch, toen Hij hem schiep, in het hart schreef, en in zijn bekeering weer grift op de tafelen van datzelfde hart. Aansluiting alzoo aan de conscientie niet als aan een individueelen wetgever, die een ieder apart in zich omdraagt, maar als aan een rechtstreekschen sensus divinitatis, waardoor God zelf ons in ons binnenste prikkelt en aan zijn oordeel onderwerpt. Niet de religie afzonderlijk met haar dogmatiek, en daarnaast als een tweede iets ons zedelijk leven met een ethiek, maar de religie ons voor God stellend en die God ons van zijn heiligen wil doordringend. Liefde en aanbidding zelf het motief voor alle geestelijke handeing, en aldus de vreeze Gods als een realiteit in heel het leven ingedragen, in gezin en maatschappij, in wetenschap en kunst, in het persoonlijk en in het staatkundig leven. Een verloste, die bij alle ding en in alle levenskeus zich eeniglijk laat beheerschen door een hem diep ontroerenden eerbied voor den steeds hem presenten en hem gadeslaanden God, ziedaar de echte Calvinist. Altoos en in alle ding de diepste, de heiligste eerbied voor den altoos tegenwoordigen God, als richtsnoer van het leven, ziedaar u het beeld geteekend van den oorspronkelijken Puritein. 64 Wereldschuwheid is nooit zijn kenmerk, maar het parool van den Anabaptist geweest. Het Doopersche dogma van de „Mijdinghe,” bewijst dit. Dualistisch staan dan, naar luid van dat dogma, de „heiligen” tegen de wereld over. Ze zweren geen eed, ze gaan in geen krijgsdienst, alle magistratuur wijzen ze af. Hunner is hier reeds een nieuwe wereld, die met deze oude wereld niets uitstaande heeft. Alle verplichting jegens, alle verantwoordelijkheid voor die oude wereld schudden ze van zich af, en mijden haar stelselmatig uit vreeze voor bezoedeling en besmetting. Maar dit juist betwist en ontkent de Calvinist. Er zijn geen twee werelden, die als de booze en de goede wereld in elkaar worden geschoven. Het is een en dezelfde persoon, dien God recht schiep, die daarna viel en zondaar werd, en het is die oude zondaar die herboren wordt en ingaat ten eeuwigen leven. En zoo ook is het één en dezelfde wereld, die eens het Paradijs droeg, sinds met den vloek overtogen, en door algemeene genade in stand werd gehouden, die nu door Christus verzoend en gered is, en die straks door den wereldbrand henen, haar staat van heerlijkheid tegemoet gaat. Juist daarom echter kan de Calvinist zich niet in zijn kerk opsluiten, om de wereld er aan te geven, maar is het veeleer zijn verhoogde roeping, om die wereld naar Gods bestel op het hoogst te ontwikkelen, en te midden van die wereld al wat voor menschelijk eerbaar geldt, lieflijk is en wel luidt, om Gods wille hoog te houden. Ge ziet daarom in de historie, hoe, om nu van mijn eigen voorvaderen te mogen spreken, de Calvinisten nauwelijk het vierde eener eeuw in de Nederlanden vasten voet kregen, of er ritselt leven naar alle kant, er bruist ontembare energie op elk gebied van menschelijke handeling, en hun scheepvaart en handel, hun ambachts- en fabriekwezen, hun land- en tuinbouw, hun kunst en wetenschap bloeit op met eertijds ongekenden luister en geeft aan heel West-Europa den stoot tot een geheel nieuwe ontwikkeling van het menschelijk leven.

What now does the Calvinist mean by his faith in the ordinances of God? Nothing less than the firmly rooted conviction that all life has first been in the thoughts of God, before it came to be realized in Creation. Hence all created life necessarily bears in itself a law for its existence, instituted by God Himself. There is no life outside us in Nature, without such divine ordinances,— ordinances which which are called the laws of Nature ; — a term which we are willing to accept, provided we understand thereby, not laws originating from Nature, but laws imposed upon Nature. So, there are ordinances of Heaven for the firmament above, and ordinances for the earth below, by means (if which this world is maintained, and, as the Psalmist says, these ordinances are the servants of God. Consequently there are ordinances of God for our bodies, for the blood that courses through our arteries, and veins, and for our lungs as the organs of respiration. And even so are there ordinances of God, in Logic, to regulate our thoughts; ordinances of God for our imagination, in the domain of aesthetics; and so, also, strict ordinances of God for the whole of human life in the domain of moral*. Not moral ordinances in the sense of summary general laws, which leave the decision in concrete and detailed instances to ourselves, but just as the ordinance of God determines the course of the smallest asteroid, as well as the orbit of the mightiest star, so also these moral ordinances of God descend to the smallest and most particular details, stating to us what in every case is to be considered as the will of God.

And those ordinance- of God, ruling both the mightiest problems and the smallest trifles, are urged upon us, 36 not like the statutes of a law book, not like rules which may be read from paper, not like a codification of life, which could even for a single moment, exercise any authority of itself, — but they are urged upon us as the constant will of the omnipresent and almighty God, who at every instant is determining the course of life, ordaining its laws, and continually binding us by His moral authority. The Calvinist does not, like Kant, ascend in his reasoning from the "Da So/is/" (Thou shalt) to the idea of a lawgiver, but, because he stands before the face of God, because he sees God, and walks with God, and feels God in the whole of his being and existence, therefore he cannot withdraw his ear from that never silenced "Thou sfialt", which proceeds continually from his God, in Nature, in his body, in his reason, and in his action.

Thence it follows that he adjusts himself to these ordinances not by force, as though they were a yoke of which he would like to rid himself, but with the same readiness with which we follow a guide through the desert, recognizing that ice are ignorant of the path, which the guide knows, and therefore acknowledging that there is no safety but in closely following in his footsteps. When our respiration is disturbed, we try irresistibly and immediately to remove the disturbance, and to make it normal again, i. e. to restore it, b} r bringing it again into accordance with the ordinances which God has given for man's respiration. To succeed in this gives us a feeling of unspeakable relief. Just so, in every disturbance of the moral life the believer has to strive as speedily as possible to restore his spiritual respiration, according to the moral commands of his God, because only after this restoration can the inward life again thrive freely in his soul, and renewed energetic action become possible. Therefore every distinction between general moral ordinances, and more special christian commandments is unknown to him. Can we imagine that at one time God willed to rule things in a certain moral 37 order, but that now, in Christ, He wills to rule it otherwise? As though He were not the Eternal, the Unchangeable, who, from the hour of creation even unto all eternity had willed, wills, and shall will and maintain one and the same firm moral world-order! Verily Christ has swept away the dust with which our sinful limitations had covered up this world-order, and has made it glitter again in its original brilliancy.

Verily Christ and He alone has disclosed to us the eternal love of God, which was, from the beginning; the movingprinciple of this world order. Above all, Christ has strengthened in us the ability to walk in this world order with a firm, unfaltering step. But the world-order itself remains just what it was from the beginning. It lays full claim, not only to the believer (as though less were required from the unbeliever), but to every human being and to all human relationships. Hence Calvinism does not lead us to philosophize on a so-called moral life, as though ice had to create, to discover, or to regulate this life. Calvinism simply places us under the impress of the majesty of God, and subjects us to His eternal ordinances and unchangeable commandments. Hence it is that, for the Calvin ist, all ethical study is based on the Law of Sinai, not as though at that time the moral world-order began to be fixed, but to honour the Law of Sinai, as the divinely authentic summary of that original moral law which God wrote in the heart of man, at his creation, and which God is re-writing on the tables of every heart at its conversion. The Calvinist is led to submit himself to the conscience, not as to an individual lawgiver, which every person carries about in himself, but as to a direct sensus divinitatis, through which God Himself stirs up the inner man, and subjects him to His judgment. He does not hold to religion, with its dogmatics, as a separate entity, and then place his moral life with its ethics as a second entity alongside of religion, but he holds to religion, as placing him in the presence of 38 God, Himself, Who thereby embues him with His divine will. Love, and adoration are, to Calvin, themselves the motives of every spiritual activity, and thus the fear of God is imparted to the whole of life as a reality, — into the family, and into society, into science and art, into personal lie, and into the political career. A redeemed man who in all things and in all the choices of life is controlled solely by the most searching, and heart-stirring reverence for a God who is ever present to his consciousness, and who ever holds him in his eye: — thus does the Calvinistic type present itself in history. Always and in all things the deepest, the most sacred reverence for the ever present God as the rule of life, — this is the only true picture of the original Puritan. The avoidance of the world has never been the Calvinistic mark, but the shibboleth of the Anabaptist. The specific, anabaptistical Dogma on "avoidance" proves this. According to this dogma, tin: Anal taptists, announcing themselves as "saints", were severed from the world. They stood in opposition to the world. They refused to take the oath; they abhorred all military service; they condemned the holding of public offices. Here already, they shaped a new world, in the midst of a worldof sin, but which had nothing to do with this present world. They rejected all obligation and responsibility towards the old world, and they avoided it systematically, for fear of contamination, and contagion. But this is just what the Calvinist always disputed and denied. It is not true that there are two worlds, a bad one and a good, which are fitted into each other. It is one and the same person whom God created perfect and who afterwards fell, and became a sinner; — and it is this same "ego" of the old sinner who is born again, and who enters into eternal life. So, also, it is one and the same world which once exhibited all the glory of Paradise, which was afterwards smitten with the curse, and which, since the Fall, is upheld by common grace ;— which has now been redeemed and saved by Christ, in its centre, and which 39 shall pass through the horror of the judgment into the state of glory. For this very reason, however, the Calvinist cannot shut himself up in his church and ahandon the world to its fate. He feels, rather, his high calling to push the development of this world to an even higher stage, and to do this in constant accordance with God's ordinance, for the sake of God, upholding, in the midst of so much painful corruption, everything that is honourable, lovely, and of good report among men. Therefore it is that we see in History (if I may be permitted to speak of my own ancestors), that scarcely had Calvinism been firmly established in the Netherlands for a quarter of a century, when there was a rustling of life in all directions, and an indomitable energy was fermenting in every department of human activity, and their commerce and trade, their handicrafts and industry, their agriculture and horticulture, their art and science, flourished with a brilliancy previously unknown, and imparting a new impulse for an entirely new development of life, to the whole of Western Europe.

What now does the Calvinist mean by his faith in the ordinances of God? Nothing less than the firmly rooted conviction that all life has first been in the thoughts of God, before it came to be realized in Creation. Hence all created life necessarily bears in itself a law for its existence, instituted by God Himself. There is no life outside us in Nature, without such divine ordinances, – ordinances which are called the laws of Nature; – a term which we are willing to accept, provided we understand thereby, not laws originating from Nature, but laws imposed upon Nature. So, there are ordinances of God for the firmament above, and ordinances for the earth below, by means of which this world is maintained, and, as the Psalmist says, These ordinances are the servants of God. Consequently, there are ordinances of God for our bodies, for the blood that courses through our arteries and veins, and for our lungs as the organs of respiration. And even so are there ordinances of God, in logic, to regulate our thoughts; ordinances of God for our imagination, in the domain of aesthetics; and so, also, strict ordinances of God for the whole of human life in the domain of morals. Not moral ordinances in the sense of summary general laws, which leave the decision in concrete and detailed instances to 88 ourselves, but just as the ordinance of God determines the course of the smallest asteroid, as well as the orbit of the mightiest star, so also these moral ordinances of God descend to the smallest and most particular details, stating to us what in every case is to be considered as the will of God. And those ordinances of God, ruling both the mightiest problems and the smallest trifles, are urged upon us, not like the statutes of a law-book, not like rules which may be read from paper, not like a codification of life, which could even for a single moment, exercise any authority of itself, – but they are urged upon us as the constant will of the Omnipresent and Almighty God, who at every instant is determining the course of life, ordaining its laws and continually binding us by His divine authority. The Calvinist does not, like Kant, ascend in his reasoning from the “Du sollst” (Thou shalt) to the idea of a lawgiver, but, because he stands before the face of God, because he sees God, and walks with God, and feels God in the whole of his being and existence, therefore he cannot withdraw his ear from that never silenced “Thou shalt”, which proceeds continually from his God, in nature, in his body, in his reason, and in his action.

Thence it follows that the true Calvinist adjusts himself to these ordinances not by force, as though they were a yoke of which he would like to rid himself, but with the same readiness with which we follow a guide through the desert, recognizing that we are ignorant of the path, which the guide knows, and therefore acknowledging that there is no safety but in closely following in his footsteps. When our respiration is disturbed, we 89 try irresistibly and immediately to remove the disturbance, and to make it normal again, i.e., to restore it, by bringing it again into accordance with the ordinances which God has given for man’s respiration. To succeed in this gives us a feeling of unspeakable relief. Just so, in every disturbance of the normal life the believer has to strive as speedily as possible to restore his spiritual respiration, according to the moral commands of his God, because only after this restoration cam the inward life again thrive freely in his soul, and renewed energetic action become possible. Therefore every distinction between general moral ordinances, and more special christian commandments is unknown to him. Can we imagine that at one time God willed to rule things in a certain moral order, but that now, in Christ, He wills to rule it otherwise? As though He were not the Eternal, the Unchangeable, Who, from the very hour of creation, even unto all eternity, had willed, wills, and shall will and maintain, one and the same firm moral world-order! Verily Christ has swept away the dust with which man’s sinful limitations had covered up this world-order, and has made it glitter again in its original brilliancy. Verily Christ, and He alone, has disclosed to us the eternal love of God, which was, from the beginning, the moving principle of this world-order. Above all, Christ has strengthened in us the ability to walk in this world-order with a firm, unfaltering step. But the world-order itself remains just what it was from the beginning. It lays full claim, not only to the believer (as though less were required from the unbeliever), but to every human being and to all human 90 relationships. Hence Calvinism does not lead us to philosophize on a so-called moral life, as though we had to create, to discover, or to regulate this life. Calvinism simply places us under the impress of the majesty of God, and subjects us to His eternal ordinances and unchangeable commandments. Hence it is that, for the Calvinist, all ethical study is based on the Law of Sinai, not as though at that time the moral world-order began to be fixed, but to honor the Law of Sinai, as the divinely authentic summary of that original moral law which God wrote in the heart of man, at his creation, and which God is re-writing on the tables of every heart at its conversion. The Calvinist is led to submit himself to the conscience, not as to an individual lawgiver, which every person carries about in himself, but as to a direct sensus divinitatis, through which God Himself stirs up the inner man, and subjects him to His judgment. He does not hold to religion, with its dogmatics, as a separate entity, and then place his moral life with its ethics as a second entity alongside of religion, but he holds to religion as placing him in the presence of God Himself, Who thereby embues him with His divine will. Love and adoration are, to Calvin, themselves the motives of every spiritual activity, and thus the fear of God is imparted to the whole of life as a reality, – into the family, and into society, into science and art, into personal life, and into the political career. A redeemed man who in all things and in all the choices of life is controlled solely by the most searching and heart-stirring reverence for a God Who is ever present to his consciousness, and Who ever holds him in His 91 eye; – thus does the Calvinistic type present itself in history. Always and in all things the deepest, the most sacred reverence for the ever-present God as the rule of life, – this is the only true picture of the original Puritan.

The avoidance of the world has never been the Calvinistic mark, but the shibboleth of the Anabaptist. The specific, anabaptistical dogma of “avoidance” proves this. According to this dogma, the Anabaptists, announcing themselves as “saints”, were severed from the world They stood in opposition to it. They refused to take the oath; they abhorred all military service; they condemned the holding of public offices. Here already, they shaped a new world, in the midst of this world of sin, which however had nothing to do with this our present existence. They rejected all obligation and responsibility towards the old world, and they avoided it systematically, for fear of contamination, and contagion. But this is just what the Calvinist always disputed and denied. It is not true that there are two worlds, a bad one and a good, which are fitted into each other. It is one and the same person whom God created perfect and who afterwards fell, and became a sinner; – and it is this same “ego” of the old sinner who is born again, and who enters into eternal life. So, also, it is one and the same world which once exhibited all the glory of Paradise, which was afterwards smitten with the curse, and which, since the Fall, is upheld by common grace; which has now been redeemed and saved by Christ, in its center, and which shall pass through the horror of the judgment into the state of glory. For 92 this very reason the Calvinist cannot shut himself up in his church and abandon the world to its fate. He feels, rather, his high calling to push the development of this world to an even higher stage, and to do this in constant accordance with God’s ordinance, for the sake of God, upholding, in the midst of so much painful corruption, everything that is honorable, lovely, and of good report among men. Therefore it is that we see in History (if I may be permitted to speak of my own ancestors) that scarcely had Calvinism been firmly established in the Netherlands for a quarter of a century when there was a rustling of life in all directions, and an indomitable energy was fermenting in every department of human activity, and their commerce and trade, their handicrafts and industry, their agriculture and horticulture, their art and science, flourished with a brilliancy previously unknown, and imparted a new impulse for an entirely new development of life, to the whole of Western Europe.

O que então o Calvinismo quer dizer por sua fé nas ordenanças de Deus? Nada menos que a convicção firmemente enraizada de que toda vida tem estado primeiro nos pensamentos de Deus, antes de vir a ser realizada na Criação. Por isso, toda vida criada necessariamente traz em si mesma uma lei para sua existência, instituída pelo próprio Deus. Não há vida na Natureza exterior a nós sem tais ordenanças divinas, - ordenanças que são chamadas de leis da Natureza - um termo que estamos dispostos a aceitar, desde que entendamos com isso, não as leis que se originam da Natureza, mas as leis impostas sobre a Natureza. Assim, há ordenanças de Deus para o firmamento acima e ordenanças para a terra em baixo, por meio das quais este mundo é sustentado e, como o Salmista diz: Estas ordenanças são servas de Deus. Conseqüentemente há ordenanças de Deus para nossos corpos, para o sangue que corre através de nossas artérias e veias, e para nossos pulmões como o órgão de respiração. E assim, logicamente, há ordenanças de Deus para regular nossos pensamentos; ordenanças de Deus para nossa imaginação no campo da estética; e também, ordenanças estritas de Deus para toda a vida humana no campo da moral. Não ordenanças morais no sentido de sumário de leis em geral, que deixam para nós mesmos a decisão nas instâncias concreta e detalhada. Mas, assim como a ordenança de Deus determina o curso do menor asteróide tanto quanto a órbita do astro mais poderoso, do mesmo modo, estas ordenanças morais de Deus descem aos menores e mais particulares detalhes, declarando para nós o que em cada caso deve ser considerado como a vontade de Deus.

Estas ordenanças de Deus que governam tanto os problemas mais poderosos quanto os mais insignificantes são impelidas sobre nós, não como os estatutos de um livro de lei, nem como regras que podem ser lidas em papel, nem como uma codificação de vida, que poderiam até mesmo por um momento exercer qualquer autoridade por si mesmos – mas são impelidas sobre nós como a contínua vontade do Onipresente e Todo-Poderoso Deus, que a cada instante está determinando o curso da vida, ordenando suas leis e continuamente restringindo-nos por sua autoridade divina. O calvinista não sobe, como Kant, de seu raciocínio do “Du sollst” (Tu deves) para a idéia de um legislador, mas, porque ele está diante da face de Deus, porque vê a Deus, anda com Deus e sente Deus no todo de seu ser e existência, por isso não pode afastar seu ouvido daquele nunca silenciado “Tu deves”, que procede continuamente de seu Deus, na natureza, em seu corpo, em sua razão, e em sua ação.

Portanto, segue-se que o verdadeiro calvinista ajusta-se a estas ordenanças não por força, como se elas fossem um jugo do qual ele gostaria de livrar-se, mas com a mesma prontidão com que seguimos um guia pelo deserto, reconhecendo que nós somos ignorantes sobre o caminho, o qual o guia conhece e, portanto, reconhecendo que não há salvação senão em seguir suas pegadas de perto. Quando nossa respiração é interrompida, tentamos irresistível e imediatamente remover a interrupção e torná-la normal de novo, i.e., restaurá-la, trazendo-a novamente de acordo com as ordenanças que Deus tem dado para a respiração do homem. Ser bem-sucedido nisto dá-nos um sentimento inexprimível de alívio. Do mesmo modo, em toda interrupção da vida normal o crente deve esforçar-se, tão rapidamente quanto possível, para restaurar sua respiração espiritual conforme as ordens morais de seu Deus, porque somente depois desta restauração a vida interior pode novamente prosperar livremente em sua alma, e torna-se possível uma renovada ação energética. Portanto, toda distinção entre ordenanças morais gerais e mandamentos cristãos mais especiais é desconhecido para ele. Podemos imaginar que antigamente Deus desejou governar coisas numa certa ordem moral, mas que agora, em Cristo, ele deseja governá-las de outra maneira? Como se ele não fosse o Eterno, o Imutável, que, desde o momento da criação, por toda eternidade, desejou, deseja e desejará e manterá uma e a mesma constante ordem mundial moral!

Na verdade, Cristo tem varrido para longe a poeira com que as limitações pecaminosas do homem tem coberto esta ordem mundial, e a tem feito brilhar novamente em seu resplendor original. Verdadeiramente, Cristo, e somente ele, tem revelado para nós o amor eterno do Cristo que foi, desde o começo, o princípio motor desta ordem mundial. Acima de tudo, Cristo tem fortalecido em nós a habilidade para andar nesta ordem mundial com um passo constante, firme. Mas a própria ordem mundial continua exatamente o que era desde o princípio. Ela apresenta plena reivindicação, não somente para o crente (como se fosse exigido menos do incrédulo), mas para cada ser humano e para todos os relacionamentos humanos. Por isso, o Calvinismo não nos leva a filosofar sobre a assim chamada vida moral, como se nós tivéssemos de criar, descobrir ou regulamentar esta vida. O Calvinismo simplesmente coloca-nos sob a impressão da majestade de Deus, e sujeita-nos a suas ordenanças eternas e mandamentos imutáveis. Por isso é que, para o calvinista, todo estudo ético está baseado na Lei do Sinai, não como se naquele tempo a ordem mundial moral começasse a ser fixada, mas para honrar a Lei do Sinai como o resumo divinamente autenticado daquela lei moral original que Deus escreveu no coração do homem, quando de sua criação, e que Deus está rescrevendo nas tábuas de cada coração quando de sua conversão.

O calvinista é levado a submeter-se à consciência, não como a um legislador individual que cada pessoa carrega em si, mas como a um direto sensus divinitatis, através do qual o próprio Deus desperta o homem interior e o sujeita a seu julgamento. Ele não impõe a religião com sua dogmática como uma entidade separada, e então coloca sua vida moral com sua ética como uma segunda entidade ao lado da religião, mas impõe a religião como colocando-a na presença do próprio Deus, que com isso o inspira com sua vontade divina. Para Calvino, o amor e a adoração são os próprios motivos de toda atividade espiritual, e assim o temor de Deus é conferido à vida toda como uma realidade – na família e na sociedade, na ciência e na arte, na vida pessoal e na carreira política. Um homem redimido que em todas as coisas e em todas as escolhas da vida é controlado somente pela mais penetrante e vibrante reverência do coração por um Deus que está sempre presente em sua consciência, e que sempre o mantém em seus olhos – assim apresenta-se o tipo calvinista na História. Sempre e em todas as coisas a mais profunda, a mais sagrada reverência pelo Deus sempre presente como uma regra de vida – esta é a verdadeira imagem do Puritano original.

A anulação do mundo nunca foi a marca calvinista, mas o lema do Anabatista. O específico dogma anabatista da “anulação” prova isto. Segundo este dogma, os Anabatistas, anunciando-se como “santos”, estavam separados do mundo. Eles colocaram-se em oposição a ele. Recusaram-se a prestar juramento; aborreceram todo serviço militar; condenaram a manutenção de cargos públicos. Formaram um novo mundo aqui, no meio deste mundo de pecado, o qual, contudo, nada tinha a ver com esta nossa presente existência. Rejeitaram toda obrigação e responsabilidade para com o velho mundo, e o evitaram sistematicamente por medo da contaminação e contágio. Mas, é exatamente isto que o calvinista sempre contestou e negou. Não é verdade que há dois mundos, um mal e um bom, que estão encaixados um no outro. É uma e mesma pessoa que Deus criou perfeita e que depois caiu, e tornou-se um pecador – e é este mesmo “ego” do velho pecador que renasce e que entra na vida eterna. Assim, também, é um e o mesmo mundo que outrora exibiu toda glória do Paraíso, que depois foi atingido com a maldição, e que, desde a Queda, é sustentado pela graça comum; que agora tem sido redimido e salvo por Cristo em seu centro e que passará através do horror do julgamento para o estado de glória.

Por esta mesma razão, o calvinista não pode calar-se em sua igreja e abandonar o mundo a sua sorte. Antes, sente sua alta chamada para promover o desenvolvimento deste mundo a um estágio ainda mais alto, e fazer isto em constante acordo com a ordenança de Deus, por causa de Deus, sustentando, no meio da tão dolorosa corrupção, tudo que é honrável, amável e de boa fama entre os homens. Por isso é que vemos na História (se pode ser permitido que eu fale de meus próprios ancestrais) que o Calvinismo tinha sido firmemente estabelecido na Holanda apenas a um quarto de um século, quando houve um sussurro de vida em todas as direções, e uma energia indomável estava fermentando em cada departamento da atividade humana, e seu comércio e negócio, seu artesanato e industria, sua agricultura e horticultura, sua arte e ciência floresceram com um resplendor não conhecido até então, e deu um novo impulso para um desenvolvimento inteiramente novo da vida a toda Europa Ocidental.

Что понимает кальвинист под верой в установления Божии? Для него это глубоко укоренившееся убеждение, что вся жизнь была в замысле Божием, прежде чем осуществилась в творении. Значит, вся сотворенная жизнь необходимо несет в себе закон своего существования, установленный Самим Богом. Вне нас, в природе, нет жизни без божественных установлений, названных законами природы; и этот термин мы готовы принять, если только понимаем под ним не законы, возникающие из природы, а законы, налагаемые на природу. Есть установления Божии для тверди, которая наверху, и установления для земли внизу, посредством которых утвержден этот мир, и, по слову Псалмопевца, установления эти — слуги Божии. Есть Божии установления для нашего тела, для крови, текущей по артериям и венам, для наших легких, как органов дыхания. Есть даже установления Божии в логике, которые регулируют наши мысли; установления для воображения; установления в сфере эстетики; и, наконец, строгие установления для всей нашей жизни в сфере нравственности. Это — не нравственные законы в смысле суммарных общих законов, которые оставляют решение в каждом конкретном случае нам самим. Как установления Божии определяют и траекторию мельчайшего астероида, и орбиту крупнейшей звезды, так же нравственные Его установления вникают в самые частные мелочи, сообщая нам, что в каждом конкретном случае нужно считать волей Божией. Божии установления, управляющие и величайшими проблемами, и ничтожнейшими событиями, обязывают нас не как свод законов, не как правила, записанные на бумаге, не как кодекс жизни, который пусть на один миг стал бы авторитетным сам по себе, но как постоянная воля Всеведущего и Всемогущего Бога, Который в каждое мгновение определяет путь жизни, устанавливая законы для нее и постоянно связывая нас Своим божественным авторитетом. Кальвинист не поднимается, подобно Канту, в своих рассуждениях от «Du sollst» («Ты должен») к идее законодателя; он стоит перед лицом Божиим, видит Бога, ходит с Богом, чувствует Бога во всем своем бытии и существовании, а потому он не может отвратить слух от несмолкающего «Ты должен», которое постоянно исходит от Бога в природу, в тело, в разум и в действие.

Отсюда следует, что истинный кальвинист приспосабливает себя к этим установлениям не через силу, словно к ярму, от которого хотел бы избавиться, а с той же самой готовностью, с какой мы следуем за проводником в пустыне, понимая, что мы не знаем дороги, а он ее знает, и признавая поэтому, что обрести безопасность можно только следуя по его стопам. Когда наше дыхание прерывается, мы пытаемся сразу устранить помеху, сделать его нормальным, т. е. восстановить его, снова приведя в соответствие с установлениями, которые Бог дал для дыхания. Если это получается, мы испытываем несказанное облегчение. Точно так же, нарушая нормальное течение жизни, верующий стремится как можно скорее восстановить свое духовное дыхание в соответствии с нравственными заповедями Божиими, потому что только после этого внутренняя жизнь снова свободно действует в его душе и сам он может действовать во всю силу. Поэтому всякое различение между общими нравственными установлениями и более специальными христианскими заповедями ему незнакомо. Можем ли мы представить, что когда-то Бог желал определенного нравственного порядка, а теперь, во Христе, Он хочет править иначе, как будто Он не Вечный и Неизменный, Который с самого первого часа творения и во веки веков желал, желает и будет желать и утверждать один и тот же твердый нравственный миропорядок. Поистине Христос смахнул пыль, которой грешная человеческая ограниченность покрыла этот миропорядок, и тот засверкал в его первоначальном блеске. Поистине Христос, и только Он один, открыл нам вечную любовь Бога, которая была с самого начала движущей причиной этого миропорядка. Мало того, Христос укрепил в нас способность ходить твердым шагом в соответствии с этим миропорядком. Но сам миропорядок остался таким, каким был с самого начала. Он предъявляет полные требования не только к верующим (словно от неверующих требуется меньше), но и к каждому человеку и ко всем отношениям между людьми. Поэтому кальвинизм не ведет к философствованию о так называемой нравственной жизни, как будто мы должны создать ее, открыть, или ею управлять. Кальвинизм дает нам ощутить величие Божие и подчиняет нас Его вечным установлениям и неизменным заповедям. Поэтому для кальвиниста всякое изучение этики основано на Синайском Законе, не потому, что в то время начал закрепляться нравственный порядок, но чтобы чтить Закон, как истинный, исходящий от Бога свод того исконного нравственного закона, который Бог начертал в сердце человека как Своего творения и переписывает на скрижалях каждого сердца, когда оно обращается. Кальвиниста ведут к тому, чтобы он покорился совести не как своему личному законодателю, которого каждый несет в себе, но как прямому sensus divinitatis (чувству Бога (лат.)), через которое Сам Бог подстегивает внутреннего человека и покоряет его Своему суду. Он не придерживается религии с ее догматикой, чтобы потом приспособить к ней свою нравственную жизнь с ее этикой, словно та существует параллельно с религией; его религия, его вера ставит его перед Самим Богом, Который вкладывает в него Свою божественную волю. Любовь и поклонение для Кальвина сами по себе обусловливают всякую духовную деятельность, и, таким образом, страх Божий реально и ощутимо входит во все стороны жизни — в семью и общество, в науку и искусство, в личную жизнь и политическую карьеру. Искупленный человек при любом жизненном выборе руководствуется лишь ищущим и непрестанным поклонением перед Богом, Который всегда в его сознании и всегда держит его перед Своим взором. Таков кальвинист, представленный в истории, — всегда и во всем глубочайшее и самое священное почтение к присносущему Богу. Таково правило всей жизни; и в нем единственно истинный образ настоящего пуританина.

Бегство от мира никогда не было свойственно кальвинизму, это — шибболет анабаптизма. Это доказывает особая анабаптистская догма «отдаления», согласно которой анабаптисты, объявляя себя «святыми», уходили от мира, противостояли ему. Они отказывались давать клятвы; они избегали военной службы; они осуждали общественное служение. Уже тогда они образовывали особый мир посреди греховного мира, который не имел ничего общего с нашей настоящей жизнью. Они отвергали все обязанности и всякую ответственность перед прежним миром и систематически избегали его, чтобы не оскверниться. Именно это кальвинизм всегда оспаривал и отрицал. Неправда, что существует два мира, плохой и хороший, которые приспосабливаются друг к другу. Есть одна и та же личность, которую Бог создал совершенной, и которая затем пала и стала грешной, — и это самое «я» ветхого человека возрождается и входит в вечную жизнь. Точно так же есть один мир, который однажды отображал всю славу рая, а потом подпал под проклятие, и со времен грехопадения поддерживается общей благодатью, а теперь в своей основе искуплен и спасен Христом и пройдет через ужасы суда в состояние славы. По этой самой причине кальвинист не может запереть себя в своей церкви и предоставить мир его судьбе. Он чувствует, скорее, свое высокое призвание в том, чтобы продвигать этот мир к более высокой ступени в постоянном согласии с Божиими установлениями, ради Самого Бога, поддерживая среди мучительного разложения все истинное, благородное, пользующееся доброй славой. Поэтому (если мне позволят говорить о моих предшественниках), мы видим в истории, что едва кальвинизм твердо обосновался в Нидерландах за четверть столетия, как на всех направлениях жизни начался расцвет, неукротимые силы высвободились в каждой сфере человеческой деятельности. И коммерция, и торговля, и ремесла, и промышленность, и сельское хозяйство, и садоводство, искусство и наука развивались с доселе неведомой мощью и придали новый импульс совершенно новому развитию жизни во всей Западной Европе.

Slechts één uitzondering geef ik toe, en wensch ik opzettelijk, èn te mainteneeren, èn in het rechte licht te plaatsen: Niet 65 elk intiemer verkeer met de onbekeerde wereld achtte het Calvinisme vrij van gevaar, en met name wierp het een bolwerk op tegen den te onheiligen invloed dier wereld in het besliste breken met kaartspel, schouwburg en dans. Drie levensuitingen, die ik eerst elk in haar afzonderlijke beteekenis waardeer, om eerst daarna op haar vereenigdeuitwerking terug te komen.

Het kaartspel is van Calvinistische zijde in den ban gedaan, niet alsof alle spel ons verboden ware, of ook alsof in de kaarten iets demonisch school, maar omdat het de gevaarlijke neiging kweekt, om van God af te laten, en te vertrouwen op de Fortuin. Het spel, waarvan de uitkomst uitsluitend bepaald wordt door scherpte van blik, vlugheid van handeling en gerijpte geoefendheid, veredelt; maar een spel als het kaartspel, dat in hoofdzaak beheerscht wordt door de vraag hoe de kaarten liggen en rondgedeeld worden, kweekt het geloof aan een macht buiten God, die dan Toeval heet of Fortuin. Tot zulk wangeloof nu neigt elk zondaar van nature. De koorts van het beursspel toont ons nog dagelijks, hoeveel sterker de aantrekkingskracht is, door den nuk van de Fortuin, dan door deze inspanning op ons uitgeoefend. Tegen die neiging, zoo oordeelde de Calvinist, moest het opkomend geslacht gewapend worden en door het kaartspel zou juist omgekeerd die booze neiging worden aangekweekt. En overmits nu een steeds verkeeren als in de tegenwoordigheid Gods voor den echten Calvinist de bron ontsloot, waaruit hem stalen levensernst en verhoogde levenskracht toevloeide, verfoeide hij een spel, dat de Fortuin boven Gods bestel, het hunkeren naar het Toeval boven het vaste geloofsbetrouwen stelde. God te vreezen en naar de gunsten der Fortuin te dingen, scheen hem als water te zijn en vuur. — Tegen het Schouwburgbezoek rees gansch andere bedenking. Op zichzelf lag er in de fictie niets zondigs. Ook het verbeeldingsleven is een gave Gods. Noch ook lag het kwaad in het dramatische. Hoe hoog heeft Milton Shakespeare niet geroemd, en schreef hij zelf niet in dramatischen vorm? Zelfs in de publieke uitvoering als zoodanig school het kwaad volstrekt niet. Te Genève zijn in Calvijn’s dagen voor al het volk publieke voorstellingen gegeven op de markt. Neen, wat hier stuitte, was niet de comedie 66 of tragedie, de opera of de operette op zichzelf, maar wel het onzedelijk offer dat, om ons te vermaken, van spelers en speleressen werd gevergd. Een troep komedianten was in die dagen vooral als regel een zedelijk verlaagd korps. Eensdeels omdat het altoos in eens anders karakter optreden, eindigde met alle eigen karakterontwikkeling onmogelijk te maken, en anderdeels omdat, heel anders dan bij de Grieken, bij ons ook de vrouw op het tooneel werd toegelaten, en de geldelijke bloei van het theater op en neer ging met haar verspelen van wat der vrouw het heiligst moet zijn, haar eer en haar deugd. Zeker, er is ook een strenge comedie denkbaar, maar, enkele zeer groote steden uitgezonderd, vonden die bezoek noch betaling, en de feitelijke toestand was en bleef, dat, gerekend over heel de wereld, (Hall Cayne heeft het nog onlangs in zijn „The Christian” bevestigd) de inkomsten van het theater te milder vloeiden, naarmate de troep zich in zedelijken zin minder ontzag. Als regel mocht dus gezegd, dat het schouwburgwezen om te bloeien haar hecatombe van karakterverlaging en zedelijke ontadeling vergde, en het koopen van oor- en ooggenot tot dien prijs, achtte een Calvinist die al het menschelijke in den mensch om Gods wil eert, rechtstreeks geoordeeld. — Ten slotte wat den dans aangaat, zijn het mondaine bladen als le Figaro, die nu nog den Calvinist in het gelijk komen stellen. De zedelijke pijn, zoo schreef dit blad nog kort geleden, waarmeê een vader zijn dochter voor het eerst in den balkring invoert, is voor niemand, die toon en blik en actie in deze kringen kent, een geheim. Ook hier dus geen protest van Calvinistische zijde tegen den dans op zichzelf, maar uitsluitend tegen de zonde die er zich in uitgiet, en tegen de zonde waartoe ze verlokt.

This admits of only one exception, and this exception I wish both to maintain and to place in its proper light. What I mean is this. — Not every intimate intercourse with the unconverted world is deemed lawful, by Calvinism, for it placed a barrier against the too unhallowed influence of this world by putting a distinct ''veto"' upon three things, card-playing, I heal res, and dancing; — three forms of amusement which I shall first treat separately, and then set forth in their combined influence. — Card-playing has been placed under a ban by Calvinism, not as though games of all kinds were forbidden, nor as though something demoniacal lurked in the cards themselves, but because it fosters in our heart the dangerous tendency to look away from God, and to put our trust in Fori inn- or L/,f/r. A game which is decided by keenness of vision, quickness of action, and range of experience, is ennobling in its character, but a game like cards, which is chiefly decided by the way in which the 40 cards are arranged in the pack, and blindly distributed, induces us to attach a certain significance to that fatal imaginative power, outside of God, called Chance or Fortune. To this kind of unbelief, every one of us is inclined. The fever of stock-gambling shews daily how much more strongly people are attracted and influenced by the nod of Fortune, than by solid application to their work. Therefore the Calvinist judged that the rising generation should be guarded against this dangerous tendency, whereas, by. means of card-playing it would be fostered. And since the sensation of God's ever-enduring presence was felt by Calvin and his adherents as the never-failing source from which they drew their stern seriousness of life, they could not help loathing a game which poisoned this source by placing Fortune above the disposition of God, and the hankering after chance above the firm confidence in His will. To fear God, and to bid for the favors of Fortune seemed to him as irreconcilable as fire and water.

Entirely different objections were entertained against Theatre-going. In itself there is nothing sinful in fiction;— the power of the imagination is a precious gift of God Himself. Neither is there any special evil in dramatic imagination. How highly did Milton appreciate Shakespeare's Drama, and did not he himself write in dramatic form? Nor did the evil lie in public theatrical representations, as such. Public performances were given for all the people at Geneva, in the Market Place, in Calvin's time, and with his approval. No, that which offended our ancestors was not the comedy or tragedy, nor should have been the opera, or the operetta, in itself, but the moral sacrifice which as a rule was demanded of actors and actresses, for the amusement of the public. A theatrical troop, in those days especially, stood, morally, very low\ This low moral standard resulted partly from the fact that the constant and ever-changing presentation of the character of other people, finally hampers the moulding of your per- 41 sonal character; and partly because, unlike the Greeks, modern Theatres have introduced the presence of women on the stage, the prosperity of the Theatre being too often gauged by the measure in which a woman jeopardizes the most sacred treasures God entrusts to her, — her stainless name, and irreproachable conduct. Certainly, a strictly moral Theatre is very well conceivable, but with the exception of a few large cities, such Theatres would neither be sufficiently patronized nor could exist financially, and the actual fact remains that, taking all the world over, the prosperity of a Theatre often increases in proportion to the moral degradation of the actors. For often therefore the prosperity of Theatres is purchased at the cost ot manly character, and of female purity; and to purchase delight for the ear and the eye at the price of such a moral hetacomb, the Calvinist, who honoured whatever was human in man, for the sake of God, could not but condemn. Finally, so far as the dance is concerned, even worldly papers, like the parisian "Figaro", at present justify the position of the Calvinist. Only recently an article in this paper called attention to the moral pain with which a father takes his daughter into the Ball-room for the first time. This moral pain, it declared, is evident, in Paris at least, to all who are familiar with the whisperings, indecent looks and actions prevalent in those pleasure-loving circles. Here, also, the Calvinist does not protest against the Dance itself, but exclusively, against the impurity to which it is often in danger of leading.

This admits of only one exception, and this exception I wish both to maintain and to place in its proper light. What I mean is this. Not every intimate intercourse with the unconverted world is deemed lawful, by Calvinism, for it placed a barrier against the too unhallowed influence of this world by putting a distinct “veto” upon three things, card playing, theatres, and dancing; – three forms of amusement which I shall first treat separately, and then set forth in their combined significance.

Card-playing has been placed under a ban by Calvinism, 93 not as though games of all kinds were forbidden, nor as though something demoniacal lurked in the cards themselves. but because it fosters in our heart the dangerous tendency to look away from God, and to put our trust in Fortune or Luck. A game which is decided by keenness of vision, quickness of action, and range of experience, is ennobling in its character, but a game like cards, which is chiefly decided by the way in which the cards are arranged in the pack, and blindly distributed, induces us to attach a certain significance to that fatal imaginative power, outside of God, called Chance or Fortune. To this kind of unbelief, every one of us is inclined. The fever of stock-gambling shows daily how much more strongly people are attracted and influenced by the nod of Fortune, than by solid application to their work. Therefore the Calvinist judged that the rising generation ought to be guarded against this dangerous tendency, because by means of card-playing it would be fostered. And since the sensation of God’s ever-enduring presence was felt by Calvin and his adherents as the never-failing source from which they drew their stern seriousness of life, they could not help loathing a game which poisoned this source by placing Fortune above the disposition of God, and the hankering after chance above the firm confidence in His will. To fear God, and to bid for the favors of Fortune, seemed to him as irreconcilable as fire and water.

Entirely different objections were entertained against Theatre-going. In itself there is nothing sinful in fiction; – the power of the imagination is a precious gift of 94 God Himself. Neither is there any special evil in dramatic imagination. How highly did Milton appreciate Shakespeare’s Drama, and did not he himself write in dramatic form? Nor did the evil lie in public theatrical representations, as such. Public performances were given for all the people at Geneva, in the Market Place, in Calvin’s time. and with his approval. No, that which offended our ancestors was not the comedy or tragedy, nor should have been the opera, in itself, but the moral sacrifice which as a rule was demanded of actors and actresses for the amusement of the public. A theatrical troop, in those days especially, stood, morally, rather low. This low moral standard resulted partly from the fact that the constant and ever-changing presentation of the character of another person finally hampers the moulding of your personal character; and partly because our modern Theaters, unlike the Greek, have introduced the presence of women on the stage, the prosperity of the Theater being too often gauged by the measure in which a woman jeopardizes the most sacred treasures God entrusts to her, her stainless name, and irreproachable conduct. Certainly, a strictly normal Theater is very well conceivable; but with the exception of a few large cities, such Theaters would neither be sufficiently patronized nor could exist financially; and the actual fact remains that, taking all the world over, the prosperity of a Theater often increases in proportion to the moral degradation of the actors. Too often therefore – Hall Caine in his “Christian” corroborated once more the sad truth – the prosperity of Theaters is purchased at the cost of manly character, and of female purity. And 95 the purchase of delight for the ear and the eye at the price of such a moral hecatomb, the Calvinist, who honored whatever was human in man for the sake of God, could not but condemn.

Finally, so far as the dance is concerned, even worldly papers, like the Parisian “Figaro”, at present justify the position of the Calvinist. Only recently an article in this paper called attention to the moral pain with which a father takes his daughter into the ball-room for the first time. This moral pain, it declared, is evident, in Paris at least, to all who are familiar with the whisperings, indecent looks and actions prevalent in those pleasure-loving circles. Here, also, the Calvinist does not protest against the Dance itself, but exclusively against the impurity to which it is often in danger of leading.

Isto admite apenas uma exceção, e esta exceção desejo tanto manter, quanto colocar em sua própria luz. O que eu quero dizer com isto? Nem toda relação pessoal com o mundo não convertido é considerada lícita pelo Calvinismo, pois ele colocou uma barreira contra a influência muito profana deste mundo colocando um “veto” distinto sobre três coisas, jogo de cartas, teatro e dança – três formas de entretenimento que tratarei primeiro separadamente, e então apresentarei em seu significado combinado.

O Jogo de cartas foi colocado pelo Calvinismo sob maldição, não como se jogos de todos os tipos fossem proibidos, nem como se alguma coisa demoníaca estivesse escondida nas cartas em si, mas porque fomenta em nosso coração a tendência perigosa de olhar para longe de Deus, e a colocar nossa confiança no Destino ou Sorte. Um jogo que é decidido pela perspicácia da visão, agilidade da ação e extensão da experiência é dignificante em seu caráter, mas um jogo, como o de cartas, que é decidido principalmente pelo modo em que as cartas são arranjadas em um baralho e distribuídas às cegas, induz-nos a vincular um certo significado àquele poder imaginativo fatal, fora de Deus, chamado Acaso ou Destino. Cada um de nós está inclinado a este tipo de incredulidade.

A paixão pela especulação no mercado de ações diariamente como as pessoas são muito mais fortemente atraídas e influenciadas pela balança do Destino, do que pelo sólido envolvimento com o seu trabalho. Por isso, o calvinista considerou que a geração nascente deveria ser guardada desta tendência perigosa, porque ela seria adotada mediante o jogo de cartas. E visto que a sensação da sempre duradoura presença de Deus foi sentida por Calvino e seus adeptos como a fonte que nunca se esgota, da qual eles tiraram sua rígida seriedade de vida, não poderiam evitar odiar um jogo que envenenava esta fonte colocando o Destino acima da disposição de Deus, e o anseio pelo acaso acima da firme confiança em sua vontade. Temer a Deus e fazer oferta aos favores do Destino, pareceu a ele tão irreconciliável quanto o fogo e a água.

Objeções inteiramente diferentes foram levantadas em consideração contra ir ao teatro. Nada há de pecaminoso na ficção em si – o poder da imaginação é um dom precioso do próprio Deus. Nem há qualquer mal especial na imaginação dramática. Quão altamente Milton aprecia o Drama de Shakespeare, e não escreve ele mesmo em forma dramática? Nem encontra-se o mal na representação teatral pública, como tal. No tempo de Calvino, e com sua aprovação, representações públicas eram feitas para todas as pessoas em Genebra no Market Place. Não, aquilo que ofendia nossos ancestrais não era a comédia ou a tragédia, nem deve ter sido a ópera em si, mas o sacrifício moral que era exigido dos atores e atrizes como uma regra para o entretenimento do público.

Um grupo teatral, especialmente naqueles dias, colocava-se numa posição moralmente muito baixa. Este baixo padrão moral em parte era o resultado do fato que a constante e sempre mutante representação do caráter de outra pessoa finalmente impede a formação de seu caráter pessoal; e em parte porque nossos teatros modernos, diferente dos gregos, introduziram a presença da mulher no palco, sendo a prosperidade do teatro muitas vezes aferida pela medida em que uma mulher expõe o mais sagrado tesouro que Deus confia a ela, seu nome imaculado e sua conduta irrepreensível.

Certamente, um teatro estritamente normal é muito bem aceitável; mas com a exceção de umas poucas grandes cidades, tais teatros não seriam suficientemente patrocinados nem poderiam existir financeiramente; e o certo é que, tomando todo o mundo novamente, a prosperidade de um teatro muitas vezes cresce em proporção à degradação moral dos atores. Por isso, muitas vezes, – Hall Caine em seu “Cristão” confirmou uma vez mais a triste verdade – a prosperidade do teatro é adquirida ao custo do caráter viril e da pureza feminina. E o calvinista que honrava tudo que era humano no homem por causa de Deus, não poderia senão condenar a compra de delícias para os ouvidos e para os olhos ao preço de um hecatombe55 moral como este.

Finalmente, no que diz respeito a dança, até mesmo um jornal secular como o parisiense “Figaro”, atualmente justifica a posição do calvinista. Apenas recentemente, um artigo neste jornal chamou a atenção para o cuidado moral com que um pai levou sua filha pela primeira vez ao salão de baile. Este cuidado moral, ele declarou, é evidente, em Paris ao menos, a todos que estão familiarizados com os rumores, olhares e ações indecentes prevalecente naqueles círculos de prazer amoroso. Aqui também, o calvinista não protesta contra a Dança em si, mas exclusivamente contra a impureza para a qual ela freqüentemente está em perigo de ser dirigida.

Все, о чем я говорил, допускает лишь одно исключение, и я хочу защитить и получше осветить его. То, что я имею в виду, состоит в следующем: кальвинизм считает законным не всякое близкое соприкосновение с необращенным миром; он ставит преграду против слишком уж сильного влияния этого мира, четко запрещая три вещи: игру в карты, театр и танцы. Эти формы увеселения я сначала рассмотрю отдельно, а потом попытаюсь показать вам их общее значение.

Карточную игру кальвинизм запретил не потому, что будто бы запретил вообще все игры, и не потому, будто в картах есть что-то бесовское, а потому, что она взращивает в сердце опасную тенденцию отвернуться от Бога и положиться на судьбу и удачу. Игра, в которой побеждают благодаря зоркости, быстроте или опыту, только облагораживает, а вот игра, исход которой зависит от того, как перетасованы карты в колоде и вслепую разложены, ведет нас к вере в какую-то силу рока, именуемую случаем или судьбой. К этому виду неверия склонен каждый из нас. Азарт карточной игры то и дело показывает, что людей больше прельщает фортуна, чем серьезный труд. Поэтому кальвинизм рассудил, что молодых людей надо оберегать от этой опасной тенденции, которая усиливается из-за карточной игры. Постоянное присутствие Бога Кальвин и его сподвижники ощущали как неиссякающий источник, из которого они черпали свое серьезное отношение к жизни, и потому, естественно, отвращались от игры, отравляющей этот источник, ставя фортуну выше Божией милости, погоню за случаем — выше твердого упования на Божию волю. Кальвин считал, что бояться Бога и выпрашивать благосклонность у судьбы так же несовместимо, как несовместимы огонь и вода.

Совершенно иные возражения против театра. В театральном представлении самом по себе нет ничего плохого; сила воображения — ценный дар, исходящий от Самого Бога. Нет ничего плохого и в драматическом воображении. Мильтон высоко ценил Шекспира, да и сам писал драмы. Зла нет и в общественных театральных представлениях. Общественные представления давались в Женеве на рыночной площади, и Кальвин это одобрял. Наши предшественники осуждали не комедию или трагедию, и не оперу саму по себе, а ту нравственную жертву, которая, как правило, требовалась от актеров и актрис ради увеселения публики. Театральная труппа, особенно в те дни, пребывала на довольно низком нравственном уровне, отчасти из-за того, что постоянное и вечно меняющееся изображение другого человека мешает создать свою собственную личность; отчасти же потому, что наши современные театры, в отличие от греческих, пустили на сцену женщин, и успех пьесы очень часто зависит от того, в какой мере женщина оскверняет самое священное сокровище, вверенное ей Богом, — незапятнанное имя и безукоризненное поведение. Конечно, можно себе представить совершенно нормальный театр; но, за исключением нескольких больших городов, такие театры не смогут существовать по финансовым причинам. Словом, что ни говори, опыт учит, что процветание театров пропорционально моральной деградации актеров. Это бывает так часто, что Холл Кейн в своем «Христианине» повторяет печальную истину: процветание театра покупается ценой мужского характера и женской чистоты. Можно ли покупать услады слуха и зрения такой ценой? Кальвинизм, который ради Бога почитает все, что есть в человеке человеческого, не мог этого одобрить.

Что касается танцев, даже светские газеты вроде парижского «Фигаро» уже оправдывают позицию кальвинистов. Недавно статья в этой газете рассказала читателям о страданиях отца, который выводит свою дочь на первый бал. Эти страдания понятны каждому, по крайней мере в Париже, кто слышал, как злословят на балах, как нескромно глядят на девушек и чем вообще занимаются. Кальвинизм возражает не против танца, а только против той нечистоты, к которой он часто ведет.

En hiermee keer ik terug tot het bolwerk waarvan ik sprak. Ter dege goed hadden onze vaderen ontwaard, hoe het juist dans, spel en komedie waren, waarop het wereldsch deel der wereld schier verzot scheen. Het gold in die kringen niet als bijzaak, maar als hoofdzaak voor het leven, en het bitterst gesmaad en het felst bestookt werd juist hij, die deze drie heerlijkheden aan dorst randen. En juist deswege bekenden ze hoe feitelijk in deze drie de Rubicon lag, die niet mocht worden 67 overgetrokken, of de ernst des levens legde het voor het levensspel, de vreeze des Heeren voor de jacht naar zingenot af. En nu, heeft niet de uitkomst hun kloek protest gekroond? Nu nog na drie eeuwen zijn in mijn vaderland geheele levenskringen aan te wijzen waar het aan den wereldzin belet is binnen te dringen, waarin het leven zich van buiten naar binnen heeft gekeerd, en waarin, dankzij die heilige concentratie, een zin voor het hoogere en een energie voor het heilige gekweekt is, die elke andere groep ons benijdt. Niet alleen de vleugel van den vlinder is in die kringen ongedeerd gebleven, maar het stofgoud schittert er op dien vleugel nog met ongebroken glans.

With this I return to the barrier of which I spoke. Our fathers perceived excellently well that it was just these three,— Dancing, Card-playing, and Theatres, — with which the world was madly in love. In worldly circles these pleasures were not regarded as secondary trifles, but honoured, as all-important matters; and whoever dared to attack them, exposed himself to the bitterest scorn and enmity. For this very reason, they recognized, in these three, the Rubicon which no 42 true Calvinist could cross without sacrificing his earnestness to dangerous mirth, and the fear of the Lord to often far from spotless pleasures. And now may I ask, — has not the result justified their strong and brave protest ? Even yet after a lapse of three centuries, you will find, in my Calvinistic country, entire social circles into which this world liness is never allowed to enter, but in which the richness of human life has turned, from without, inward, and in which, as the result of a sound spiritual concentration, there has been developed such a deep sense of everything high, and such an energy for everything holy as to excite the envy even of our Antagonists. Not only has the wing of the Butterfly in those circles been preserved intact, but even the gold-dust upon this wing shines as brilliantly as ever.

With this I return to the barrier of which I spoke. Our fathers perceived excellently well that it was just these three: Dancing, Card-playing, and Theater-going, with which the world was madly in love. In worldly circles these pleasures were not regarded as secondary trifles, but honored as all-important matters: and whoever dared to attack them exposed himself to the bitterest scorn and enmity. For this very reason, they recognized in these three the Rubicon which no true Calvinist could cross without sacrificing his earnestness to dangerous mirth, and the fear of the Lord to often far from spotless pleasures. And now may I ask, has not the result justified their strong and brave protest? Even yet, after a lapse of three centuries, you will find, in my Calvinistic country, in Scotland, and in your own States, entire social circles into which this worldliness 96 is never allowed to enter, but in which the richness of human life has turned, from without, inward, and in which, as the result of a sound spiritual concentration, there has been developed such a deep sense of everything high, and such an energy for everything holy, as to excite the envy even of our antagonists. Not only has the wing of the butterfly in those circles been preserved intact, but even the golddust upon this wing shines as brilliantly as ever.

Com isto, retorno à barreira da qual falei. Nossos pais perceberam excelentemente bem que eram exatamente estes três: Dançar, Jogar cartas, e ir ao Teatro, com os quais o mundo estava loucamente apaixonado. Nos círculos mundanos estes prazeres não eram considerados como ninharias secundárias, mas honrados como questões de grande importância: e quem ousasse atacá-los expunha-se ao mais amargo desprezo e inimizade. Por esta mesma razão, eles reconheceram nestes três o Rubicão56 que nenhum verdadeiro calvinista poderia atravessar sem sacrificar sua seriedade por uma perigosa alegria, e o temor do Senhor por prazeres freqüentemente longe de serem imaculados.

E então posso perguntar, não tem o resultado justificado seu forte e corajoso protesto? Mesmo depois de um lapso de três séculos, vocês ainda encontrarão em meu país calvinista, na Escócia e em seu próprio país, círculos sociais inteiros nos quais nunca foi permitido entrar este mundanismo, mas nos quais a riqueza da vida humana tem retornado, de fora, interior, e nos quais, como resultado de uma sadia concentração espiritual, tem sido desenvolvido um tal profundo senso de tudo que é alto, e uma tal energia por tudo que é santo, que estimula a inveja até mesmo de nossos antagonistas. Não somente tem sido preservada a asa da borboleta nestes círculos, mas até mesmo o ouro em pó sobre esta asa reluz tão brilhante como nunca.

Теперь я вернусь к преграде, о которой мы говорили. Наши отцы прекрасно понимали, что танцами, игрой в карты и хождением в театр увлекся весь мир. В светских кругах эти удовольствия считают не второстепенными развлечениями, а самыми важными; всякого, посмевшего критиковать эти удовольствия, глубоко презирали. По этой самой причине кальвинисты именно в этом увидели Рубикон, который они не могут перейти, не жертвуя своей порядочностью ради губительного веселья, а страхом Господним — ради далеко не невинных удовольствий. Посмею спросить, не оправдал ли опыт их сильные и смелые протесты? И сейчас, через три столетия, вы обнаружите как в моей кальвинистской стране, так и в Шотландии, и в ваших Штатах целые круги, куда эти светские занятия так и не получили доступа, но в которых кипит жизнь во всем своем разнообразии, и благодаря здоровому сосредоточению духа развилась такая глубокая тяга ко всему высокому и святому, что этому завидуют даже наши противники. Крыло бабочки в этих кругах сохранилось неприкосновенным, мало того — золотая пыльца сияет на нем так же ярко.

Die proef op de som nu is het, waarvoor ik uw eerbied vraag. Verre overtreft onze eeuw de eeuw van het Calvinisme in den vloed der geschriften over zedelijke problemen en zedelijk leven. Philosofen en theologen wedijveren met elkander, om ons het spoor op het zedelijk erf, wat wilt ge? uit te bakenen of bijster te maken. Maar wat ze niet vermochten, is zedelijke vastigheid aan de geschokte conscientie te hergeven. Eer moet de klacht geuit, dat steeds meer alle fundament van het zedelijk gebouw wordt losgewoeld, en er ten slotte geen enkele stevigheid overblijft, waarvan het volk in zijn massa gevoelt, dat het een onverwrikbaar houvast oplevert voor zijn zedelijke toekomst. Het recht van den sterkste is geloofd, eigendom is diefstal geheeten, de vrije liefde geproclameerd, om eerlijkheid wordt gelachen, een pantheïst dorst Jezus en Nero op één lijn te plaatsen. En vergelijk dáármeê nu de ongelooflijke uitkomst, door het Calvinisme van voor drie eeuwen verkregen. Het begreep dat de wereld niet met ethisch philosopheeren, maar alleen door herstel van teederheid in de conscientie te redden was. Daarom redeneerde het niet, maar greep de zielen aan, en plaatste ze, aangezicht tot aangezicht, voor het aanschijn des Almachtigen, dat het hart weer beefde voor zijn heilige majesteit en in die majesteit de glorie zijner liefde ontdekte. En als ge dan teruggaat in de historie, en ge ziet, hoe verdorven het Calvinisme toen ter tijd de wereld vond, hoe diep in alle landen destijds het zedelijk leven gezonken was, aan de hoven en in de volkskringen, onder de geestelijken en onder de corypheën der wetenschap, bij mannen 68 en bij vrouwen, onder hooge en onder lage standen, en ge ziet dan hoe het Calvinisme, in één menschenleeftijd, een breeden, zedelijken levenskring in vijf landen tegelijk schiep, die dusver nog nimmer in hoogheid van opvatting en kracht tot zelfbeheersching overtroffen werd, wie uwer durft dan ontkennen, dat althans op zedelijk gebied het Calvinisme den palm der overwinning wegdroeg? ¹⁴⁾

1) De vrede voor het ontrust gemoed.

2) Zaad der religie.

3) Gewaarwording van het Eeuwige.

4) De geestelijkheid vormt de leerende kerk.

5) Zonder tusschenschakel.

6) Verblijfplaats der jong gestorven kinderkens.

7) Dat bidden en werken één zal zijn.

8) Linnaeus noemde de mensch: homo sapiens d.i. het met zelfbewustzijn begaafde wezen.

9) De noodzakelijke behoefte aan een H. Schriftuur.

10) Behoefte aan kunstlicht.

11) Noodzakelijkheid der wedergeboorte.

12) Lichaam.

13) De mystieke gemeenschap met Christus.

14) Dat in deze Lezing van Religie, niet van Godsdienst gesproken werd, geschiedde opzettelijk. „Godsdienst” is het dienen van God in culte en practijk. „Religie” is het woord, dat onze vaderen bezigden, om de bewuste verhouding tusschen God en het menschelijk creatuur uit te drukken.

This now is the proof to which I invite your respectful attention. Our age is far ahead of the Calvinistic age in its overflowing mass of ethical essays and treatises and learned expositions. Philosophers and Theologians really vie with one another in discovering for us, or in hiding from us, just as you may be pleased to put it, the straight road in the domain of morals. But there is something that all this .host of learned scholars have not been able to do. They have not been able to restore moral firmness to the enfeebled public conscience.

Rather must we complain that ever more and more the foundations of our moral building are gradually being loosened and unsettled, until finally there remains not one stronghold left of which the people in their wider ranks can feel that it guarantees moral certainty for the Future. Statesmen and Jurists are openly proclaiming the right of the strongest ; the ownership of property is called stealing; free love has been advocated, and honesty is ridiculed. A pantheist has dared to put Jesus and Nero on the same footing; and Van Nietzsche, going further still, deemed Christ's blessing of the meek to be the curse of humanity.

Now compare with all this the marvellous results of 43 three centuries of Calvinism. Calvinism understood that the world was not to be saved by ethical philosophizing, but only by the restoration of tenderness of conscience. Therefore it did not indulge in reasoning, but appealed directly to the soul, and placed it face to face with the Living God, so that the heart trembled, at His holy majesty, and in that majesty, discovered the glory of His love. And when, going back in this historical review, you observe how thoroughly corrupt and rotten Calvinism found the world, to what depth moral life at that time had sunken, in the courts, and among the people, in the clerg} T , and among the leaders of science, among men and wonen, among the higher and the lower classes of society : — then what censor among you will dare to deny the palm of moral victory to Calvinism, which in one generation, though hunted from the battlefield to the scaffold, created, throughout five nations at once, wide serious groups of noble men and still nobler women, hitherto unsurpassed in the loftiness of their ideal conceptions and unequalled in the power of their moral self-control.

This now is the proof to which I invite your respectful attention. Our age is far ahead of the Calvinistic age in its overflowing mass of ethical essays and treatises and learned expositions. Philosophers and Theologians really vie with one another in discovering for us (or in hiding from us, just as you may be pleased to put it) the straight road in the domain of morals. But there is something that all this host of learned scholars have not been able to do. They have not been able to restore moral firmness to the enfeebled public conscience.

Rather must we complain that ever more and more the foundations of our moral building are gradually being loosened and unsettled, until finally there remains not one stronghold left of which the people in their wider ranks can feel that it guarantees moral certainty for the Future. Statesmen and Jurists are openly proclaiming the right of the strongest; the ownership of property is called stealing; free love has been advocated; and honesty is ridiculed. A pantheist has dared to put Jesus and Nero on the same footing; and Nietzsche, going further still, deemed Christ’s blessing of the meek to be the curse of humanity. 97

Now compare with all this the marvelous results of three centuries of Calvinism. Calvinism understood that the world was not to be saved by ethical philosophizing, but only by the restoration of tenderness of conscience. Therefore it did not indulge in reasoning but appealed directly to the soul, and placed it face to face with the Living God, so that the heart trembled at His holy majesty, and in that majesty, discovered the glory of His love. And when, going back in this historical review, you observe how thoroughly corrupt and rotten Calvinism found the world, to what depth moral life at that time had sunk, in the courts, and among the people, in the clergy and among the leaders of science, among men and women, among the higher and the lower classes of society: – then what censor among you will dare to deny the palm of moral victory to Calvinism, which in one generation, though hunted from the battlefield to the scaffold, created, throughout five nations at once, wide serious groups of noble men, and still nobler women, hitherto unsurpassed in the loftiness of their ideal conceptions and unequalled in the power of their moral self-control.

Esta então é a prova para a qual eu solicito sua respeitosa atenção. Nossa época está muito à frente da época calvinista em sua transbordante massa de ensaios éticos, tratados e exposições eruditas. Na verdade os Filósofos e Teólogos competem uns com os outros para revelar-nos (ou esconder de nós, como vocês pode estar satisfeitos em colocá-lo) a estrada certa no campo da moral. Mas há algo que toda esta multidão de estudiosos eruditos não tem sido capaz de fazer. Eles não têm sido capazes de restaurar a firmeza moral à consciência pública debilitada.

Antes, devemos lamentar que sempre mais e mais as fundações de nosso edifício moral estão sendo gradualmente afrouxadas e desarranjadas, até que finalmente não seja deixada nenhuma fortaleza na qual o povo, em suas mais amplas classes, possa sentir que a certeza moral para o futuro está garantida. Estadistas e Juristas estão proclamando abertamente o direito do mais forte; o título de propriedade é chamado de furto; o amor livre tem sido advogado; e a honestidade é ridicularizada. Um panteísta tem ousado colocar Jesus e Nero no mesmo pé de igualdade; e Nietzsche, indo ainda mais longe, julgou a bênção de Cristo para o manso como sendo a maldição da humanidade.

Compare com tudo isto o maravilhoso resultado de três séculos de Calvinismo. O Calvinismo entendeu que o mundo não deveria ser salvo através do filosofar ético, mas somente através da restauração da compaixão da consciência. Portanto, não entregou-se ao raciocínio, mas apelou diretamente para a alma, e colocou-a face a face com o Deus vivo, de modo que o coração temeu sua santa majestade, e nesta majestade, descobriu a glória de seu amor. E quando, voltando em sua revisão histórica, vocês observam quão completamente corrupto e podre o Calvinismo encontrou o mundo, a que profundidade a vida moral naquele tempo tinha afundado, na corte e entre o povo, no clero e entre os líderes da ciência, entre homens e mulheres, entre as classes mais altas e mais baixas da sociedade – então qual crítico entre vocês ousará negar a palma de vitória moral ao Calvinismo, que em uma única geração, embora perseguido desde o campo de batalha até o cadafalso, criou através de cinco nações ao mesmo tempo, grandes grupos de homens nobres sérios, e mulheres mais nobres ainda, até agora não ultrapassados na eminência de suas concepções ideais e inigualáveis no poder de seu autocontrole moral.

Теперь я бы хотел привлечь ваше внимание к следующему рассуждению. В наш век гораздо больше статей, трактатов и ученых трудов о нравственности, чем в век Кальвина. Философы и теологи соревнуются друг с другом, открывая нам (или скрывая от нас, это уж как хотите) прямую дорогу нравственности. Но есть нечто, что это множество ученых мужей сделать не смогло. Они не смогли восстановить нравственную строгость в истощенной совести общества.

Скорее мы вправе сетовать на то, что все больше основ нашего нравственного строения постепенно расшатывают и сдвигают с места, пока в конце концов не останется ни одного принципа, который, по мнению большинства, обеспечивал бы в будущем нравственную определенность. Политики и юристы открыто провозглашают право сильного; владение собственностью называют воровством; свободную любовь защищают; честность осмеивают. Пантеизм осмелился поставить рядом Христа и Нерона; и Ницше, зайдя дальше всех прочих, счел блаженство смиренных несчастьем для человечества.

Сравните со всем этим чудесные плоды трех столетий кальвинизма. Он понимал, что мир надо спасать, не философствуя об этике, а восстанавливая чуткую совесть. Поэтому он не позволил себе рассуждать, а непосредственно воззвал к душе и поместил ее лицом к лицу с Живым Богом, так что сердце вострепетало от Его святого величия и в этом величии открыло славу Его любви. Когда, продвигаясь назад в этом историческом обзоре, вы увидите, каким разложившимся и прогнившим кальвинизм застал мир, до какого дна докатилась нравственная жизнь того времени при дворе и в народе, среди священства и среди ученых, у мужчин и у женщин, в высших и низших слоях общества, кто из вас откажет в пальме нравственной победы кальвинизму, который за одно поколение, в преследованиях, в битвах, на эшафоте, создал в пяти нациях одновременно большие и достойные сообщества благородных мужчин и еще более благородных женщин, до сих пор непревзойденных по величию своих идеалов и по силе нравственного самообладания.

1 «Наставления в Христианской Вере» Кальвина. Англ. Эдинбург. пер., т. 1, кн. 1, гл. 3 «И мы считаем несомненным, что люди обладают врожденным чувством божественного... ». Гл. 4 «Итак, опыт показывает, что сокровенным вдохновением Божиим семя религии посеяно во всех людях. С другой стороны, трудно найти одного человека из ста, который бы лелеял это семя в своем сердце, чтобы оно проросло. Но нет никого, в ком бы оно погибло окончательно».

2 Сацердотализм — учение о том, что при свершении Евхаристии священник приносит жертву.

* Эти слова Кайпера не стоит относить к институту церковных служителей как таковому, но лишь к его извращенной форме, проявившейся в учреждении клира — посредников между Богом и народом Божьим. Реформатская Церковь, и Кайпер, как один из ее видных представителей, всегда настаивала на необходимости для созидания Церкви и совершенствования святых профессионально обученных служителей Слова и Таинств, которым бы, согласно 1 Фес. 5:12,13 и 1 Тим. 5:17, народ Божий оказывал соответствующую честь (об институте служителей Слова и Таинств см. Еф. 4:11,12; 2 Кор. 5:18–20; 2 Тим. 4:1,2; Мф. 28:19; 1 Кор. 11:24; 1 Тим. 2:1,2; 1 Петр. 5:2–4 и др.). — Прим. науч. консультанта.