得救确据属于信心的本质吗？ ——对比加尔文与加尔文主义者Does Assurance Belong to theEssence of Faith? Calvin and the Calvinists

https://www.tms.edu/msj/msj5-1-3/

https://www.churchchina.org/archives/170104.html

文/周毕克（Joel R.Beeke） 译/煦 校/述宁

当代教会亟需重新关注得救确据的教义，这样，基督徒的生活才会结出所期望的果子。在教会历史中与此相关的讨论集中在一个问题上，就是加尔文主义者与加尔文本人对于信心与确据的关系的看法是否不同。两者之间的差异是量上的和方法论上的，而非质的方面或实质性的。加尔文自己区分了信徒体验中的信心（faith）和信心的实际(reality of faith)两个定义。荷兰“二次改教”（拙劣的术语翻译，Nadere Reformatie，字面意思是“深化的改教”）的代表人物亚力山大·科姆里（Alexander Comrie）试图找到“确据是信心的结果”（assurance is the fruit of faith）和“确据和信心是不能分离的”（assurance is inseparable from faith）这两个观点之间的平衡，他本质上与加尔文持有相同的立场。而在获得确据的自觉意识的两步方法上，他及其他一些加尔文主义者与加尔文本人有所不同。加尔文和加尔文主义者为教会提供了值得效仿的典范，是今天非常需要的。

The contemporary church stands in great need of refocusing on the doctrine of assurance if the desirable fruit of Christian living is to abound. A relevant issue in church history centers in whether or not the Calvinists differed from Calvin himself regarding the relationship between faith and assurance. The difference between the two was quantitative and methodological, not qualitative or substantial. Calvin himself distinguished between the definition of faith and the reality of faith in the believer’s experience. Alexander Comrie, a representative of the Dutch Second Reformation, held essentially the same position as Calvin in mediating between the view that assurance is the fruit of faith and the view that assurance is inseparable from faith. He and some other Calvinists differ from Calvin in holding to a two-tier approach to the consciousness of assurance. So Calvin and the Calvinists furnish the church with a model to follow that is greatly needed today.

现今有许多人推断，个人得救确据的教义，即“对自己是否得救的确定性”，不再有现实意义，因为几乎所有的基督徒都拥有充足的确据。但事实可能恰恰相反，确据的教义具有特殊的现实意义，因为当今的基督徒生活在一个极其缺乏确据的时代。

Today many infer that the doctrine of personal assurance`that is, the certainty of one's own salvation`is no longer relevant since nearly all Christians possess assurance in an ample degree.  On the contrary, it is probably true that the doctrine of assurance has particular relevance, because today's Christians live in a day of minimal, not maximal, assurance.

圣经、改教家和后改教人士多次提醒，个人的得救确据可以透过它的果实来识别：与神亲密相交的生活；有孩子般服从为标记的温柔、孝顺的关系；渴慕上帝以及荣耀上帝的属灵操练；渴望成就大使命来荣耀他。丰富的确据会伴随强烈的宣教意识。有得救确据的信徒会祈祷和期待复兴，视天堂为家，盼望基督再临，渴慕进入荣耀（参提后4:6-8）。

Scripture, the Reformers, and post-Reformation men repeatedly offer the reminder that personal assurance of salvation is recognizable by its fruits:  a close life of fellowship with God; a tender, filial relationship marked with childlike obedience; a thirsting after God and spiritual exercises that extol Him; a longing to glorify Him by the fulfillment of the Great Commission.  Where assurance abounds, mission-mindedness prevails.  Assured believers pray for and anticipate revival, view heaven as their home, and long for the Second Advent of Christ and their translation to glory (2 Tim 4:6-8).

确据像救恩一样，是双面的。它是亲密关系之巅峰：信徒由此既认识基督又知道他是为基督所认识的。确据不是自我说服，而是圣灵运行其中的一种确定性，让基督徒通过基督更加靠近上帝。

Assurance, like salvation, is double-sided.  It is the summit of intimacy by which the believer both knows Christ and knows he is known by Him.  Assurance is not a self-given persuasion, but a Spiritapplied certainty which moves the Christian Godward through Christ.

今天，这些荣耀上帝的果子通常严重缺乏。与神相交的渴望，对天堂的真实性的感受，为上帝的荣耀而有的欢喜，为复兴的祷告，这些都比以前缺乏。每当教会确信她正以自己的方式在这个世界上追求上帝和荣耀，并且对属世美善的强调支配这种确信时，确据就处于低潮状态（参希伯来书11章）。

Today these God-glorifying fruits are often seriously lacking. The desire to fellowship with God, the sense of the reality of heaven, the relish for God's glory, and intercession for revival all fall short of a former day.  Whenever the church's emphasis on earthly good dominates the conviction that she is traveling through this world on her way to God and glory, assurance is at a low ebb (Hebrews 11).

拯救的信心（saving faith）的教义对基督徒是至关重要的。今天，教会需要再次认识到：信心是培育各种形式和程度的个人确据的苗圃。每一次信心的运用，神对信徒的应许的成就，恩典的内在证据，圣灵的见证，都会产生确据。

Today the church needs to realize again that one important reason the doctrine of saving faith is of central importance to the Christian is because faith is the seed-bed of every kind and degree of personal assurance.  This includes assurance that flows from each exercise of faith, from the application of God's promises to the believer, from inward evidences of grace, and from the witness of the Holy Spirit.

信心和确据之间的关系问题成为宗教改革，特别是改教后神学的一个根本焦点：确据，即对自己得救的确定，属于信心的本质吗？从更实践的角度说：没有确据的信心是否可能存在？如果可能，信心会因此失去了活力、确定性和常态吗？

This question of the relationship between faith and assurance became a cardinal point in Reformation and particularly in postReformation theology:  does assurance`that is, certainty of one's own salvation`belong to the essence of faith?  More practically, is it possible to have faith without assurance?  If so, does not faith lose its vitality, and assurance, its normalcy?

在处理这些“信心/确据”的问题时，改教和改教后的神学家反对天主教的主张，即基督徒通常没有任何形式的确据。他们之所以如此抗争是因为他们的最高目标是忠实于圣经及其权威。从根本上说，他们是在圣经资料、解经和释经学中奋战。因为新旧约都显示一个强大的张力：活泼的信心和一种常态的确据（创15:6；罗 4:16-22），又同时伴随着缺乏确据的可能性（诗篇38，73，88；彼后1:10）。

In dealing with these faith/assurance questions, the Reformation and post-Reformation theologians struggled against Roman Catholicism's assertion that no forms of assurance commonly belonged to Christians.  But they so struggled largely because their supreme goal was allegiance to Scripture and its authority.  At root, they were wrestling with biblical data, exegesis, and hermeneutics. Both testaments display a formidable tension:  vital faith and some kind of normal assurance (Gen 15:6; Rom 4:16-22), conjoined with the possibility of lacking assurance (Psalms 38, 73, 88; 2 Pet 1:10).

改教和改教后的著作里关于“信心/确据”问题的讨论的核心关注点是在牧养中如何处理圣经的张力，这是现今非常需要重新提出并面对的问题。在谨慎地扩展改教初期的教义时，宗教改革后的神学家们断言得救确据问题涉及的不只是对上帝在基督里的应许的主观依赖。他们明确地教导说，如果把这三段论[2]和圣灵的见证正确地设置在圣经、以基督为中心和三位一体的背景下，它们在信徒的得救确据中就具有有效的位置；并且是作为确据的次要依据而有效，并不篡夺上帝的应许作为主要依据的地位。

The central concern in the discussion of faith/assurance questions in Reformation and post-Reformation writing`a concern which sorely needs resurfacing today`was the outworking of this scriptural tension in a pastoral context.  In a meticulous augmentation of early Reformation doctrine, post-Reformed divines affirmed that certain kinds of assurance involve more than an objective resting on the promises of God in Christ.  Specifically, they taught that when properly set in a scriptural, Christocentric, and Trinitarian context, the syllogisms2 and the witness of the Spirit have a valid place in the believer's assurance`valid, that is, as secondary grounds of assurance that do not usurp the primary ground that consists of the promises of God.

然而，关于信心与确据之间关系，宗教改革后的神学家们和改教家的理解似乎有很大的不同。早期改教家认为，确据是信心不可或缺的一部分，而宗教改革后的神学家们则认为可以区分确据与信心，正如《威斯敏斯特信条》的第18章所显明的那样。学者试图调解这种明显的差异，认为这是一个实质性的甚至是对立性的区别。由此至少演变出两派解释。

However, in dealing with questions on the relationship between faith and assurance, Reformation and post-Reformation theologians appear to differ considerably.  Whereas the early Reformers held that assurance is part and parcel with faith, post-Reformation divines felt free to distinguish assurance from faith as witnessed by chap. 18 of the Westminster Confession.  Scholarship has compounded this apparent difference by regarding it as a substantive, even an antithetical, distinction.  At least two schools of interpretive thought have evolved.

第一派也是最古老的派别，其中打头阵的是威廉姆·坎宁安（William Cunningham），有罗伯特·达布尼（Robert Dabney）、查尔斯·贺智（Charles Hodge）、约翰·麦克劳德（John Macleod）和其他一些人支持他。他们认为改教后对信心和确据之间的区分是早期改革原则的正面发展。此加尔文学派认为改教家把刚刚萌芽的“信仰/确据”问题留给了他们的教牧后继者。改教家与后改教家之间的差异是实质性的和发展性的，而不是对立性的。

The first and oldest group, spearheaded by William Cunningham, and supported by Robert Dabney, Charles Hodge, John Macleod, and others, views the post-Reformation distinction between faith and assurance as a positive outworking of early Reformation principles.  This Calvinistic school regards the Reformers as leaving the faith/assurance question in embryonic form for maturation under their pastoral successors.  The difference between the Reformers and the post-Reformation men is substantial and developmental, but not antithetical.

然而，目前绝大部分学者，都不再将改教之后发展有关确据的详细教义的努力看作为忠实地发展早期改革原则的结果。相反，改教以后历经艰难发展的确据教义，最近被视为与早期改教家所坚持的“信心和确据朴素的不可分离性”是对立的。有人认为，改教家，特别是加尔文，没有允许给实践型三段论和似乎类似的非基督论的策略留出空间，来协助定义或获得主观上的确据。相反，他们认为，唯独在上帝在耶稣基督里的客观应许的基础上，确据才能得以实现。除了少数几个例外，宗教改革后的神学家们被视为将冰冷的系统化的经院哲学注入信心和确据的教义，从而排挤了改教家们的牧养情怀。

The bulk of current scholarship, however, no longer views the post-Reformation struggle to develop a detailed doctrine of assurance as a faithful outworking of early Reformation principles.  Rather, postReformation agonizings to develop a doctrine of assurance have been more recently regarded as antithetical to the simplicity of the early Reformers' insistence on the inseparability of faith and assurance.  It is argued that the Reformers, and Calvin in particular, allowed no room for the practical syllogism and similar supposedly non-Christological devices as aids for defining or gaining subjective assurance.  Rather, they argue, assurance must be realized exclusively through resting on the objective promises of God in Christ Jesus.  With notable exceptions,4 the post-Reformers are viewed as having injected a cold systematic scholasticism into the doctrines of faith and assurance, thereby supplanting the pastoral tone of the Reformers.

巴西尔·豪（Basil Hall）、罗伯特·肯德尔（Robert T. Kendall）和其他一些人在不同地方代言了这种当代学派。根据更晚近的学术共识，西奥多·贝扎（Theodore Beza）和威廉·帕金斯（William Perkins）都被视为将后改教的确据教义打包并推下主观性实验斜坡的罪魁祸首；他们被看为是显然不加疑问地接受了信心和确据之间的区别，认为“信心”是朝着悔改的一端，而“救恩的确据”朝向另一端。从而就像威斯敏斯特议会那样背叛了加尔文。肯德尔认为，17世纪40年代的威斯敏斯特神学在各种与确据有关的教义方面，本质上偏离了正统的加尔文主义，其中包括上帝的旨意、恩典之约、称义、赎罪、悔改、人的意志在救赎中的作用。

In various contexts Basil Hall, Robert T. Kendall and others represent this contemporary school of thought.5  According to that more recent scholarly consensus, Theodore Beza and William Perkins are regarded as the culprits who packed and pushed the postReformation doctrine of assurance down the slope of experimental subjectivity until it snowballed into the Westminster Assembly's betrayal of Calvinism via an "apparently unquestioned acceptance of a distinction between faith and assurance, for `Faith' was one heading in the Confession, and `Certainty of Salvation' another."6  According to Kendall, the Westminster theology of the 1640's represents a qualitative departure from authentic Calvinism in a variety of doctrines connected with assurance, including the decrees of God, the covenant of grace, sanctification, atonement, repentance, and the role of the human will in soteriology.

虽然坎宁安在历史方面比肯德尔更为精确，但也不是完全正确的。他们都没有触及这个问题的核心。两者（特别是肯德尔）都夸大了关涉其中的不同侧重点。关于加尔文和加尔文主义者中“信心/确据”的问题，本质性偏离（肯德尔）或非对立性但实质性差异（坎宁安）的观点都是错误的。

Though Cunningham is far more historically accurate than Kendall, even he is not altogether correct.  Neither has reached the heart of the issue.  Both, particularly Kendall, exaggerate the different emphases involved.  With regard to the faith/assurance question in Calvin and Calvinism, the theories of qualitative departure (Kendall) or of non-antithetical yet substantial discrepancy (Cunningham), are both erroneous

加尔文和加尔文主义者之间在“信心/确据”问题上的差异主要是在量上的和方法论上的。换句话说，这是一个侧重点和方法的问题，而不是性质方面的或实质性的问题。本文作者在其它地方表明，这些量上的差异主要源于近来人们对在后改教时期的牧养方面背景的强调。第二代和第三代的新教牧师往往觉得必须强调和澄清改教家们的确据教义，因为他们坚信相当多的教会成员认为上帝的拯救恩典是理所当然的。

The discrepancy between Calvin and Calvinism on faith and assurance was largely quantitative and methodological.  In other words, it was a matter of emphasis and method, rather than qualitative or substantial.  The present writer has shown elsewhere that these quantitative differences stem largely from a newly evolving emphasis in the pastoral context of the post-Reformation period.7  Second and third generation Protestant pastors often felt compelled to augment and clarify the magisterial Reformers' doctrine of assurance because of their conviction that numerous parishioners were taking God's saving grace for granted.

这篇文章比较约翰·加尔文（1509-1564）和一个典型的荷兰“二次改教”神学家亚力山大·科姆里（1706-1774），以此显明，加尔文和加尔文主义者在确据教义上是基本一致的，尽管对此问题有各自不同的侧重点。之所以集中关注加尔文和科姆里，是因为加尔文作为名副其实的十六世纪宗教改革神学家在信心方面有众多论述，而科姆里代表了后宗教改革思想成熟的年代，他的主要作品都是关于信心的教义的。

In this article the aim is to show through a comparison of John Calvin (1509-1564) and a typical Dutch Second Reformation divine, Alexander Comrie (1706-1774), that notwithstanding different emphases on the question of personal assurance of faith, both Calvin and the Calvinists were fundamentally of one mind on assurance.  The focus is on Calvin because he has rightly been called the theologian of the sixteenth-century Reformation who wrote extensively on faith, and on Comrie because he represents the mature age of post-Reformation thinking and devoted all his major works to the doctrine of faith.

约翰·加尔文JOHN CALVIN (1509-1564)

信心的性质与定义

Nature and Definition of Faith

关于确据的教义，加尔文重申了路德和慈运理的基本信仰，但也表明了自己的侧重点。与路德和慈运理一样，对加尔文来说信心绝不仅仅是认同（assensus），它总是涉及到知识（cognito，认知）和相信或信任（fiducia，信靠）。加尔文着重指出，知识和相信是得救信心的生命维度而不是单纯的概念问题。信心不是像贝扎后来教导的那样，是历史知识加上对得救的认同，而是一种拯救性的和确定的知识，并且伴随拯救性的、确定的信靠。

Calvin's doctrine of assurance both reaffirmed the basic tenets of Luther and Zwingli and disclosed particular emphases of his own. As with Luther and Zwingli, faith is never merely assent (assensus) for Calvin, but always involves both knowledge (cognitio) and confidence or trust (fiducia).  Calvin emphatically affirms that knowledge and confidence are saving dimensions of the life of faith rather than mere notional matters.  Faith is not historical knowledge plus saving assent as Beza would later teach,8 but a saving and certain knowledge conjoined with a saving and assured trust.9 Knowledge for Calvin is foundational to faith. 

对加尔文来说，知识是信心的基础。这种知识以上帝的话为基础，因此确据必须在上帝话语里寻求，并且是从上帝话语中流出的。信心对圣经总是说“阿们”的。

This knowledge rests upon the Word of God; hence assurance must be sought in the Word10 and flows out of the Word.  Faith always says "amen" to the Scriptures.

因此，信心也离不开基督和上帝的应许，因为耶稣基督是活的道，他是文字之道的总纲和实质，在他里面神所有的应许都是“是的，阿们”。 真信心会接受耶稣基督就是在父神的恩典中赐下、披戴福音的那一位。加尔文将上帝的诸多应许作为确据的基础，因为这些应许取决于这位不能撒谎的上帝的本性，而不是取决于罪人的任何善功。而且，因为信心也通过它所倚靠的应许而获得它的特征，信心本身就盖上了上帝话语无误性的印记，所以其本质就具有确据。确据、信任、确定性、信靠都属于信心的本质。

Hence faith is also inseparable from Christ and God's promises, for the sum and substance of the written Word is the living Word, Jesus Christ, in whom all God's promises are "yea and amen."13  True faith receives Christ, the one clothed in the gospel and graciously offered by the Father.14  Calvin makes much of the promises of God as the ground of assurance, because these promises depend on the very nature of that God who cannot lie rather than on any works performed by sinners.15  Moreover, since faith takes its character from the promise on which it rests, faith takes to itself the infallible stamp of God's very Word, and so possesses assurance in its very nature.  Assurance, confidence, certainty, trust`all belong to the essence of faith.

这种确定的并使人确信的信心是圣灵在选民身上的工作和给予选民的礼物。圣灵说服被拣选的罪人相信上帝在基督里的应许的可靠性，并赐予他们信心来接纳这真道。

This assured and assuring faith is the gift and work of the Holy Spirit granted to the elect.  The Spirit persuades the elect sinner of the reliability of God's promise in Christ and grants faith to embrace that Word.

因此，加尔文认为使人确信的信心是与得救的知识、圣经、耶稣基督、上帝的应许、圣灵的工作以及拣选不可分割地连接在一起。总之，上帝自己就是选民的保证。确据是因着恩典建立在上帝之上的；除了上帝的恩典，罪人不能以任何方式经历到它。因此，以下就是加尔文对信心的正式定义：

Thus, for Calvin assuring faith joins indissolubly with saving knowledge, the Scriptures, Jesus Christ, God's promises, the work of the Holy Spirit, and election.  In a word, God Himself is the assurance of the elect.  Assurance is gratuitously founded upon God; apart from God's grace, a sinner cannot experience it in any way.17 Consequently, Calvin's formal definition of faith reads like this:

现在我们应该对信心有一个正确的定义，我们可以称它为关于上帝仁慈地对待我们的坚固并确定的知识，它是建立在基督里白白的应许这个真理之上，是通过圣灵向我们揭示并刻印在我们心中的。

Now we shall possess a right definition of faith if we call it a firm and certain knowledge of God's benevolence toward us, founded upon the truth of the freely given promise in Christ, both revealed to our minds and sealed upon our hearts through the Holy Spirit.

在这个定义中，加尔文认为信心不仅仅是完全客观地相信上帝不容置疑的应许，它还包含个人的主观确信，也就是，相信上帝对罪人的应许。真正的信徒认识并称颂上帝对他的恩典和仁慈。

In this definition, Calvin argues that faith involves something more than fully believing the undoubted promise of God objectively; it also contains personal, subjective assurance in the sense that in believing God's promise to sinners, the true believer recognizes and celebrates that God is gracious and benevolent to him in particular.

这信心的定义涵盖了确据，加尔文由此逻辑地得出结论：任何“相信”却缺乏对他已被上帝所拯救的确信的人，根本就不是一个真正的信徒：

From a definition of faith that embraces assurance, Calvin logically concludes that anyone who "believes" but lacks the conviction that he is saved by God is not a true believer after all:

我说，没有人是一个信徒，除非他对自己得救有确据，对战胜恶魔和死亡满怀信心。……我们无法很好地理解上帝的良善，除非我们从伟大确据的成果来了解它。

No man is a believer, I say, except he who, leaning upon the assurance of his salvation, confidently triumphs over the devil and death. . . .  We cannot otherwise well comprehend the goodness of God unless we gather it from the fruit of great assurance.

正是这种说法使威廉姆·坎宁安和罗伯特·达布尼指责加尔文“轻率”。然而，加尔文的《基督教要义》、注释集和讲道集，也包含了相当数量的同样强烈的限定性说明。加尔文经常重复这些主题，其中穿插了一个高超的信心教义：不信很难消失；怀疑经常与确据竞争；巨大的诱惑，挣扎和冲突是常态；撒旦和剩余的残存肉体攻击信心；对上帝的信靠被恐惧束缚。

It is this kind of statement that evokes the charge of "incautiousness" leveled against Calvin by William Cunningham and Robert Dabney.20   A culling of Calvin's Institutes, commentaries and sermons, however, also presents a formidable array of qualifying statements of an equally intense nature. Calvin often repeats these themes, intermingled with a lofty doctrine of faith:  unbelief dies hard; assurance is often contested by doubt; severe temptations, wrestlings, and strife are normative; Satan and the remnants of remaining flesh assault faith; trust in God is hedged about with fear.

显然，加尔文认可不同程度的信心和确据。他常说“婴儿的信心”、“信心的开端”和“软弱的信心”等概念。他主张确据是与信心的发展成比例的。重生、成圣、悔改、信心和确据都是逐步发展的。

Clearly Calvin allows for varying degrees of faith and assurance.  He often speaks of such concepts as "infancy of faith," "beginnings of faith," and "weak faith."22  He asserts assurance to be proportional to faith's development.23  Regeneration, sanctification, repentance, faith, and assurance are all progressive.

在对约翰福音20:3的精彩讲解中，加尔文证明门徒走向空坟墓的时候没有意识到他们有信心，这似乎与他的“信徒知道自己状态”的主张相抵触：

In a remarkable exposition of John 20:3, Calvin seems to contradict his assertion that believers know themselves to be such when he testifies that the disciples had faith without being aware of it as they approached the empty tomb:

无论是门徒还是妇女，他们的信心如此之少，或几乎没有任何信心，他们却都有如此巨大的热情，真是令人惊讶；而且，不可能是宗教感情驱使他们去寻找基督的。因此，有某种信心的种子留在他们心里，一度被淹没，以致他们没有意识到他们所拥有的。因此，上帝的灵常以一种秘密的方式在选民中工作。总之，我们必须相信有一些隐蔽的根，我们可以看到由此结出的果实。

There being so little faith, or rather almost no faith, both in the disciples and in the women, it is astonishing that they had so great zeal; and, indeed, it is not possible that religious feelings led them to seek Christ.

这引出考虑加尔文的“信心/确据”困境的症结：加尔文怎么能在以充分确据来定义信心的同时又允许信心有可能缺乏有意识的确据呢？这里有一组明显的矛盾。确据就是毫无疑问，但并非总是如此。它不犹豫，但又可以犹豫；它包含安全感，但又可能被焦虑困扰。忠心的信徒有坚定的确据，但又动摇和颤抖。

Some seed of faith, therefore, remained in their hearts, but quenched for a time, so that they were not aware of having what they had.  Thus the Spirit of God often works in the elect in a secret manner.  In short, we must believe that there was some concealed root, from which we see fruit produced.

解决这些表面上的矛盾

如何解决这些矛盾？加尔文在处理这个复杂的问题时至少有四个原则。这些都有助于弄清这些表面上的矛盾。

This leads to a consideration of the nucleus of the faithassurance dilemma in Calvin:  how can Calvin interweave assertions of faith as definable in terms of full assurance while allowing for some possibility of faith lacking conscious assurance?  Here lies a set of apparent contradictions.  Assurance is free from doubt, yet not always so.  It does not hesitate, yet can hesitate.  It contains security, but may be beset with anxiety.  The faithful have firm assurance, yet waver and tremble.

1、信心与体验

1. Faith and experience. 

加尔文认为有必要区分信心的定义和信徒的实际体验。这在很大程度上解开了这个困境。在把信心解释为包含“巨大的确据”后，加尔文如此阐述了这一张力关系：

Calvin finds it necessary to distinguish between the definition of faith and the reality of the believer's experience. This sheds considerable light on the dilemma.  After expounding faith as embracing "great assurance," Calvin addresses this tension as follows:

不过，有人会说：“信徒的体验完全不同：在认识上帝对他们的恩典时，他们往往不仅受到临到他们的不安所试探，而且多次被严重惊吓所动摇。因为如此激烈的诱惑，使他们的头脑不安，似乎不太符合信心的必然性。当然，当我们教导信心应该是确定的和有保证的时候，我们不能想象任何确定性不带有怀疑，或任何确据不被攻击。

Still, someone will say:  "Believers experience something far different:  In recognizing the grace of God toward themselves they are not only tried by disquiet, which often comes upon them, but they are repeatedly shaken by gravest terrors.  For so violent are the temptations that trouble their minds as not to seem quite compatible with that certainty of faith." Accordingly, we shall have to solve this difficulty if we wish the above stated doctrine to stand.  Surely, while we teach that faith ought to be certain and assured, we cannot imagine any certainty that is not tinged with doubt, or any assurance that is not assailed.

这段引文，以及其他更多类似性质的文字（特别是在谈论圣礼增强信心之时）表明，尽管加尔文很想通过定义来保持信心和确据的密切关联，但他也承认，在实际体验中，基督徒对上帝应许的信心是逐渐成长的。

This quotation, and more of like nature (most notably when dealing with sacramental strengthening of faith28), indicate that although Calvin is anxious to keep faith and assurance in close proximity by definition, he also recognizes that in actual experience the Christian gradually grows into a more full faith in God's promises.

2、肉体与灵魂

2. Flesh versus spirit. 

第二个被加尔文用来处理信心概念中“应该”与“是”之间的张力的原则就是“肉体与灵魂”的对立。基督徒能如此强烈地体验肉体与灵魂的张力是因为圣灵的内住引发并持续引发这个张力。许多渗透在信心中的体验的矛盾（例如，改革宗对罗马书7:14-25的经典解释）在这种张力中找到自己的解决方案：“这样看来，我以内心（灵魂）顺服上帝的律，我肉体却顺服罪的律了。”（罗7:25）

There is a second, interwoven principle by which Calvin aids in grasping his "ought to"/"is" tension in faith, namely, flesh versus spirit.29  Christians experience this spirit-flesh tension so acutely because the presence of the Holy Spirit has instigated and maintains it.30  The many paradoxes that permeate experiential faith (e.g., Romans 7:14-25 in the classical Reformed interpretation) find their resolution in this tension:  "So then with the mind [spirit] I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin" (v. 25).

在加尔文看来，灵魂的“确定安慰”是与肉体的“不完美”并存的，因为这是信徒在自己身上发现的两个原则。由于灵魂最后战胜肉体是在基督里的末世性盼望，所以基督徒在此生处于不断地挣扎中。而“灵魂”的律使他充满“因认识上帝的良善而来的喜乐”，即使肉体的律激活他不信的自然倾向。只要“残余肉体”仍在，“每日的良心挣扎”就总困扰他。

In Calvin, the "sure consolation" of the spirit is side-by-side with "the imperfection" of the flesh, for these are the two principles the believer finds within himself.  Since the final victory of the spirit over the flesh is an eschatological hope in Christ, the Christian finds himself in perpetual struggle in this life.  The principle of "spirit" fills him "with delight in recognizing the divine goodness"32 even as the principle of flesh activates his natural proneness to unbelief.33  "Daily struggles of conscience" beset him as long as the "vestiges of the flesh" remain

总之，加尔文告诉我们，从有信心的灵魂产生盼望、喜乐、确据；从肉体产生恐惧、怀疑、幻灭。虽然这两个原则可以同时发生作用，但加尔文认为，瑕疵和怀疑只属于肉体，而不属于信心。肉体的工作会常常扰乱信心，但不会混淆。真信徒在生命之路上可能会有许多属灵“战斗”的失败，但他不会失去面对肉体的“整个战争”的最终胜利。祈祷和圣礼会帮助满有信心的灵魂获得最终的得胜。

In short, Calvin teaches that from the spirit of faith arise hope, joy, assurance; from the flesh, fear, doubt, disillusionment.  Though these two principles may operate simultaneously, Calvin maintains that imperfection and doubt are attributable only to the flesh, not to faith.  The works of the flesh often attend faith, but do not mix with it. The true believer may lose many spiritual "battles" along the pathway of life, but he shall not lose the ultimate "war" against the flesh.  Prayer and the sacraments assist the spirit of faith in gaining the ultimate victory.

3、信心的萌芽与信心的自觉

3. Germ of faith versus consciousness of faith. 

尽管存在着定义和体验、灵魂与肉体之间的张力，加尔文主张信心与确据并不夹杂着不信，因而其结果不是某种可能性而是确定性。加尔文教导，就连信心最小的萌芽也在它的本质里包含着确据，即使信徒因为其信心的自觉很微弱，从而并不总是能够把握这个确据；他因此避免了罗马天主教的“仅仅是可能性”的结论。

Despite the tensions between definition and experience, spirit and flesh, Calvin is able to maintain that faith and assurance are not mingled with unbelief so as to result in mere probability rather than certainty.35  Calvin escapes the Roman Catholic conclusion of mere probability by teaching that the smallest germ of faith contains assurance in its very essence, even when the believer is not always able to grasp this assurance because of weakness in being conscious of his faith.

因此，尽管基督徒在信心没有实际运作时会被怀疑和困惑所困扰，但圣灵所种下的信心种子不会灭亡。正因为它是圣灵的种子，信心包含并保留了确据的要素。信心的意识或感觉随着信心操练的起伏而增加和减少，但信心的种子永远不会改变或起伏。因此，确据是常态，但其程度不同，并且其恒常性与信徒的意识相对应。根据加尔文的观点，牧者在回应如何面对微弱的确据时，不应该否认信心与确据之间的有机联系，但应该通过使用恩典敦促信徒追求更坚定的信心。

Consequently, though the Christian is tossed about with doubt and perplexity when faith is not in practical exercise, the seed of faith which the Spirit has planted cannot perish.  Precisely because it is the Spirit's seed, faith contains and retains the element of assurance.  The sense or feeling of assurance increases and decreases in proportion to the rise and decline of faith's exercises, but the seed of faith itself can never change or fluctuate.  Thus, assurance is normal, but varies in degree and constancy relative to the believer's consciousness.  In responding to weak assurance, according to Calvin, the pastor should not deny the organic tie between faith and assurance, but should urge the pursuit of stronger faith through the use of the means of grace.

 4、三位一体的框架

4. Trinitarian framework

最后，通过广泛全面的原则，即关于“信心/确据”的教义的三位一体的框架，加尔文鼓励那些倾向于怀疑的人。圣父的拣选必定胜过撒旦的作为；圣子的义必定战胜信徒的罪；使人产生确据的圣灵见证必定战胜灵魂的软弱。这样，有确据的信心也必定将要征服不信带来的怀疑。

  Finally, through a broad sweeping principle, namely, a Trinitarian framework for the doctrines of faith and assurance, Calvin intends to spur forward those inclined to doubt. The election of the Father must prevail over the works of Satan.  The righteousness of the Son must prevail over the sinfulness of the believer.

对于加尔文来说，可以通过一系列复杂的途经建立确据，而其中最重要的是圣父在基督里的拣选和保守。因此，加尔文可以写道“双重预定不仅不会动摇信心，而是给予它最好的印证，”特别是在对信徒倚靠有确据的信心而生活的这一日常呼召的背景下来看时：

For Calvin, a complex set of means establish assurance, not the least of which is the Father's election and preservation in Christ.  Hence Calvin can write that "predestination duly considered does not shake faith, but rather affords the best confirmation of it,"37 especially when viewed in the context of the believer's daily calling to live by assured faith:

我们被拣选的坚定性与我们的呼召连在一起，是建立我们确据的另一个途经。基督接受的所有的人 ，是圣父赐予并委托给他保守到永生的。

The firmness of our election is joined to our calling [and] is another means of establishing our assurance.  For all whom [Christ] receives, the Father is said to have entrusted and committed to Him to keep to eternal life.

对于加尔文来说，只有在基督中心论的条件下，这种由拣选来支持救赎的确定性才是可能的；因此，他不断强调基督是拣选的一面镜子，通过它“我们必须，并且只有不带自我欺骗，才可能仔细思量我们自己的拣选。”拣选将信徒的眼睛从他无法满足任何获得救赎条件的绝望转向关注耶稣基督里上帝承诺的无偿的爱和怜悯的确定性。通过与基督联合，“得救的确据如拣选的确据一般成为真实有效的”。因此，基督徒不应该认为耶稣基督是“远远的站着，而不是内住在我们里面。”在这种基督论方式下，加尔文试图缩短这两者之间的“距离”，即作为上帝定旨的、永恒的和隐藏的作为的客观的拣选，与信徒对于他被拣选的确据的主观理解。对加尔文来说，拣选并没有引发确据的问题，而是就确据问题给予了答案。信徒在基督里“看见”他已被拣选，在福音中“听见”他已被拣选。

Such undergirding of salvation's certainty by election is possible only in a Christocentric context for Calvin; hence his constant accent on Christ as the mirror of election "wherein we must, and without self-deception may, contemplate our own election."39  Election turns the believer's eyes from the despairing hopelessness of his inability to meet any conditions of salvation to focus on the certainty of Jesus Christ as God's pledge of gratuitous love and mercy.40  Through union with Christ "the assurance of salvation becomes real and effective as the assurance of election."41  Consequently, Christians ought not to think of Christ as "standing afar off, and not dwelling in us."42  In this Christological manner Calvin seeks to reduce the "distance" between election as God's decretal, eternal, and hidden act, which is objective from the believer's subjective apprehension of assurance that he is elect.  For Calvin, election does not raise the question of assurance; rather, election answers it.  In Christ the believer "sees" his election; in the gospel, he "hears" of his election.

然而，对于加尔文来说，有许多类似于有信心却缺乏得救特征的现象。例如，他说“不成形的信心”、“隐含的信心”、“信心的预备”、“暂时的信心”、“一时的信心”、“虚幻的信心”、“虚假的信心的表现”、“影子型的信心”、“短暂的信心”、“假冒为善的信心”和“对恩典的短暂意识”。自我欺骗确实是可能的。事实上，那些败坏的人与那些被拣选的人在信心上经常感觉几乎相同：“上帝拣选的人和那些只有转瞬即逝的信心的人之间有很大的相似性。”因此，自我省察是必不可少的：“让我们学会审视自己，搜索那些上帝使他的孩子区别于陌生人的内在标志是否属于我们，即，虔诚和信心的活泼根基。”

For Calvin, however, there is much that resembles faith that lacks a saving character.  For example, he speaks of "unformed faith," "implicit faith," "the preparation of faith," "temporary faith," "an illusion of faith," "a false show of faith," "shadow-types of faith," "transitory faith," faith "under a cloak of hypocrisy," and a "momentary awareness of grace."43  Self-deceit is a real possibility.  In fact, the reprobate often feel nearly identical to the elect with regard to faith: "There is a great likeness and affinity between God's elect and those who are given a transitory faith."44  Consequently, self-examination is essential:  "Let us learn to examine ourselves, and to search whether those interior marks by which God distinguishes his children from strangers belong to us, viz., the living root of piety and faith."

然而，即使在自我省察中，加尔文仍然强调基督论。人们必须深入他们的良心，检查他们是否单单信靠基督，因为这是植根于圣经的体验的果实。“如果你看到自己‘在基督、圣经、圣灵之外’，那肯定是被咒诅下地狱了。”

Even in self-examination, however, Calvin maintains a Christological emphasis.  People must descend into their conscience to examine whether they are placing their trust in Christ alone, because this is the fruit of experience grounded in the Scriptures.  "If you contemplate yourself [apart from Christ, the Word, and the Spirit], that is sure damnation."

因此，加尔文的推理是这样展开的：（1）拣选的目的包括拯救；（2）选民不是因他们自己而被拣选，乃是单单在于基督；（3）因为选民在基督里，所以离开了基督他们无法在自己里面找到拣选和救恩，也不能没有基督而只在圣父里找到；（4）他们的确据乃是在基督里得着的，因此与基督的生命相交是确据的基础。但问题仍然是：如何实现这个活泼的相交？这样的相交如何给予人确据？

Thus, Calvin's line of reasoning proceeds like this:  (1) The purpose of election embraces salvation.  (2) The elect are not chosen for anything in themselves, but only in Christ.  (3) Since the elect are in Christ, the assurance of their election and salvation can never be found in themselves apart from Christ, nor in the Father apart from Christ. (4) Rather, their assurance is to be had in Christ; hence vital communion with Him is the basis of assurance.47  But the questions remain:  how do the elect achieve this vital communion?  How does such communion impart assurance?

加尔文的回答是圣灵论的：圣灵将耶稣基督和他的福分应用到那些有罪的但被拣选的罪人的心里和生活中，这样他们在得救的信心中确信基督属于他们，他们也属于他。圣灵在他们心中专门证实了上帝在基督里的应许的可靠性。

Calvin's answer is pneumatological:  the Holy Spirit applies Christ and His benefits to the hearts and lives of guilty, elect sinners, through which they are assured that Christ belongs to them and they to Him by saving faith.48  The Spirit especially confirms within them the reliability of God's promises in Christ.

加尔文主张圣灵在救赎的应用中具有一个核心的和决定性的角色。作为个人的安慰者、印记、凭据、见证、保证和恩膏，圣灵向信徒见证他们被收养。为区分被拣选的与被弃绝的，圣灵必须主观地印证客观依靠上帝的应许作为确据的主要依据。被弃绝的人可以声称拥有上帝的应许，却没有体验到对这些应许的“感觉”或“意识”（sensus）。

Calvin advocates a cardinal and pervasive role for the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption.  As personal comforter, seal, earnest, testimony, security, and anointing, the Holy Spirit bears witness to the believer's gracious adoption.49  To distinguish the reprobate from the elect, the Holy Spirit must subjectively seal an objective reliance upon God's promises as the primary ground for assurance.  The reprobate may claim God's promises without experiencing the "feeling" (sensus) or "consciousness" of those promises.

在区分被拣选的与被弃绝的方面，加尔文觉得有必要谈论基督“为我们成就的”（for us），但更多地是应该谈论圣灵“在我们里面所作的”（in us），因为在主观方面的界限区分得更清晰。他谈论过很多内心的经历、感情、光照、感知，甚至“极强烈的情绪”。尽管意识到过度的反省和主观性会带来危险，但加尔文也认识到，只有当圣灵把信徒带入信心并使其体验信心，上帝的应许对他才是足够的。

When distinguishing the elect from the reprobate, Calvin feels compelled to speak more about what the Spirit does in us than what Christ does for us, for in the subjective aspect the line of demarcation is sharper.  He speaks much of inward experience, of feeling, of enlightenment, of perception, even of "violent emotion."51  Though aware of the dangers of excessive introspection and subjectivity, Calvin also recognizes that the promises of God are sufficient for the believer only when the Spirit brings them within the scope and experience of faith.

加尔文坚持圣灵带来确据的主要方式是引导信徒获得上帝在基督里的应许，他由此否定了任何被放在没有生命改变的信徒里面的确信。然而，加尔文并不否认透过圣灵增强确据的次要途经，即圣灵在信徒里面作工结出善行的果子和各种各样恩典标记的果子。具体来说，圣灵可以通过揭示他拥有信心“确实的记号”，如“神圣的呼召、基督之灵的光照、归信基督、信心的持守、避免自信、敬畏”，以此向信徒保证他不是被弃绝的或是暂时相信的假信徒.。虽然这些不是根基性的，但这些次要的支持对于进一步建立确据是非常有益的。

By insisting that the Spirit's primary mode of bringing assurance is to direct the believer to embrace the promises of God in Christ, Calvin rejects any confidence being placed in the believer as he is in himself.  Nevertheless, Calvin does not deny that a subordinate means to bolster assurance is through the Spirit as He works within the believer to bear fruit in good works and various marks of grace. Specifically, the Holy Spirit may assure the believer that he is not a reprobate or temporary believer by revealing to him that he possesses "signs which are sure attestations"53 of faith, such as "divine calling, illumination by Christ's Spirit, communion with Christ, receiving Christ by faith, the embracing of Christ, perseverance of the faith, the avoidance of self-confidence, and fear."54  Though never foundational, this secondary support is highly beneficial for the "further establishment" of assurance.

因此，加尔文并不那么否认实践三段论，把它看作是“滥用和曲解的预警。”实践三段论的真正的问题并不是它存在于加尔文和加尔文主义者那里，而是它在他们的系统里的形式和它对于教义和生活所透露出来的信息。对于加尔文来说，实践三段论必须在伟大的宗教改革标志的背景之下：唯独圣经、唯独信心、唯独耶稣基督、唯独上帝的荣耀。在教导实践三段论中若违背其中任何一个原则，整个概念就是诅咒而不是祝福。行为充其量起到对基督的信心的辅助作用。实践三段论永远不能取代上帝的应许而成为确据的主要依据；必须始终保留其次要的确认作用。否则，不确定性将取代确定性。后期加尔文主义者对信心和确据的教导最主要的根源都表明它们在加尔文的思想里就已存在。

Thus, Calvin does not present a denial of the practical syllogism so much as "a warning against its misuse and misinterpretation."56 The real issue at stake in the practical syllogism is not its presence in the thought of Calvin and the Calvinists, but the form it takes within their systems and the message it implies for both doctrine and life.  For Calvin the practical syllogism must be in the context of great hallmarks of the Reformation:  Scripture alone,57 faith alone, Christ alone, and the glory of God alone.  Break one of these principles in teaching the practical syllogism, and the whole concept becomes a curse instead of a blessing.  At best, works serve as an adjunct to faith in Christ.  The practical syllogism may never replace the promises of God as the primary ground of assurance; it must always retain a secondary confirming role.  Otherwise, uncertainty will replace certainty.  Most major roots of later Calvinistic teaching on faith and assurance thus evidence their presence in Calvin.

亚力山大·科姆里ALEXANDER COMRIE (1706-1774)

亚力山大·科姆里是荷兰“二次改教”的最后明灯之一。作为对正统派圈子里逐渐形成的冰冷的理性主义的回应，荷兰二次改教的目的是将改教真理应用于日常生活和体验。

Alexander Comrie was one of the last bright lights of the socalled Dutch Second Reformation (a poor translation of the term, Nadere Reformatie, which most literally means "further Reformation").60 As a reaction to cold rationalism which had evolved in some circles of orthodoxy, the Dutch Second Reformation aimed to apply Reformed truth to daily life and experience.

作为一个土生土长的苏格兰人，科姆里在欧斯金（Erskine）兄弟，埃比尼泽（Ebenezer，1680-1754）和拉尔夫（Ralph，1685-1752）的讲道和教义教导下归信。在接受了良好的教育后，他在沃布吕赫（woubrugge）的一间荷兰改革宗教会接受按立。他在那里38年的事奉开创了一场属灵运动，波及整个荷兰。在沃布吕赫的年月，科姆里写了大量关于得救信心的教义以及它与称义的关系的著作。尤其是他关于得救信心教义的贡献，使他在整个荷兰的同行和“敬虔派”中的获得了声誉。

A native of Scotland, Comrie was converted under the preaching and catechizing of the Erskine brothers, Ebenezer (1680-1754) and Ralph (1685-1752).62  After receiving an excellent education,63 he was ordained in a Reformed Dutch church at Woubrugge, where his thirty-eight-year ministry pioneered a spiritual movement that spread throughout a large portion of the Netherlands.64  Throughout his Woubrugge years, Comrie wrote extensively on the doctrine of saving faith and its relationship to justification.65  It was especially his contributions to the doctrine of saving faith that gained him renown both among his peers and the "pious" throughout the Netherlands.

在十八世纪中期的荷兰，改革宗思想界内外的神学辩论的关键都围绕着严谨地阐明新教最初的唯独因信称义的教义，特别是在其核心的问题上，即：确据是否属于信心的本质？科姆里在这场辩论中的作用是至关重要的，不仅因为他是一个多产的作家，尤其是因为他努力在其中起到中间人的作用，这使他在几个方面与加尔文有惊人地认同。

In mid-eighteenth-century Holland, the crux of theological debate both within and beyond the boundaries of Reformed thought centered around a scrupulous elucidation of Protestantism's initial tenet`justification by faith alone, and most particularly around the cardinal question, does assurance belong to the essence of faith? Comrie's role in this debate was a critical one`not only because he was a prolific writer on it, but especially because he aimed to play a mediating role which identifies him strikingly with Calvin in several respects.

争论的一方是威廉默斯·阿·布雷克（Wilhelmus à Brakel）、雅各·格林尼维根（Jacob Groenewegen）和德国人弗里德里希·廉坡（Friedrich Lampe）。这些神学家认为，确据必须被看作是信心的果实。他们认为饥渴的追寻基督属于荷兰所谓的“避难”（refuge-taking）的信心，以区别于“确信”的信心。他们认为“避难”的信心是信心的本质，“确信”的信心是信心的果子。他们认为如果确据是附属于信心，那是有害于牧养的，因为它使在“恩典开端的人”气馁，使他们认为他们缺乏确据就意味着他们还没有重生。

On one side of the debate were Wilhelmus à Brakel, Jacob Groenewegen, and the German, Friedrich Lampe.  These divines argued that assurance must be regarded as a fruit of faith.  They regarded hungering and thirsting after Christ as belonging to what the Dutch called "refuge-taking" faith, as distinct from "assured" faith. They deemed refuge-taking faith to be of the essence of faith, and assured faith, of the fruit of faith. They were sure that the attachment of assurance to faith was pastorally injurious because it discouraged "beginners in grace" by causing them to think that their lack of assurance meant that they were as yet unregenerate.

另一方，西奥多·范·德·华（Theodore van der Groe） 和西奥多·范·图耶（Theodore van Thuynen）主张确据和信心不可分割的。他们认为加尔文一直主张缺乏个人得救确据的人是缺乏得救信心的。此外，他们一再指出，布雷克和廉坡的观点可能造成牧养方面的潜在危险：渴慕基督的罪人可能被鼓励将他们的拯救建立在他们的渴慕上，却没有以确据的信心接受基督。

On the other side were Theodore van der Groe and Theodore van Thuynen who maintained that assurance is inseparable from faith. They argued that Calvin maintained that one who lacks assurance of personal salvation lacks saving faith.  Moreover, they were insistent on pointing out that the view of à Brakel and Lampe left open a potentially dangerous pastoral condition.  Convicted sinners who were hungering for Christ might be encouraged to build their salvation on their hunger without ever receiving Christ with an assured faith.

科姆里认为，双方的立场中都有可挽救的元素，可以在对加尔文的正确理解上结合起来。像加尔文一样，科姆里认为，确据一定属于信心的本质，但基督徒的信心并不总是主动地确认他们在基督里的个人的救恩。关于确据既是信心的本质又可以和信心被区分开来的困境，科姆里相信他能通过一些神学辨析来处理，其中两项是：

Comrie argued that both positions contained salvageable elements which could be combined in a right understanding of Calvin. Like Calvin, Comrie maintained that assurance certainly belongs to the essence of faith, but also that the faith of Christians did not always actively confirm their personal salvation in Christ.67  The dilemma of assurance being both of the essence of faith and yet distinguishable from it, Comrie believed he could best address through a number of theological distinctions, two of which are the following:

信心的“习性”（Habit, habitus）和“行为”（Act, actus）

The "Habit" (habitus) and "Act" (actus) of Faith

在科姆里的思想里，习性和行为是最重要的区别，是他的信心教义的基础和组织原则。这种区别绝不是新奇的，但在他的手中受到了新的对待。科姆里认为，造成荷兰“二次改教”神学家之间在信心方面不和的根本原因，是大家普遍没能处理好这种区分：（1）信心作为一种内在固有的“习性”正好与重生重合；（2）各种信心的行为（即actus）。只有当信心习性被运用到实践中时，圣灵才使真信徒能够实施信心行为。科姆里用信心习性来指信心的原则、范围、能力和特权。用信心行为指从信心习性流出的这些行动：“救恩的知识、救恩的赞同、救恩的确信。因此，信心习性是上帝植入到灵魂里的新品质，而信心行为是它（信心习性）的积极操练，使信心成为实践现实。

The paramount distinction in Comrie's thought, habitus and actus, served as the foundation and organizing principle of his doctrine of faith.  This distinction was by no means novel,68 but did receive fresh treatment at his hands.  Comrie believed that a prime cause of the disharmony on faith among the Dutch Second Reformation theologians was the widespread failure to make this distinction:  (1) faith as an "in-wrought habitus" coinciding with regeneration; and (2) faith in its various activities (hence, actus).  The Holy Spirit enables the true believer to perform the acts of faith only when the habit of faith is brought into exercise.  By the habit of faith Comrie intends the principle, capacity, ability, and faculty of faith.69  By the acts of faith, he means those activities`saving knowledge, saving assent, and saving confidence`that flow forth from the habit of faith.70  Thus, the habit of faith is the new quality infused into the soul by God, whereas the acts of faith are its positive exercises, which make faith a practical reality.

科姆里对信心习性的强调跟新教历来所注重的一样，他这样定义信心：

Comrie underscored the habit of faith as the accent of historic Protestantism, defining faith as follows:

我们认为信心就是圣灵上帝倾注在选民心里的习性或原则，与新的本性一起，成为它的第一因素和最重要的因素，他们透过它从基督获得，并且也能从基督传入他们里面一种接受所有神圣话语对这功能的影响的能力；因此，它本身是活跃的。

By faith we understand the habit or principle, which God the Holy Spirit has poured into the hearts of the elect, together with the new nature as its first and most important element, by which they attain out of Christ and passing into them from Christ, the ability to receive all the impressions which the Divine Word makes upon this faculty, and accordingly, to be itself active.

依据这个定义及其随后的论述，科姆里突出了几个重要的强调点：

From this definition and its subsequent exposition, Comrie brings several salient emphases to the fore:

（1）通过强调圣灵主导的信心（习性）注入，来试图避免将某种具体的信心行为抬到太高（如“接受”或“靠近”基督），以致于行为本身（即便不是神学上至少在实际上）获得某种程度的称义能力。科姆里认为，当信心成为一种使我们称义的行为，就是凭人的行为称义，而不是凭上帝的恩典称义。对于科姆里来说，单单这一危险已经是足够的理由来认为信心习性是基础性的，并拒绝布雷克对信心行为的强调。

(1)  By placing emphasis on the Spirit-wrought implantation of faith (habitus), he seeks to avoid esteeming a particular act of faith so highly (such as "accepting" or "closing with" Christ) that the act itself appears to obtain some degree of justifying power`if not theologically, at least practically.  For whenever faith as an act justifies us, Comrie argues, justification is of works and of man, rather than of grace and of God.72  For Comrie, this danger alone is sufficient reason to regard the habit of faith as foundational and to reject à Brakel's emphasis on the act of faith.

（2）因此，通过强调信心习性，科姆里有意高举神圣恩典为信心的唯一原因。将信心习性植入选民的灵魂是圣灵独有特权，而选民原本在属灵上已死，完全没有这样的灵性能力。凭借这种植入，他被纳入并嫁接到耶稣基督里。有了这个植入后，他一定会积极地发挥信心。

(2)  By accenting the habit of faith, therefore, Comrie purposes to exalt divine grace as the sole cause of faith.  It is the sole prerogative of the Holy Spirit to implant this habit of faith in the souls of the elect who altogether lack such spiritual ability, being spiritually dead.73  In this implanting of faith, the spiritually dead sinner is utterly passive. With this implanting, he is incorporated, ingrafted into Jesus Christ. From this implanting, he will necessarily become active in exercising faith.

（3）至于如何理解信心与基督的联合，科姆里首要强调信心习性，次要强调信心行为。像加尔文一样，科姆里教导，嫁接进入基督是主要的（het primaire），因为正是通过这种嫁接，信徒获得耶稣基督的所有福分（het secundaire）。基督作为施恩者要优先于他赐予的福分；他的位格要优先于他的恩典。事实上，正是信心与基督的联合，证实了这些福分是真实的。

(3)  Comrie parallels a primary emphasis on the habit of faith and a secondary emphasis on the acts of faith with his perception of faith's union with Christ.  Like Calvin, Comrie taught that the ingrafting into Christ is primary (het primaire), for it is through this ingrafting that the believer receives all Christ's benefits (het secundaire).75  Christ as Benefactor takes priority over His benefits; His Person is greater than His gifts.  Indeed, it is faith's union with Christ that confirms the benefits as being genuine.

（4）通过强调信心习性，科姆里也维护了信心行为对上帝恩典的绝对依赖。尽管圣灵锻造的信心（习性）的恩典是完美的，内驻于它所植入的灵魂，但信心的活动（行为）并不是同样强烈，因为它本身不能凭借自己并为自己行动，而是一定要由这植入习性的圣灵来影响它。

像加尔文一样，科姆里主张所有真正的属灵操练都是来自于三一上帝和圣经。信心行为从圣父的喜悦经由基督而流出，由基督的灵激活，而且不能与上帝的话语分开。克罗米斯特（P. J. Kromigst）反对科姆里，认为科姆里将圣灵与道分开太远；正好相反，科姆里似乎恰恰是竭力保持一种道与圣灵的最亲密关联，他写道：

(4)  By accentuating the habit of faith, Comrie also retains absolute dependence on the grace of God in the acts of faith.  Though the Spirit-wrought grace of faith (habitus) is perfect and abides in the soul in which it is implanted, the activity of faith (actus) is not always equally strong, for it has no power to act in and of itself, but must be acted upon by the same Spirit who implants the habitus.

如果没有“圣灵在应许里面并透过应许直接运行”，被植入的信心倾向就永不能被付诸实践（行动 ad actum ），它先是被动地接受上帝恩典的礼物，随后因着恩典并通过恩典而变得活跃。

Like Calvin, Comrie advocates that all true spiritual exercises flow from a Trinitarian and scriptural framework.  Acts of faith flow from the Father's good pleasure through Christ, are activated by the Spirit of Christ, and are inseparable from the Word of God.77  Contrary to P. J. Kromigst's objection that Comrie separates the Spirit too much from the Word, at every instance he seems eager to maintain a most intimate Word-Spirit connection.78  Comrie writes, The infused propensity of faith can never be exercised (ad actum) except that`by the immediate operation of the Holy Spirit in and by means of the promise`it first receives the gift of divine grace passively, and then becomes active subsequent to and by means of this.

但是，圣灵完成信心的习性和行为所凭借的是上帝的道和上帝所命定的、以道为中心的相互关联的渠道。

But the means whereby the Spirit accomplishes both this habitus and actus of faith is the Word of God and those allied channels appointed by God that are Word-centered.

因此，科姆里从来不会为了将圣灵提到前台而放弃道，而是始终主张：天父的预旨、在圣子的义里与他联合、圣灵的应用，以及道的宣讲是不可分离的。总之，如果信心习性是圣灵植入的，信心行为则必须通过道来实现，虽然这样的行动可能经常会是以一种缓慢而渐进的过程出现。

Thus, Comrie never brings the Spirit to the foreground at the expense of the Word.81  Rather, he maintains the inseparability of the decree of the Father, the union with the Son in His righteousness, the application of the Spirit, and the means of the Word.82  In short, if the habit of faith is implanted by the Spirit, the acts of faith must come to fruition through the Word, though such activities may frequently come forth as a slow and gradual process.8

（5）最后，通过区别信心的功能和行动，科姆里得以防止他的加尔文主义受新律法主义（neonomianism）的苗头的影响。他深知加尔文主义经常容易萌生新律法主义，从而危害唯独因信称义的概念。

 (5)  Finally, by distinguishing between the faculty and the act of faith, Comrie was able to preserve his Calvinism from the seeds of neonomianism.84  Comrie was well aware of the fact that Calvinism was often prone to relapse into neonomianism, jeopardizing the concept of justification by faith alone.

信心的直接（directus）行为和回应（reflectus）行为

The Direct (directus) and Reflex (reflectus) Acts of Faith

对于选民如何逐渐拥有完全的信心确据的问题，科姆里大量谈及直接的和回应的信心行为，并用《威斯敏斯特信仰告白》第18章2节来作支持。根据这个确据的定义，科姆里主张建立在神圣真理的“应许”上的确据用来解释直接信心行为，建立在“恩典的内在证据”和“圣灵的见证”上的确据是回应的信心行为的结果。

When addressing the question of how the elect are gradually brought to full assurance of faith, Comrie makes considerable use of the direct and reflex acts of faith (directe en reflexive geloofsdaden), and appeals to the Westminster Confession of Faith, chap. 18.2 for support.

根据科姆里的说法，直接信心行为涉及到对上帝启示宣告的真理的直接领悟，尽管它更多地是涉及福音的应许，特别是那些安慰罪人的应许：如果他们接受了基督，他们永不会被抛弃 。科姆里毫不犹豫地倡导“‘直接的’确据，即单单祷告仰望耶稣，‘没有任何中介’而直接从福音应许而来的确据。”这种确定来自于上帝的应许的直接相信，影响整个系列的心灵活动，使缺乏的人饥渴爱慕基督的义。圣灵让人不断意识到缺乏，由此赋予人这样的直接行为，直到选民完全地拥有基督。当这发生的时候，圣灵印记的工作将上帝的应许在信徒的体验中应用在信徒的心里，从而成为他自己的应许。

From this definition of assurance, Comrie affirms assurance founded upon "the divine truth of the promises" as illustrative of the direct act of faith, while assurance founded upon the "inward evidences of graces" and the "testimony of the Spirit" results from reflexive acts of faith.86 The direct act of faith, according to Comrie, involved an immediate apprehension of the entire revelation of God as sworn truth, though it more specifically addressed itself to the gospel promises, particularly those that encouraged sinners with the promise they would not be cast out if they came to Christ.  Comrie felt no difficulty in advocating "a `direct' assurance of faith, an assurance which solely derives its liberty`without anything being intermediate`from the gospel promise while prayerfully looking unto Jesus."87  The certainty resulting from this direct believing in God's promises influences an entire array of soul activities, by which the needy hunger and thirst after the righteousness of Christ.88  The Holy Spirit grants such direct acts by an increasing realization of need until the elect are brought to embrace Christ in His fullness.89  When this occurs, the sealing work of the Spirit experientially applies the promises of God to the believer's heart as his own through the sealing work of the Spirit.

因此，直接信心行为被它的对象（基督福音的应许）所占据，而回应的信心行为具有不同的性质，它关注的是回顾直接行为，让“灵魂确定自己在基督里有份”。这种自反性的信心行为也是圣灵的恩赐，必须有圣灵内在见证的证实 。

Thus, the direct act of faith is occupied with the object presented to it, the promises of the gospel in Christ, and the reflexive act, being of a different nature, is concerned with looking back on the direct act "which assures the soul of personally being a partaker of Christ."91  This reflexive act of faith is the gift of the Holy Spirit also, and must be ratified by His inward testimony.

科姆里对确据的区分的首要目标，是指引真信徒更多地关注外在于他们的上帝在耶稣基督里无条件的恩典，从而引导他们对他们的呼召和拣选有确据。他的次要目标包括：调和当时改革宗的争论，教导信徒圣灵在他的生命中的拯救工作的方式，并鼓励在挣扎中的信徒竭力追求更大程度的确据。通过这些区分和目标，科姆里保护自己不落入两个误区：（1）布雷克的错误，即认为确据不属于信心的本质，而只是信心的一个果子；（2）图耶的错误，即教导有得救信心的人必然有着对此信心的自觉地确认。作为这些思想流派的调停者，科姆里像加尔文一样认为确据一定属于信心的本质，但基督徒可能不一定总是能把握住这种确据。总之，科姆里的立场基本上是这样的：确据的种子在“避难的信心”中已经存在，虽然它大部分时间是静止的，信徒的目标必须是，他应当有意识地使他在原理上已经清楚的内容，在适当的时候在基督里长成充分的确据。“无论作为种子，还是在成长中，或已经得到充分确据”，所有的确据都是圣灵主权的礼物。

92 Comrie's distinctions relative to assurance have as the primary goal the leading of true believers to make their calling and election sure by being directed more outside of self to the unconditional grace of God in Jesus Christ.  His secondary goals include mediating contemporary Reformed debate, teaching the believer how the Holy Spirit works savingly in his life, and encouraging the struggling believer to press forward for greater degrees of assurance.  Through these distinctions and goals, Comrie protects himself from two errors: (1) the error of à Brakel, who states that assurance does not belong to the essence of faith, but is only a fruit of faith;93 and (2) the error of van Thuynen who teaches that an assured confidence of faith is essential to be a partaker of saving faith.94  Mediating between these schools of thought, Comrie, like Calvin, maintains that assurance certainly belongs to the essence of faith, but that this assurance may not always be grasped by Christians.  In sum, Comrie's position is basically this: the seed of assurance is already present in refuge-taking faith, albeit largely dormant, but the goal of the believer must be to grow in the consciousness of what he already possesses in principle, in order to attain in due season to full assurance in Christ.  At every point`whether as seed, or in the growth of assurance, or as full assurance`all assurance is the sovereign gift of the Spirit.

结论CONCLUSIONS

在对约翰·加尔文和亚历山·科姆里（作为加尔文主义者的代表）关于“信心/确据”的观点的一些细节上进行思考后，我们现在可以得出几个结论：

After a consideration in some detail of the views of John Calvin and Alexander Comrie (as a representative Calvinist) on faith and assurance, it is now possible to draw several conclusions:

首先，关于信心和确据的关系，必须拒绝加尔文与加尔文主义者完全没有联系的观点。因为，尽管侧重点不同，加尔文和加尔文主义在这一点是相同的：拥有确据却不自知是可能的。确据本质上应属于每一个信徒，尽管他可能不是总是感觉得到它。这个观念是联结两个不同本质侧重点之间的桥梁。因此，当加尔文所定义的信心包含了确据，并非直接与《威斯敏斯特信条》对信心和确据之间的区分相对立，因为加尔文和《威斯敏斯特信条》关注点不同。加尔文专门从信心带给人确信的特点来定义信心；《威斯敏斯特信条》第18章则特别描述了作为一种自觉意识和体验现象的确据。

First, radical discontinuity between Calvin and the Calvinists with regard to the relationship between faith and assurance, must be rejected.  For, despite varying emphases, Calvin and the Calvinists merge at this juncture:  Assurance may be possessed without being known. That is, the notion that assurance belongs in essence to every believer though he may not always feel the sense of it, is a bridge which unites the two varying emphases qualitatively.95  Consequently, when Calvin defines faith in terms that embrace assurance, he is not directly contradicting the Westminster Confession's distinction between faith and assurance, for Calvin and the Confession do not have the same concern in view!  Calvin is specifically defining what faith is in its assuring character; the Confession's chapter 18 is specifically describing what assurance is as a self-conscious, experimental phenomenon.

其次，加尔文和大多数加尔文主义者（包括科姆里）所表达的信心概念，包括“作为信心本质的确据”（assurance in the essence of faith）和“对信心本身的充足的确据”（full assurance of faith）两者，都没有要求信徒能时刻有意识地感受到。许多加尔文学者，包括坎宁安，正是忽视了这种在一个定义里的双重内涵。坎宁安认为，消除与加尔文矛盾的唯一途径，就是在这样的假设基础上进一步发展，即“关于信心的定义并不是为了说明什么是真正的信心的本质以及其中通常所包含的内容，而是描述什么是真正的信心，或者也描述其最完美的状态和最高的境界时的样式。”而对于加尔文和大多数加尔文主义者来说，不管信徒是否意识到，确据既然是信心的本质，就必然也包含在信心所有的运作中。

Secondly, the concepts of faith which Calvin and most Calvinists (including Comrie) present, embrace both assurance in the essence of faith and full assurance of faith, without demanding that the believer be able to feel assurance consciously at all times.  It is this combination within a single definition that many Calvin scholars, including William Cunningham, have overlooked.  Cunningham posits that the only way to remove contradiction from Calvin is to proceed "upon the assumption that the definition was intended not so much to state what was essential to true faith and always found in it, as to describe what true faith is, or includes, in its most perfect condition and its highest exercise."97  But for Calvin and most Calvinists assurance is both essential for faith and is contained in all its exercises, regardless of the believer's consciousness of his assurance.

再次，加尔文确实不同于包括科姆里在内的一些加尔文主义者。关于确据的意识，他拒绝这种双层次途径，即清教徒通常所作出的“运作的信心”与“有充分确据的信心”的区分，以及在荷兰二次改教神学家那里更为常见的“皈信的信心”（toevluchtnemend geloof）和“确定的信心”（verzekerd geloof）。加尔文的追随者认为确据是需要通过在信心生活中有意识地逐步成长来实现的，这是加尔文不能认同的，尽管他认为信心的知识是可以逐步增加的。

Thirdly, Calvin does differ from Comrie and some Calvinists (including Comrie) by rejecting a two-tier approach to the consciousness of assurance which was frequently distinguished in Puritanism as "faith in exercise" versus "full assurance of faith," and even more commonly denominated by the Dutch Second Reformation divines as "refuge-taking faith" (toevluchtnemend geloof) and "assured faith" (verzekerd geloof).  On this aspect of assurance as realized through a conscious step-up in the life of faith, Calvin differed from some of his followers, although he sympathized with the notion of steps in the knowledge of faith.

第四，虽然坎宁安可能正确地看到加尔文没有研究出信心和确据关系的所有细节，但他和罗伯特·达布尼，以及查尔斯·贺智认为加尔文的教义忽略了后改教时代浮现的议题或者与这些议题相矛盾，这肯定是太过分了。虽然后宗教改革与十六世纪宗教改革的属灵环境会有很大的不同，但加尔文在他的《基督教要义》、注释书、讲道里到处强调确据，证明个人确据问题在他那时代也是非常常见的。他不断强调“如何拥有确据”、“我们所拥有的确据是什么样的”和“这是我们确据的基础” 等等，表明他所应对的时代状况。就是那时许多信徒缺乏足够的确据。加尔文是对刚刚摆脱罗马天主教会束缚的信徒说话，他们过去受的教导是若一般的平信徒宣称有确据他就是异端。加尔文教导虽然人的不信“不会轻易地消失”，但确据却应当是常见的，他的目的是要在教会里在坚实的圣经基础上来建立和鼓励获得确据。

Fourthly, though Cunningham may be right in asserting that Calvin had not worked out all the details of the faith/assurance relationship, he, Robert Dabney, and Charles Hodge99 certainly go too far in depicting his doctrine as contradictory to or ignorant of the issues that would surface in the post-Reformation era.  Though the spiritual milieu of the post-Reformation would vary considerably from the sixteenth-century Reformation, Calvin's stress on assurance throughout his Institutes, commentaries, and sermons proves that the issue of personal assurance was very much alive in his generation as well.  His ongoing emphasis on "this is how to come to assurance," "this is the kind of assurance we have," and "this is where our assurance rests,"100 etc., shows that he was speaking to a contemporary situation in which numerous parishioners possessed a scant degree of assurance.  Calvin addressed individuals newly delivered from the bondage of Rome which had taught that it was heretical for the typical layman to claim assurance.  By teaching that assurance ought to be normative, though unbelief "will not die easily," Calvin's goal was to establish and encourage assurance in the church on solid biblical grounds.

这也是科姆里和绝大多数英国清教主义和荷兰二次改教的后改教加尔文主义者的目标。发展出来的词汇术语，关于确据的著述，对信心软弱者的牧养情怀，迫切劝告并且邀请希望人的信心成长，剖析暂时的信心和其它错误形态的信心，所有这一切更加凸显了这些同时发生的运动渴求在基督里与上帝的活泼团契。因着崭新的牧养原因，后改教者将确据的次要依据从加尔文思想里的“副线”提高到“主线”，就像科奈里斯·格拉弗兰（Cornelis Graafland）所认为的，加尔文允许外在的记号作为真信心的有效证据，这个被加尔文打开的小孔，被后来的神学家扩大。他们用显微镜检查个人性的属灵体验，正是因为他们渴望探寻三一上帝的手在他们生命里的工作，为了将所有的荣耀归于拣选的圣父、救赎的圣子和运行的圣灵。加尔文主义的牧者，并没有本质上背离加尔文对信心与确据的教导，而是努力带领群羊进入信徒与基督联合的救恩所拥有的充分确据和享受中。

Such was also the goal of Comrie and the vast majority of the post-Reformation Calvinists both in English Puritanism and the Dutch Second Reformation.  The terminology developed, the exposition of entire treatises on assurance, the pastoral overtones of compassion for the weak in faith, the pressing admonitions and invitations to grow in faith, the dissecting of temporary faith and other false forms of faith`all of this and much more underscores that these parallel movements relished vital communion with God in Christ.  By raising the secondary grounds of assurance to a "mainline" from the "sideline" they occupied in Calvin's thought, the post-Reformers were for fresh pastoral reasons, as Cornelis Graafland asserts, enlarging the "pores" Calvin had opened already in allowing "signs which are sure attestations" of faith.101  These theologians microscopically examined personal, spiritual experience precisely because they were eager to trace the hand of God Triune working in their lives in order to return all glory to the electing Father, redeeming Son, and applying Spirit. Without qualitatively departing from Calvin's teachings on faith and assurance, Calvinistic pastors labored to lead their flocks into a full enjoyment and assurance of the believer's saving union with Jesus Christ.

在那样一个教会的历史时代，加尔文和加尔文主义者为当代教会树立了今天所需的模范：对正确和丰富的教义思考带来成圣和充满活力的生活。今天，教会正经历一场信仰和权威的危机，因此也是确据的危机。建立个人性的确据和群体的确据是极其迫切需要的。如果更多的信徒体验到这样的确据，教会的生命力就会得到更新，她会在生活的各个领域靠“主耶和华的大能”（诗71:16）为基督和福音而活。

In such an epoch of church history, Calvin and the Calvinists have set before the contemporary church the model needed today: right and rich doctrinal thinking coupled with and leading to sanctified and vibrant living.  Today the church is undergoing a crisis of confidence and authority, and therefore of assurance.  A renewal of assurance, individual and collective assurance, is a great desideratum. If such assurance were more widely experienced, the church's vitality would be renewed and she would live in all spheres of life "in the strength of the Lord God" (Ps 71:16) for the cause of Christ and the gospel.