IN a former issue we quoted the Declaratory Act at length, and we now proceed to deal with its doctrinal teaching. In the preamble the Act says:—”Whereas it is expedient to remove difficulties and scruples which have been felt by some in reference to the declaration of belief required from persons who receive licence or are admitted to offices in this Church, the General Assembly, with consent of Presbyteries, declare as follows,” etc. Let it be made quite clear at the outset that the “difficulties and scruples” did not arise from any ambiguity in the doctrinal statements in the Confession of Faith. The Westminster Divines were past masters in the field of theology, and being masters, they stated their doctrinal propositions with a precision that has been the despair of their successors. It is this very clarity and precision that caused the “difficulties and scruples” which it was the purpose of the Declaratory Act to remove out of the way. Those who accepted the scriptural doctrines of the Confession had no such “difficulties and scruples.” It was those who were drifting from the old moorings, though still fixed to them by their ordination promises, that began to complain of “difficulties and scruples.” The framers of the Act set out by endeavouring, first of all, to meet the undisguised opposition to the Confessional teaching on the sovereignty of God and, if possible, to get it pushed into the background. Failing this, they wished to give what they considered a human touch to this great and august doctrine, and in doing so they were like foolish Alpine climbers trying to polish the rugged, lofty peaks of the giant mountains towering up to heaven. The efforts of the framers are set forth in the words—”That in holding and teaching, according to the Confession, the divine purpose of grace towards those who are saved, and the execution of that purpose in time, this Church most earnestly proclaims, as standing in the forefront of the revelation of grace, the love of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, to sinners of mankind, manifested especially in the Father’s gift of the Son to be the Saviour of the world, in the coming of the Son to offer Himself, a propitiation for sin, and in the strivings of the Holy Spirit with men to bring them to repentance.” After reading this one naturally asks, but (1) is not the teaching of the Confession on the love of God sufficiently clear and scriptural without a declaratory statement on the subject? and if it is, what aspect of the divine love is emphasised by the Confession? Is the statement of the doctrine of God’s love given in the Declaratory Act, Scriptural and Confessional? In answer to the first question, we cannot do better than quote the words of a master theologian, Dr Warfield, of Princeton, in which he points out the place given to God’s love in the Confession, and the emphasis it, like the Scriptures, lays on His love to the elect:—”It is frequently objected again that the Confession makes too little relatively of the love of God,” he says, “and too much relatively of His sovereignty, and thus reverses the emphasis of the Bible. The formers of the Confession are not responsible, however, for this separation of God’s love and sovereignty; to them His sovereignty seemed a loving sovereignty, and His love a sovereign love, and in founding the whole fabric of their Confession on the idea of God’s undeserved favour to lost sinners, they understood themselves to be glorifying His love in sinners. It is perfectly true that they seldom make use of the term ‘love,’ but this is due to the exactness of their phraseology, by which they prefer to speak of God’s ‘goodness’ and ‘grace’—by the use of which terms they designate His general love, and by the other His special love for His people. When this is understood, so far are they from neglecting to emphasise the love of God, that it is rather within the truth to say that there is no other one subject so repeatedly and emphatically and lovingly dwelt upon. The ‘goodness’ of God is one of His essential attributes (Chapter II., section i.) and is infinite (Chap. V., sec. IV.); nay, all ‘goodness’ is in and of Him (Chap. II. sec. ii.). It was in order to manifest His ‘goodness’ that He created the world (Chap. IV. sec. i.); and hence it is manifested by the light of nature (Chap. I., sec. i.)—even that He is good and doeth good to all (Chap. XXI. sec. i.); as also by the course of providence (Chap. I., sec. i.; Chap. V., sec. iv.), which is so administered as to redound to the praise of His ‘goodness’ (Chap. IV., sec. i.). Even His dealings with sin manifest His goodness (Chap. V., sec. iv.). Especially does His treatment of the elect, however, flow from His free and unchangeable love (Chap. XVII., sec. ii.; chap. III., sec. v.; Chap. V., sec. v.). His love follows them at every step, and every separate blessing bestowed upon them is a ‘grace’: effectual calling (Chap. X., sec. ii.), faith (Chap. XIV., sec. i.), justification (Chap. XI., sec. iv.), pardon (Chap. XV., sec. iii.), adoption (Chap. XII., sec. i.), each is reckoned among the saving graces (Chap. XIII., sec. i.; Chap. XVI., sec. iii.; Chap. XVII., sec. i.; Chap. IX. iv.) All His acts to His children are those of a gracious God (Chap. V., sec. v.), all things being made to work together for their good (Chap. V., sec. vii.), even His correctings, being gracious (Chap. V., sec. v.), and all to the praise of His glorious grace (Chap. III., sec. v.). There is certainly no lack of emphasis on God’s love here; though no doubt it is His sovereign love that is emphasised.”—(“On the Revision of the Confession of Faith,” p. 26). In another place quoting the demand, Dr Schaff makes for a Confession that it should be “as broad and deep as God’s love, and as strict and severe as God’s justice.” He adds—”This, this Confession is. And no Confession could be this which did not make, as this Confession does, its formative idea, not God’s general and indiscriminate love for His creatures, but His ineffable and peculiar love for His people—His saving love, as distinguished from His mere benevolence. God’s electing love is the highest manifestation of His love for man, not (as some seem to think) a limitation of it; it does not make His general love without effect—it gives it effect. That the Confession lays most stress on it, is to preserve the right proportion of faith and to glorify God’s general love, not to derogate from it. Doing so it makes everything of love, bases its whole fabric on it, and all the more glorifies it that it does not forget God’s justice. After the Bible, it is the most perfect charter of the divine love current among men. Nor would it be bettered in this regard by making it speak twice as often about love and half as often of the black facts of human nature and destiny which furnish the occasion of the exhibition of God’s love to men, and apart from a full realisation of which, we can have no appreciation of the depths of His love” (Ibid., pp. 59, 60). If it be so that the Confession lays so much stress especially on God’s electing love, why did the framers of the Declaratory Act deem it necessary in their first article to emphasise the fact that the Free Church held as standing in the forefront of the revelation of grace the love of God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to sinners of mankind? The answer is that they wished to meet the objections of those who were opposed in some way or other to God’s discriminating love to His elect. This was regarded as too limited, and the Declaratory Act is the attempt of modern theologians to blend the general benevolence of God with His discriminating love to the elect, and the attempt has proved a disastrous failure. It has been said that South Africa has often proved the grave of many a military reputation. But after a careful examination of this attempt at creedmaking by the Free Church divines of the last decade of the nineteenth century it is no exaggeration to say that the Declaratory Act proved the grave of their reputations as theologians.
We now come to discuss our next question—”Is the statement of God’s love given in the Declaratory Act Scriptural and Confessional?” Let us look more particularly at the Clause (I.)—(1) The phraseology makes a distinction between “the purpose of grace” and “the love of God to sinners of mankind.” This is contrary to Scripture. God’s purpose of grace and love have reference to the same objects. 2. That the framers of the Act have their minds fixed chiefly on God’s universal love or benevolence is indicated by the expression, “manifested especially in the Father’s gift of the Son to be the Saviour of the world.” Taking the phrase as it stands it implies the gift of the Son flows from God’s universal love or benevolence. Scripture does not give the slightest ground for this view. The gift of the Son is expressly declared in Scripture to flow from God’s love to the elect (Rom. viii. 32, 33). 3. The love of God which stands in the forefront of the purpose of grace is not God’s universal benevolence to His creatures as such but it is His sovereign love to His elect who were chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world. To state that either the Bible or the Confession placed the universal benevolence of God in the forefront of the purpose of grace is anti-Scriptural and anti-Confessional. 4. The designation “Saviour of the world” is objectionable not because it is unscriptural, but because of its environment. It is one of those great titles of the Redeemer which through the careless handling of men has been placed in questionable company. As it stands in the first clause of the Declaratory Act the title is evidently meant to be in harmony with the thought running throughout the clause of God’s universal love to men as such. This is not the Scriptural use of the designation which stresses the suitability of a Christ to sinners of all classes and nationalities universally as opposed to the exclusiveness of Jewish nationalism. There are a few other points in this Clause which might be dealt with, but sufficient has been written to show that the teaching of the Declaratory Act on the love of God is both anti-Scriptural and anti-Confessional.