(Matthew x: 32-39; I Peter iii: 14-16) Historical Topic reviewed by Rev. John A. W. Haas T.D I. What is it.-Confirmation has not been given by Christ, but is a useful institution of the Church. It is of the Church. It is the confirming by the confirmand of the confession, which the sponsors made for him at baptism. By such personal confession the confirmand shows his fitness to be admitted to the Lord's Supper. But as a necessary preparation for confession before the Church there must be examination, which shall show that there is understanding of the faith confessed. Upon confession there follows prayer with laying on of hands. This prayer is the application of the divine word to a soul and has the power of prayer in general. The laying on of hands bestows nothing. It only pictures that the intercession of the Church is for each one individually. By such prayer, then, those who have confirmed their belief are strengthened through the power of the common prayer of the Church. Confirmation is no completion of baptism. Baptism is complete in itself and its gift is for the whole life. Neither is confirmation a renewal of the baptismal covenant. Through the daily drowning of the old Adam by repentance, and the rising up of the new man by faith, baptism is renewed. No value must be given confirmation, which obscures the importance of Christ's institution, viz., baptism. Therefore also confirmation is not to be emphasized as making a vow. The only real vow of the Christian is the baptismal promise. It includes all secondary promises. Confirmation also does not in itself admit to membership. The Lord's Supper is the

full acceptance and confession of the communion through one bread and one cup of the fellowship with the body of Christ, the Church (I. Cor. 10: 16, 17). Only so far as confirmation declares our privilege to come to the Lord's Supper does it open the way to full adult membership. By baptism we were first "by one Spirit baptized into one body." (I. Cor. 12: 13).

II. Its history.-The confirmation of the Evangelical Church does not find root in the catechumenate of the ancient Church, i. l., the period of instruction and preparation of adults for baptism. It has nothing to do with the Romish sacrament of confirmation. It was really

first introduced at Strassburg between 1534 and 1539. From this latter date it was recommended by the Reformers and began to be observed in a number of German States. But when the Augsburg Interim (1547) sought to approximate Evangelical confirmation to the Romish rite, there was justifiable suspicion and opposition. The staunch Lutheran Matthias Flucius led the ranks of those who were against this sort of confirmation. It was after this only used in single instances. The devastation of the thirty years' war caused its complete cessation, and almost everywhere catechetical instruction fell into disuse. Speuld again warmly advocated confirmation and througli him and the pietist it came into general use. But pietism overstated confirmation. At times it approached in its confirmation exercises to the Methodist conception of conversion. When rationalism followed pietism, confirmation was celebrated with much sentimentality, but it was only a promise to lead a virtuous life. The confirmand was regarded as a soldier giving the oath of allegiance to the flag of a moral life. The thought then of an oath, that some still held, is a survival of rationalism. Only when the Evangelical Church returned to its old standards and the faith of the Reformation was the true place of confirmation again found. Yet there are still many customs and practises which savor of former errors, and do not agree with the subordinate place of confirmation, over against the surpassing eminence of the word in baptism and the Lord's Supper.

II. Its value.-In accordance with the determination of confirmation as a confirming of the confession of faith, its first value is that it presupposes a fuller instruction in the maturer years of our belief. The necessity of this instruction is great, but it can only accomplish its end if preceded by systematic instruction from childhood, and if the time of confirmation be put later than now usually customary.

The second important feature is the public confession. This tends to give a stronger impulse to Christian life, when it is truly appreciated. It is important that Christ should be thus confessed before men.

Again it is well that the Church should be reminded by confirmation of her duty to her youth. She has a Sunday when her prayers ascend especially for them. Confirmation Day is the Church's day for her young people.

Finally, confirmation as it opens the way to the Lord's Supper shows the high privilege of the communion. It emphasizes that only when a soul can examine itself ought it "to eat of that bread and drink of that cup." (I. Cor. 11: 28).

Rise and Development of the Rite of Confirmation

RY REV. STEPHEN PAULSON

The word "Confirmation' is used in the New Testament in two senses, first, of mak ing firm, establishing (Phil. 1:7) and second, of giving authoritative validity (Heb. 6:16). The verb, " to confirm," is used in a variety of senses in the A. V. Neither of these words is used in the New Testament to describe an ecclesiastical rite. In Acts we read of Paul confirming the souls of the disciples' (14:22) and “confirming the Churches" (15:41), of "Judas and Silas being themselves also prophets, exhorted the brethren with many words and confirmed them" (15:32). There is no indication that any ceremony was performed on these occasions. The narrative rather suggests the general idea of strengthening and establishing spiritually.

66

That the rite of Confirmation originated from the Apostolic laying on of hands and that it was at first inseparable from Baptism, is evident. Even after the general introduction of infant Baptism, Confirmation immediately followed. Yet the earliest Christian writings contain no certain testimony concerning Confirmation. Passages have been pointed out in Clement, in the Apostolic Constitutions and in Dionysius. but they rather relate to the sacrament of Baptism proper. Confirmation as such may be traced to the time of Tertullian (d. 220). Cyprian (d. 258) refers to Confirmation and calls it a sacramentum," but it is evident from his use of the term and from the passages in which it occurs, that sacramentum was not used in its strictly theological meaning, but simply in the sense of "ceremony." Certain it is, however, that as early as the end of the second century the notion began to grow that the communication of the Holy Spirit was entirely dependent upon the imposition of hands. Tertullian therefore considers Water-Baptism as the preparatory purification, which was to pave the way for the purification of the Holy Spirit, but yet in Tertullian the Baptism and the consecration or Confirmation appear together as one whole. But when the notion of the exclusive spiritual character of the bishops came to be formed, and it was sup posed that they, as the successors of the

די

Apostles, had alone received all spiritual perfection, the power of producing a true Baptism of the Spirit was ascribed to them alone. This unfounded view was justified thus: Philip was unable to confer a true Baptism of the Spirit because only a deacon (Acts 8). The Apostles have supplied what was wanting by means of the Seal of Baptism-the laying on of hands. The Bishops alone were the direct successors of the Apostles, and, therefore, they alone could confirm. This error thoroughly undermined the value of Baptism, made it of small importance and of no lasting efficacy unless followed by Confirmation. Presbyters and Deacons could Baptize, but at the Council of Toledo (A.D., 400) they were absolutely forbidden to administer the rite of Confirmation.

Now, when Baptism was administered 'n the absence of the bishop, Confirmation was solemnized at some convenient season afterward. Hence it followed that Confirmation was often deferred until several years after Baptism especially in dioceses which were seldom visited either on account of their great extent or the negligence of the bishops. The permanent separation of Baptism and Confirmation is generally traced to the thirteenth century. The earliest Confirmation service extant is found in the Gelasian Sacramentary (A. D. 492).

At the time of the Reformation Confirmation fell into disuse in the Protestant churches, because of the Romish overestimate of its inportance and the errors and superstitions connected with it. Rome had raised it to the place of a sacrament, and without any Scriptural authority urged its absolute necessity, made the Chrism the most essential part, and disparaged the efficacy of Baptism. Thomas Aquinas had declared that Baptism was the sacrament only for the beginning of the Christian life and that its efficacy was evanescent, that the advance to mature strength was through Confirmation, which stamped a certain indelible character upon the soul and was therefore not to be repeated. This is substantially the position of the Roman Church to-day. There was therefore some difficulty in retaining Confirmation without continuing in the minds of the people the errors and abuses connected with it. But yet it was recommended by the earliest Protestant theologians as a useful ecclesiastical rite if freed from errors. Luther in the "Babylonian Captivity" (1520) points out the absence of any divine word of promise attaching specifically to Confirmation. Christ laid his hands upon many and also transferred the laying on of hands for the healing of the

..

sick to his disciples, but no one ever tried to make a sacrament out of this. Confirmation, he says, is an Ecclesiastical custom or sacramental ceremony " in the same category as the consecration of waters and vessels. 'If we consecrate other created things with word and prayer, why should it not be proper to consecrate men in the same way?" Luther expressly denies the applicability of Acts 8:17 to Confirmation. Calvin also recommended Confirmation (Instit. IV, 19:4). Although very little practiced it did not become wholly obsolete in the Lutheran Church during the sixteenth century. Then through the efforts of Spener and the Pietists, it was reintroduced almost universally. Spener looked upon Confirmation as a renewal of the Baptismal vow.

Chemniz, the greatest theologian of our Church, gives in his "Refutation of the Council of Trent," the Lutheran view of Confirmation. "Those who have been baptized in infancy, when they have attained to years of discretion, may be instructed in a simple catechism of Church doctrine. 1. The child is admonished concerning his baptism. 2. The child makes a public profession of his own before the entire church. 3. He is asked concerning the chief topics of Christian doctrine, and if he do not understand is more correctly instructed. is admonished, and proclaims that he dissents from all fanatical opinion. 5. An exhortation is added from the Word of God to persevere in the covenant of Baptism. 6. Public prayer is made that God would preserve and confirm the child in this confession. . . .

4. He

Such rite of Confirmation

would confer great profit for the edification of the young and of the entire Church."

The fathers of our Church in America retained all the rites of the Church as it existed in Europe. Confirmation was retained and emphasized as a culmination of the catechetical instruction and a preparation for the reception of the Lord's Supper. Nevertheless it fell into disuse and was wholly unknown in some parts of the Church and has only of comparatively late years been reintroduced. There is to-day an evident tendency in the American Church to improve as much as possible the religious instruction of the young preparatory to Confirmation. Easter.

The Angel's Message
(Matthew xxviii : 1-15)

April 12.

Biblical Topic reviewed by Rev. C. Armand Miller Questions to be answered in brief papers: What are the circumstances of the Resurrection? What are the proofs of the facts that Jesus rose again? What are the con

tents of the Angel's Message? What place does the Resurrection hold in the preaching of the Apostles and in the Christian system of faith?

Lessons for our own lives:

1. The world's certainties are uncertain. Death is a certainty on earth to every man. And it is certain, from the world's standpoint, that death ends all communication with one's fellow men. It is certain that the man who is dead to-day will be dead to-morrow! But, in the light of the Easter story, that is uncertain! It is certain to the world, that this day which has begun will end! That the sun which rose this morning will rise to-morrow morning. But a day is coming some time that will not end, The sun will rise some day and melt into the unsetting brightness of Eternity! or it will set, and Eternity will rise. The cemetery yonder is, certainly, to the world's thought, the place of death, of corruption, of silence, of absence of motion. But the day is coming when there will be a moving of the dry bones, a stirring and a commotion, life and incorruption, in that city of the then no longer dead.

2. God's plans and promises are sure. Yes, though their fulfillment be impossible. "Expect the impossible," is pre-eminently a wise admonition in our relation to God. “If a man die, shall he live again?" asked the old patriarch. The world regards the question as answering itself. No! But the old patriarch was asking not the world, but God. Is it surely God's promise that Jesus shall come again, and we shall be changed, and the dead shall rise, and all armies and governments, and hostile men, and hell itself cannot and will not prevent it? It shall come to pass!

3. There is not only soul life beyond the grave, but the body shall live again. “Every man in his own order, Christ the first fruits, afterward they that are Christ's at His coming." His body was raised, the scars were on it. The face was His; the voice they recognized, and in the familiar action of breaking of bread He was known to them.

And if Jesus rose, so shall our loved ones rise, so shall we rise, if, Jesus tarrying, we fall asleep before that day. Ah! body, poor, humble, misshapen though thou be, yet thou art dear to this soul thou hast served so long and so faithfully. She is glad that thou shalt share Eternity with her.

And well-beloved forms that once held the sweet souls of our friends, once again shall ye fold and keep those blessed spirits. Once again shall we meet face to face, and walk hand in hand!

The Diet at Worms Historical Topic reviewed by Rev. J C. Schindel. "The light shineth in the darkness and the darkness overcame it not."

Men there are and always will be who, conscience bound to God alone, will answer to the world's audacious demand to deny the Christian faith, "Unless I am refuted by Scriptural authority, or by clear arguments from the Word, I cannot and will not recant. Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders. Gott helfe mir. Amen." (Here I stand, I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen.) So answered Luther in the Reichshaus before the Imperial Diet assembled at Worms, in the principality of Hesse-Darmstadt, April 17, 1521. The day and hour were epoch making in the heaven-ordained process of the Church's liberation. And the Diet at Worms stands the dividing time when mental and spiritual liberty, born again, broke irrevocably with papal Rome.

Let us briefly note, first, the political and religious elements entering into this august assembly; second, let us view the Diet itself, and, thirdly, consider the benefactions resulting therefrom.

The Spanish Prince Charles, by the sudden death of Maximilian and the magnanimous renunciation of Frederic of Saxony, was made Emperor of Austria, Burgundy and Germany, and, as political head or the Holy Roman Empire, he became the nominal King of Italy. The King of France, Francis I, and Henry VIII of England, had sought, with no little intrigue, the crown now placed on this youth of 19. With this crown went the rule of the most powerful kingdom since the illustrious days of Charlemagne. The new Emperor Charles, at heart, was no friend of the Pope, who had sought to defeat his election and to secure the elevation of the Roman Catholic King Francis. But political considerations bade him use the livery of heaven in which to serve the devil, and Charles obeyed. The unity of this vast empire over which a strange fate had so suddenly and unexpectedly placed him was of greater consideration than local dissent from the Roman See: the Church and State were one; religion must be a unity; aught else was heresy punishable with death. With this spirit Charles V assembled the Diet. Weighty matters of state were to be considered and the German princes presented them thus: 1. The private wars between nobles must be stopped, that the evil to the commerce of the towns may be abated; 2. The question of jurisdiction between certain bishops and thefr temporal lords must be defined; 3. In the intended

19

absence of the Emperor in Spain an acceptable Regency must be appointed; and, 4.

To take notice of the books and descriptions made by Friar Martin Luther against the Court of Rome. The which Friar Ma.. un, of the Elector of Saxony and other princes, is much favored." In the German Em pire religious affairs had so gotten hold of the public mind that upon Charles' accession to the throne revolution or reform was inevitable. This Augustinian Monk, soon to be the central figure in one of the world's greatest dramas, had beaten and driven off both the indulgence seller Tetzel and the sophist Eck. He aroused the German princess to serious thought in his "Address to the Nobility," and gave mighty voice to the overburdened heart of the common people in a language which they understood in his pamphlet On the Babylonish Captivity of the Church." He had defied Leo X when outside the Ulster Gate at Wittenberg he had publicly burned the Bull of Excommunication. He had done more. Rejecting the authority not only of the papacy, but of a general council as the ultimate interpreter of Scripture, he set at naught the decisions of the 'honorable Council of Constance, held on German soil and under a German Emperor." He unequivocally declared the Scriptures to be the ultimate authority. He rises to the hight and dignity of a true religious reformer. clearly pointing out the error, indicating its cause and applies the only remedy, the Word of the Almighty God. This was a spirit radically different, widely divergent from the then ecclesiastical age. It was the spirit in which Luther answered the summons to Worms.

The Emperor and his electors were proceeding with the consideration of state matters when the Pope demanded the rigorous enforcement of his Bull. "Should a man who has written so Christianly be executed without a trial?" so urged the Electors, "the Emperor's dignity and piety were engaged that, should Luther recant, other matters concerning the welfare of the Empire would be affected." So Luther is summoned. In his monk's gown and covered wagon he is escorted by knights and horsemen as he enters the city of Worms. Toward evening of the next day he is brought into the presence of the Diet. Before him is a pile of his books, some 20 in number. He is asked two questions: "Do you acknowledge these books to be yours?" "Do you recant the heretical doctrines they contain?" Modestly he replies, "I think the books are mine." Having examined the titles, Yes, the books are mine. But I cannot answer the second question touching my recantation, seeing it

is a question which has reference to faith and the salvation of souls, a question which concerns the Word of God, without reflection." Time is granted him until the next day. The papal party are already rejoicing and Luther's friends manifest disappointment. The supreme moment was not yet. The following day was spent in preparation. With his Bible open before him, he was heard to pray long and earnestly: "O God! O God! help me against all the wisdom of this world. . . The work is not mine, but thine. I have nothing to contend

for with these great men of the world. . O faithful and unchangeable God! I lean not upon man. It is Thine.

The cause is holy.

O God! send help. Amen." At 4 o'clock the herald came. The streets are full of people and many are upon the housetops to see this intrepid monk pass by. It was already dark and torches had been lit when they reached the Council Hall. He entered the court through throngs of Italians, Spaniards and Germans; his face betrayed no alarm, his step was firm, he walked with God. The eye of man never looked on such scene before or since. Clerics and laics, barons, counts and princes, Roman Nuncios, with ambassadors from papal France and England, prelates, bishops and archbishops, some 30 in number, eight margraves, dukes and archdukes, the six Electors of the German Empire, and upon the throne the Emperor, whose scepter ruled two hemispheres and the islands of the sea; the hallways and windows and lower courts crowded with knights in armor and gaudy trapped courtiers; in the midst of this splendor, this prelatical pomp, this worldly wisdom, stood the Friar Martin, an heretic according to Rome, his massive brow frank and open in the firm faith of his unfaltering heart, his form towering yet withal in most meek and humble mien. The brief silence is broken by the Chancellor of the Elector of Treves, the Diet's spokesman, demanding Luther's recantation. Respectfully, with much gentleness and mildness, with Christian firmness, Luther answers at some length first in German, then in Latin. Perspiration stood upon his forehead; he turned and looked upon that assembly which held in its hands his life or death; he lifted his face toward heaven and said, "Here I stand. I cannot do otherwise. God help me. Amen."

The moral grandeur of the man and the Scripturalness of the truth he had uttered, struck dumb the assembly from prince to king. He had not answered with human wisdom nor gave to sophistry its like. It was not Luther who triumphed, but the Word.

Here then was erected the truth that the Word of God is alone infalible and not men, be they pope or council. Here private judgment founded upon the Word was given a superior place to decrees which contradict truth. Here was declared the principle that the Scriptures must determine whether men and councils are right, and not men and councils sit in judgment upon the Scriptures. Here was defined for all time to come that liberty of mind and soul which, faithful to the Spirit and the Word, make possible man's highest intellectuality and the noblest development of his religious life. 2d week after Easter.

April 26, 1903.

Personal Purity

(Exod. xx: 14; Eph. v: 1-14)

Biblical Topic reviewed by Rev. C. Armand Miller Lessons for our lives: 1. There is but one law of purity for both sexes. Herein God's law is different from man's conventions. Human society damns the woman who transgresses, and caresses the man. God is no respecter of persons. Purity is also the virtue of true manhood. Paul, the hero who passed, not unscathed, through so many dangers and conflicts, writes to young Timothy, "Кеер thyself pure." Tennyson writes of the strength of purity, when he tells of the brave and noble Knight of the Round Table, Sir Galahad,

"His strength was as the strength of ten, Because his heart was pure."

God demands and will demand of the boys and the young men the same purity of heart and life that we demand of our girls and young women. And by God's law, not by social prescriptions, will we be judged.

2. How shall we keep this Commandment? It means constant watchfulness. "Out of the heart are the issues of life" and God alone can make the heart clean, and keep it clean. Prayer and the Word of God are to be powerful and frequent in the life of purity. And as we pray, so must we live. That is not a sincere prayer which simply forms the prelude of companionship with those whose thought, as evidenced by their speech and actions, is impure. Choose pure friends and associates, and apply the same principle throughout all your fellowships. Guard the eyes. Much that is called art is vile. Avoid in books, as you would in life, the companionship of the base. The theatre of our day is one of the strongest helpers of the god of lust. If Eye-gate and Ear-gate are well sentineled, and if the intruding thought is firmly and quickly hurled outside the walls, the citadel of Mansoul, by the grace of God, may be kept clean. Perhaps you say, it will make you look peculiar, to be careful of all these forms of association (Continued on page 23.)