Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The Pamphlet Collection of Sir Robert Stout: Volume 77

II. — The New Zealand Articles and the Westminster Confession

II.

The New Zealand Articles and the Westminster Confession.

How far are the proposed Articles in harmony with this venerable symbol of reformed doctrine?

It is no part of my business under this section to enter on the question whether, or if at all, how far a modification should or must be made on the Westminster standards, if the various Christian demoninations are to be fused into one "zealous and powerful National Church of New Zealand," but merely—assuming the proposed Articles to set forth the doctrinal basis required to secure the said Church—to indicate the extent of modification on the Westminster standards which these Articles propose—leaving those more immediately concerned to decide whether the modification is such as they can conscientiously accept, or whether it is not too high a price to pay for even Union.

I.—Of Sin.

No one can read the six paragraphs of Chapter VI. of the Westminster Confession on the Fall of Man, of Sin, and of the Punishment thereof, and compare these with the proposed Article on Sin in the New Zealand Creed, without page 36 perceiving how masterly, comprehensive, well-knit together, solemn, and strong are the former, and how feeble, mild contracted, and ambiguous is the latter. The Westminster Confession explains what the New Zealand Article omits—viz., how sin entered into the world, viz., through the temptation by Satan and fall of our first parents. Indeed, the New Zealand Article leaves it open for anyone to deny this. The Westminster Confession declares that as a consequence of this sin our first parents lost their original righteousness and became utterly corrupt and defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body. The New Zealand Article passes over this except in so far as it may be supposed to be included in what is affirmed about all men. The Westminster Confession asserts that the moral corruption of our first parents transmitted itself to all their ordinary descendants; the New Zealand Article appears to ignore this and to suggest that each individual sinks into a state of sin only through his own act of disobedience to the will of God. The Westminster Confession holds that this inherited evil nature, with which every man comes into the world, in other words, original sin, is the root of all actual transgressions; the New Zealand Article, I should say, while postulating nothing about this, permits original sin to be denied, and the doctrine to be embraced that men are born innocent, and do not become sinful till they actually sin. The Westminster Confession teaches that original, as well as actual sin, exposes men to condemnation; the New Zealand Article holds, or seems to hold, that only after each individual has sinned does he fall under just condemnation.

Whether the theology of the Westminster Confession on this subject be Scripture or not, the least observant reader can perceive that the New Zealand Article constitutes a wide departure from it.

2.—Of the Work of Christ.

It might reasonably enough be argued that the account furnished in Chapter VIII., s.s. 3-8. of the Westminster Confession of the redemption work of Christ the Mediator is unnecessarily detailed and elaborate; but its singular clearness and impressiveness no one can challenge. Set alongside of it the New Zealand Article looks extremely meagre, and even limp. Beyond stating that the Lord Jesus Christ as Mediator was anointed with the Holy Spirit (whether in measure or without measure, whether as the Hebrew Prophets were, or in an exceptional manner, peculiar to Himself is left undeclared), the New Zealand Article supplies no indication of the qualification Christ possessed for this office through having in Himself all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, of His appointment to the office through the call of His Father, of the way in which He discharged the office, or of the manner in which He applied the benefits of His redemption work before His incarnation in the O.T. Church, page 37 and applies them since His resurrection in the New—all of which points are handled in the Westminster Confession. The Westminster Confession, of course, may be wrong, or at least open to correction, in all or some of these points, bat it may prove instructive to note how widely different a document it is in respect of this theme from the New Zealand Creed.

3—Of Justification by Faith.

Concerning this important Article as it stands in the Westminster Confession and in the New Zealand Creed nothing more need be said then that while the former carefully excludes everything that might be supposed to constitute a ground of pardon and acceptance before God for the sinner, emphasising Christ's "obedience and satisfaction" as the only ground, and explaining how this, the righteousness of Christ, is imputed or reckoned to the sinner who receives Christ and rests on Him and His righteousness by faith, the latter contents itself by simply asserting that "everyone who through the quickening grace of the Holy Spirit repents and believes the Gospel, confessing and forsaking his sins, and humbly relying upon Christ alone for salvation, is freely pardoned and accepted as righteous in the sight of God," omitting the words which appear in the E.P. Articles, and are substantially expressed in the Westminster Confession: "Solely on the ground of Christ's perfect obedience and atoning sacrifice"—which omission certainly weakens the Article, if it does not expose the Article to suspicion. If the omitted words are understood not to be contained in those which are retained, then the Article is a whole diameter apart from the theology of the Westminster Confession; if they are supposed to be contained in these, why should they have been dropped—more especially as their inclusion would have placed the Article beyond the reach of misunderstanding?

4.—Of Union with Christ.

5.—Of Election and Regeneration.

6.—Of Christian Perseverance.

With regard to these no further remark is required than what has been made in the preceding section.

7.—Of the Last Judgment.

While the Westminster Confession not only states the fact that there shall be such a day, but explains "the end of God's appointing this day" to be "the manifestation of the glory of His mercy and justice," and the use which should be made of such a doctrine by all men, and especially by the godly, the New Zealand Article confines its statement to the fact—in particular striking out the words of Christ, which appear both in the Westminster Confession and in the E.P. Articles—"then shall the wicked go away into everlasting punishment page 38 but the righteous into life eternal." That the divergence of the two Creeds at this point, if not inexpedient in view of a union (on which no judgment is pronounced meanwhile) is by no means immaterial, the least learned student of Scripture can discern.

8.—Of the Lord's Day.

A simple perusal of what the Westminster Confession states in Chapter XXL, 7, 8, will suffice to show that the New Zealand Article could hardly have said less about the Christian Sabbath.