R. L. Dabney on those who delight in criticizing and amending "the received English version"

 

From X post:

R. L. Dabney warns against those who delight in criticizing and amending “the received English version” “this precious work of our ancestors”:

"The most reprehensible pedantry of all is that which delights in criticizing and amending the received English version. Instead of seeking for opportunities to point out errors in this precious work of our ancestors, its credit should be carefully sustained before the people, whenever this can be done without an actual sacrifice of our integrity and of the truth of the text. The general excellence of the translation merits this treatment. Such were the learning and labour of its authors, that he who is most deeply acquainted with sacred criticism will be found most modest in assailing their accuracy in any point. But it is far more important to remark, that this version is practically the Bible of the common people—the only one to which they can have familiar access. If their confidence in its fidelity is overthrown, they are virtually robbed of the written word of God…. Thus let the confidence of your hearers in their English Bibles be preserved and fortified."

-Evangelical Eloquence, 162-163.

R. L. Dabney on free justification and good works

R. L. Dabney’s article “The Moral Effects of Free Justification” appeared in The Southern Presbyterian Review (April, 1873) (reprinted in Dabney’s Discussions, Vol. I, pp. 73-106).  In the article Dabney discusses how the doctrine of free justification does not exclude the expectation of good works:

To the inconsiderate there may seem to be a contrariety; but the easy and obvious solution is the truth that, while our works are naught as a ground of merit for our justification, they are all-important as evidences that we are justified. The man that hath clean hands and a pure heart is the one who shall ascend into the hill of the Lord. Obedience characterizes one as a friend of Christ. The fear of God and works of righteousness distinguish the man who is accepted of him. The faith which evinces its living power by no works has now power to justify. The justified person is the one that doeth just works. All this is true. But this is far short of saying that the merit of clean hands and pure heart is what entitled the first-mentioned to his place in the hill of the Lord, that a sinner’s obedience deserved the bestowal of Christ’s friendship, that the fear of God and righteous works purchased Cornelius’ acceptance with him. In a word, the personal value of the believer’s good works to him in the transaction of his justification is not their purchasing, but their indicative, power (p. 89).

JTR

One more quote from Dabney's "Spurious Religious Excitements"

Note:   Here’s a final excerpt from toward the end of Dabney’s 1887 “Spurious Religious Excitements” (Discussions, Vol. 3:  pp. 456-475).  Here Dabney lays part of the blame for revivalistic excess at the feet of egalitarianism (cf. his essay “Lay Preaching” in Discussions, Vol. 2:  pp. 76-95):

One corollary from this discussion is:  How perilous is it to entrust the care of souls to an ignorant zeal!  None but an educated ministry can be expected, humanly speaking, to resist the seduction of “revival measures,” or to guard themselves from the plausible blunders  we have analyzed above.  And the church which entrusts the care of souls to lay-evangelists, self-appointed and irresponsible to the ecclesiastical government appointed by Christ, betrays its charge and duty (p. 474).

Even more from Dabney's "Spurious Religious Excitements"

Image:  R. L. Dabney (1820-1898)

 

Yet another excerpt from R. L. Dabney’s 1887 article “Spurious Religious Excitements” (Discussions, Vol. 3):

“In fact, spurious revivals we honestly regard as the chief bane of our Protestantism.  We believe that they are the chief cause, under the prime source, original sin, which has deteriorated the average standing of holy living, principles, and morality, and the church discipline of our religion, until it has nearly lost its practical power over the public conscience.  Striking the average of the whole nominal membership of the Protestant churches, the outside world does not credit us for any higher standard than we are in the habit of ascribing to the Synagogue and to American Popery.  How far is the world wrong in its estimate?  That denomination which shall sternly use its ecclesiastical authority, under Christ’s law, to inhibit these human methods and to compel teachers back to the scriptural and only real means, will earn the credit of being the defender of an endangered gospel” (p. 474).

More Dabney on "Spurious Religious Excitements"

 

Here’s another snippet from Dabney:

Thus a synergistic theology fosters these “revival measures,” as they, in turn, incline toward a synergistic creed.  Doubtless, many ministers are unconsciously swayed by the natural love of excitement.  This is the same instinct which leads school-boys and clowns to run to witness a dog fight, Spaniards to the cock-fight and the bull-fight, sporting men to the pugilist’s ring, and theatre-goers to the comedy.  This natural instinct prompts many an evangelist, without his being distinctly aware of it, to prefer the stirring scenes of the spurious revival to the sober, quiet, laborious work of religious teaching.  But it is obvious that this motive is as unworthy as it is natural (Discussions, Vol. 3, p. 471).

Dabney on "Spurious Religious Excitements"

 

The only book I allowed myself to buy at the Keach Conference was Dabney’s Discussions Volume III:  Philosophical.  The first article I read (worth the price of the volume alone) is one titled “Spurious Religious Excitements” (from The Presbyterian Quarterly, October, 1887, pp. 456-475).  You can listen to a reading of the article here.

In the article Dabney warns against “religious excitements” which he defines as “temporary movements of the emotions devoid of any saving operation of the Truth on the reason and conscience” (p. 456).    The article is aimed at the emotionalism of revivalism and what we might call today “easy-believism.”  In Dabney’s day the “third wave” of so-called charismatic renewal had yet to appear.  Still, his article has a contemporary ring to it. Here Dabney describes how emotions might be manipulated to stir up false religious experience:

These plain fact and principles condemn nearly every feature of the modern new measure “revival.”  The preaching and other religious instructions are shaped with a main view to excite the carnal emotions and instinctive sympathies, while no due care is taken to present saving, didactic truth to the understanding thus stimulated.  As soon as some persons, professed Christians, Or awakened “mourners,” are infected with any lively passion, let it be however carnal and fleeting, a spectacular display is made of it, with confident laudations of it as unquestionably precious and saving, with the design of exciting the remainder of the crowd with sympathetic contagion.  Every adjunct of fiery declamation, animated singing, groans, tears, exclamations, noisy prayers, is added so as to shake the nerves and add the tumult of a hysterical animal excitement to the sympathetic wave.  Every youth or impressible girl who is seen to tremble, or grow pale, or shed tears, is assured that he or she is under the workings of the Holy Spirit, and is driven by threats of vexing that awful and essential Agent of salvation to join the spectacular show, and add himself to the exciting pantomime.  Meanwhile, most probably, their minds are blank of every intelligent or conscientious view of the truth; they had been tittering or whispering a little while before, during the pretended didactic part of the exercises; they could give no intelligent account of their own sudden excitement, and, in fact, it is no more akin to any spiritual, rational, or sanctifying cause, than the quiver of the nostrils of a horse at the sound of the bugle and the fox-hounds.  But they join the mourners, and the manipulation proceeds…. (p. 466).

The Vision (8/22/13): Dabney on the Three Stages of Preaching

R. L. Dabney (1820-1898) was a staunch Presbyterian minister who boldly preached the doctrines of grace.  As a young minister, Dabney served Tinkling Springs Presbyterian Church in Fishersville, Virginia.  As a mature minister he taught theology at Union Seminary when it used to be located in Farmville.  Among other things, Dabney wrote a series of lectures on preaching which was printed under the title Evangelical Eloquence (reprinted by Banner of Truth).

In the opening lecture Dabney offers a historical survey of preaching, noting “there are three stages through which preaching has repeatedly passed with the same results” (p. 27).

The first stage is when “scriptural truth is faithfully presented in scriptural garb—that is to say, not only are all doctrines asserted which truly belong to the revealed system of redemption, but they are presented in that dress and connection in which the Holy Spirit has presented them, without seeking any other human science.”  He refers to this stage as “the golden age.”

The second stage is “the transition stage.”  In this stage “the doctrines taught are still those of the Scriptures, but their relations are molded into conformity with the prevalent human dialectics.” In other words, Biblical truths are still taught, but preachers attempt to make the message more relevant by conveying them in contemporary thought forms and ideas.

Finally, in the third stage, “not only are the methods and explanations conformed to the philosophy of the day, but the doctrines themselves contradict the truth of the Word” (p. 28).

Dabney traces this pattern from the preaching of the apostles in the primitive church (stage one), to the “scholasticism” of those who later allegorized the Scriptures (stage two), to the dark ages (stage three).

Then he notes how the cycle was repeated from the Reformation (stage one), to the revivalism of the Great Awakening (stage two), to the age of Rationalism (stage three).

Dabney’s three stages reminded me of the old adage that the first generation discovers the gospel, the second assumes it, and the third compromises it.

He closes by calling his hearers not to wrap “the body of God’s truth” in “the drapery of human philosophy,” urging:  “May we ever be content to exhibit Bible doctrine in its own Bible dress!” (p. 29).

Sounds like some wise counsel.  May we strive to remain “stage one” in our preaching.

Grace and peace, Pastor Jeff Riddle

Dabney on the importance of creeds

Why should we make use of clear creeds and confessions?  Robert Lewis Dabney (1820-1898) made these remarks when critiquing the anti-creedal views of Alexander Campbell:

As man’s mind is notoriously fallible, and professed Christians who claim to hold to the Scriptures, as they understand them, differ from each other notoriously, some platform for union or cooperation must be adopted, by which those who believe they are truly agreed may stand and work together.  It is the only possible expedient, in the absence of an inspired living umpire, such as the pope claims falsely to be, by which fidelity to truth can be reconciled with cooperation.  A creed, then, is such a means for enabling Christians to understand each other.  It is the human exposition of what is supposed to be the exact meaning of the Scriptures; and differs from those usually delivered from the pulpit only in being more carefully and accurately made by the assistance of many minds.  Its setting forth is an exercise of the church’s ordinary didactic function. It must advance nothing which its compilers do not suppose to be fully sustained by the Scriptures; and no authority is claimed for it, in any respect, save that which they believe is communicated by the word of God.

From Robert Lewis Dabney, “The System of Alexander Campbell:  An Examination of Its Leading Points” [first published in the Southern Presbyterian Review (July, 1880)], in Dabney’s Discussions, Vol. I (Sprinkle Publications, 1992):  p. 315.