many difficulties, as that which we have last con- sidered. In speaking of it to others, the chief perplexity, of which I am sensible, is that arising from an endeavour to give the right value to words, which are not intended to have a precise and literal meaning,

Many texts occur in Scripture, which convey an idea of God’s predetermining events; to think, that he really intends to admit us into his Counsels, is ridiculous : yet no text is to be neglected; what is to be done? - Draw out these texts, connect them, form them into a series: then ask, in what light are they to be considered? not as affording us any rule of conduct; what they tell us is concern-

ing the part of God; all our morality must be

settled before we meddle with any of them: as far as they can be serviceable to virtue, previously settled, we may use them, but no farther; and we only can be the judges. Nay, what they tell us of the Government of God, is fo faint and

indistinct,

Loaded. BM. A rad

488 BOOK Iv.

indistinct, that we cannot make of it even specu- lative propositions, to be understood in a strict and absolute sense; nor need we suppose the Sacred writers themselves to have understood these texts more distinctly. They have all the imperfections which have been* described as incident to popular language, when used about things Divine. Have thele texts then no use? yes; but it is to the Fleart, and not to the Head: each text was origi- nally introduced in such a manner, as to produce some good and pious sentiment; fo as to warm and raise the heart to holy gratitude, admiration, devo- tion; and they should always be used for that pur- pole, and that purpose ond.

Suppose a man previously good, they will animate and comfort him; but no bad man must ule them; they would make him worse; he would use them too literally; that is, he would pervert them. The applying of them must be guided entirely by the good they seem likely ro do. This could not be the case if we understood the texts; if the pro- positions they seem to contain, were level to the apprehensions of man; then one man might ule them as well as another; the bad as well as the good. Speculative truths, properly so called, are truths as much to the bad as to the good; but instruments, or weapons, will, in the hand of a good man, be ,, in the hand of a bad man, hurtful.

As to our conduct, that (our morality having been previously settled) must all proceed upon the Promises of God. All promises suppose those at Liberty, to whom they are made: and therefore God’s promises would contradict his decrees, were what are called his decrees, strictly and properly such ; and were they perfectly understood by us. —

| Intimations

• Introd. to second Part of the Articles, Sect. xi.

BOOK IV, ART. xVI I. SECT. ll, 439

Intimations of his decrees, or indistinct referring of events to them, may give us some idea of what God permits; but, in our conduct, we are not to do what he permits, but what he wes to have done; in our conduct, we are not to study what is faintly intimated, but what is plainly ex- pressed. |

If any one was to hear this said without any reference to any Article, I should think he would hesitate little about it.—And l hope to make it appear, that our Article ought not to convey any other idea. But to begin with Hf y.

11. There is so intimate a connexion between our present doctrine and the doctrines of some preceding Articles, especially the fem, that a good deal has been already said, which might have been said here. If therefore we seem to mention any persons or events without sufficient clearness, or fullness of description, it may be, because a fuller account of them has been given before.

In all ages of the world, men have had ideas of referring events to Fate ; and Philosophers have been led from sayings of common life concerning fate, into metaphysical speculations. Human know- ledge being very indistinct on this matter, thinking men have fallen into various opinions, or rather conceptions; but when these have been opposed, dissensions, in different ages, as springing from the same causes, have nearly resembled each other; they have varied more in circumstances than in essence. Indeed all dissensions respecting fate, destiny, &c. have sprung from different modes of adjusting the wisdom of God with the freedom of Man. Milton puts together, fixtfate, free- will, foreknowledge absolute, as causing perplexity even

— — ao —

_ — 2 — _ […] b 4 © - _ al —_.

—

77 Lads AG

—

— „ Y […] ior rr o—_ Four”:

r

— —

• “A Cn = PI * - — ——— - l

490 BOOK IV. 111. IV,

even in beings superior to man*. The Stoics were fatalists ; the Epicureans © were of an opposite turn. Cicero, in his Book de Fato, gives some account of the different ways, in which different Philo- sophers reasoned’. And those ancient authors, who have related or imitated the incidents of com- mon life, have left us passages referring events to fate and the decrees of the Gods. |

Mr. Hume observes, that the subject “ has been found hitherto to exceed all the“ skill of Philo- sophy.“

111. The opinions of the Jews are peculiarly worthy of our attention, as expressions of the New Testament are accommodated to them; but they have been already* mentioned. The fifth Chapter of Maimonides de Penitentià is more applicable in this place, than under the tenth Article.—The phraseology of the Jews, as being remarkable for referring events to God, has been mentioned re- peatedly *—An idea always to be kept in mind is, that the Pharisees were a sort of Stoics, and the Sadducees a fort of Epicureans. |

iv. The Christians before tlie fifth Century seem rather to introduce texts of Scripture, than to form doctrines out of them. They have been thought

to

d Paradise Lost, B. 2. v. 560,»Lardner produces, Vol. g. page 85. a passage of Agathias, which mentions as a common notion, that wars are owing to the stars, or fate.

Calvin calls his adversaries Epicureans, Inst. 3. 23. 8.

t See a story of Dox and Fox in Dr. Musgrave’s Dissertation on the Grecian Mythology, page 37, 38.—Consult Parkhurst’s Hebrew Lexicon under DN).

End of Essay on Liberty and Necessity.

d Art. x. Sect. 111.— Art. x1. Sect. 1.

i Art. x. dect. 111. & L. with references.

BOOK IV. ART, XVII. SECT. v. 491

to hold much the fame opinions about Predestina- tion, with the Arminians of later days; neither neglecting divine nor human agency. They con- ceived, that God elected or predestined men to future happiness, foresceing their fidelity in making a good use of the privilege *. But it is Controversy, which makes doctrines definite“: that is, which shews what it is that each man holds.

v. In the fifth Century, the Pelagian contro- . versy, set people on thinking and examining ; though Predestination was only an incidental, not the original or principal subject of that contro- versy”, which was, the power of Man to work out his own Salvation. Augustin’s opinion of Pre- destination has been differently represented : my own idea of it is this. He took the texts of scrip- ture, on which the doctrine of Predestination is built, in too literal a sense; but insisted on that sense chiefly because his adversaries, the Pelagians, tried to evade it, without giving any sufficient scriptural reason. He saw, that there must be something professed about Predestination and Elec- tion; but whatever it should be, he never meant it to interfere with the duties of individuals ; with their Love of God and Man; with their Fear of God and themselves ; nor with moral diligence. — (See Art. xv1. Sect. vi.) He said plainly, that no one could dt inguish between one of the elect and any other person; nor could any man know whether he /imself was one of the elect or not: he held, that God left man in this ignorance, in order to make him fear, and to prevent his falling

into

k Baxter on Perseverance, 2d Opinion. —Vosh Hist, Pel. Lib. 6. Thesis 8.

’ Art. . SeQ. zw. m Voshus, page 761, Lib. 6, Thesis 16. n De Corr. et Gratia, cap. 13 —See Baxter, Persev. page 7.

[…] ů -

Cen — L —

N _-

. — Ld — — r […] *

492 BOOK LV. ART, XVII. SECT. v.

into that securitas, of which our * Article speaks.— Whether his notions were reconcileable with each other, or not, he left men, for practice, just as the earlier Fathers had done; as much depending upon their Freewill. So that it is most probable he did not, at different times, hold what could be properly called different opinions concerning free-will,

but, by controversies with Manicheans and Pela- gians, was led into two different ways of expressing himself; which is also Bp. Overal’s” opinion. As he wished both free - will and Grace to be allowed, and Predestination as a preparation of Grace, he must,

of course, defend any one of them against those, who wanted to set it aside.

His change of conception, as to the theory of Predestination, is mentioned in his Book de Pre- destinatione Sanctorum, cap. 3-— But it only amounts to this; that he once thought the pre- ference given to Jacob over Esau, was a reward to Jacob’s fidelity, (which God foreknew) ; but after- wards, he thought the Scriptures represented that preterence as purely a favour ; and no reward.— For his change about Grace, see Art. x. Sect. vr. —He seems to have written to the Monks of Aadrumetum®* in defence of freewill, in fome sense; that is, proving, that neither Grace was to super- fede free-will, nor free-will Grace. He owns the subject to be very difficult. His ideas of Predesti- nation and Virtue seem to have been of the same

sort;

e In the English, „Wretchlessness. De Correptione et Gratia, cap. i3 He says we should love all men; we do not

[…]

Gratia et libero Arbitrio: the Letter prefixed to Valentinus, shews this plainly.

BOOK Iv. v. 493

sort ; neither was to set aside the other, though we could not reconcile them. A method which I have commended: betore* repeatedly.

Fulgentius and Prosper supported Augustin. — The Greek fathers were never great Predestina- rians. Their sending Petrus Diaconus* was as much upon our present subject, as on that of the tenth Article.

The principal question agitated in the Christian church was, did God elect men, and make them virtuous, &c.—or did he elect them because of their virtue? that is, because he foresaw they toon be virtuous?—the former sort of election was called absolute, the latter, conditional®. And this seems always likely to be the principal question while there is any. — Absolute predestination, election, de- cree, would be conceived to be made for promoting the Glory of God; or, from his good pleasure : and it would be called the cause of Virtue ; as virtue would be called the cause of conditional election.— It was also a question, whether the umber of ele& was limited: many seem to have been inclined to

maintain some predestination to happiness, and none to misery. (Not unlike the compilers of our Article.) Moreover, disputes arose about the con- sequences of the doctrine of Predestination, as to God, and as to Man; whether it proved God to be partial, unjust, cruel, &c. or man incapable of exhortation,

Page 1. Rhemists on Rom. viii. 30. seem to hold this opinion. i

Art. x. Sect. x1. XLVI. and Art. xv i. Sect. xxx i111.

t Art. x. Sect. vii.

u Whitby speaks of a conditional election upon our Per- severance in a life of Holiness.“ Five Points, page 36. And this is all the Election he allows: and this was once my idea of conditional: and then 1 called the kind of conditional mentioned above, intermediate; between absolute and Whitby’s conditional; and media scientia occurred to my mind, et

exhortation, reproof, (corre tion), &c. and what rules of prudence and reserve should be commonly followed in zeaching the doctrine.

The Pelagians seem to me not to have entered into the subject of Predestination; they declare indeed against any man’s being forced to sin by necessity; but that declaration was made with re- spect to Original sin, and the possibility of keeping God’s commandments : subjects already treated under our ninth and fifteenth Articles. In Aug. de Predestinatione Sanctorum, you find it said what the Pelagians hold“; but I think Augustin means by Pelagians, what we call Semipelagians ; for that Book, and the following, De Dono Per- severantiæ (which has been called the second book de Prædestinatione Sanctorum) are both written to the French Prelates, Prosper and Hilary, in answer to reasonings which had been sent to Au- gustin (in Africa, I suppole,) by them: reasonings which were prevalent at Marse:lIes?, the mart of Semipelagians, and had spread into different parts of France.—I do not see anything about Predesti- nation in Pelagius’s Creed sent to Innocent; nor in that ascribed to Fulianus*.—The dispute about Predestination was iucidental, as just now men- tioned ; and Augustin did not write his , Book de Predestinatione Sanctorum, seemingly, till about twelve or thirteen years after the death of Inno- cent. Indeed Augustin seems to me to have said but /ittle upon Predęstiuation; considering how much noise his sayings have made: he considered

it chiefly as the Christian dispensation viewed in the

• Aug. de Prædest. Sant. cap, 19. Opera Edit. Benedict.

Tom. 10. page 539. | 7 Art. X. Sect. Ii. z See ad Appendix to 10th Vol. of Augustin’s Works, Ed.

Bened. page 64 and 74.

the foreknowledge and predetermination of God : he calls it preparatio Gratiz. |

vi. The Semipelagians seem to have thought just as Augustin did 1n the former part of his life, when he published his Opuscula; that is, that those, who were elected by God, were favoured on account of their good disposition, or-faith and confidence in him. They thought moreover, that the number of the elect was not limited; and they had a notion, that such as died Infants * would be rewarded or punished in a future life, according to the conduct which they would have observed had they lived on to maturity. |

The Mohammedans © are reckoned great Fatalists; but

vii. We come next to the ninth Century, We spoke of poor Gotescalc“ under the tenth Article. The transactions most to our present purpole passed after he had been entirely subdued, and had re- canted® his opinion, Then several churches in France with Remi (or Remigius) Bishop of Lyons at their head, undertook to defend his cause and his doctrine. They held Councils, and wrote Epistles. The Epistle of the Church of Lyons (Ecclesia Lugdunen/is) is one of the principal de- fences of Predęstination. It, amongst other things, tries to settle the difference between Prescience and Predestination;

Art. 1x. Sect. 1x, |

d For these notions, see Hilary’s Letter to Augustin, which is sometimes prefixed to his Book De Prædestinatione Sanctorum. Vol. 10. p. 519. Ed. Bened. and de Prædest. Santorum, cap. 12.

© Art. x, Sect. 1x. 4 Art, x. Sect. ix.

© See in Usher’s Book about him, his two confessions. « In Sirmond’s Opuscula, Vol. 3, at the beginning, there are two sentences against him: one of them in the form of a Synodic Epistle. -In Mosheim, Cent. g. 2. 3. 24, we see what a great deal has. been written about this poor Monk, and the contests he occasioned, |

VOL. 111. 11

K 2

• —

[…]

496 BOOK IV, Ix.

Predestination ; that is, between knowing what would happen, and determining what should happen. — The distinction was not then new; it is in

Augustin?: predestinarians are glad to have re-

course to it, as it helps them to defend themselves against the charge of making God the Author of Sin. They can, by means of such a distinction, allow his foreknowing sin, and deny his causing it, — There seems an inconsistency in several writers, in making the decrees of God absolute, and yet, at the same time, an exercise of the divine ? Justice in punishing. : * viii. If we looked into the writings of the S:cheolmen, we should find, that, before the scho- lastic ages, and during them, the notions of Pre- destination - had been growing stronger. The intricacies, which that doctrine brings into dis- cussion, suited the Schoolmen. Bishop Burnet on this Article may furnish some instances, I could content myself with referring, as in the tenth Article, to one of Thomas Aquinas’s Indexes*. — The same differences, which prevailed between the Thomists and Scotists, the Dominicans and Franciscans’, about Grace, prevailed also about Predestination. 1x. Let us then pass to the of the Refer- mation : taking first the early 3 without regard to Country, and mentioning the Council of Trent, as composed of persons from different countries;

De Præd. Sanct. cap. 10.

t See Fulke’s Rhemish Testament, on parts of Rom. ix. — See also expressions of Calvin in Dif. on this Article. —Baret owns, or is made to own, that Sin is not the cause of Repro-

bation, but that © the reprobation of the wicked is from ever- lasting. 8 ; Lecture I read two Heads out of the Index to the works of Thomas Aquinas; beginning, Pradestinatio juvatur precibus sanctorum, &c. and Præscientia meritorum non est causa, &c. & Art. xi. Sect. x.

BOOK IV. 1X. 497

countries; and then, as in the tenth Article *, let us take accounts of our doctrine as professed in different countries, without keeping to one time.

At the beginning of the Reformation, the first opposition was to popish good works’. This oc- casioned great stress to be laid upon every part of Divine Agency. Wickliffe was a predestinarian ©; and so were other able Reformers; Zuingle, Calvin, and at first, Martin Luther ; though he afterwards softened®; but Calvin continued in his first rigour, and his follower Beza increased upon it. We might read Calvin’s definition of Predestination. — Dr. Balguy calls his system “ nonsense; and his religion, © a religion which seems to have rested on this execrable foundation, that God is a Ty- rant. Why else did its teachers delight to represent him as governing by Will only, not by wisdom ®* — The Zuinglians held, For Predeftination and Reprobation ; that man doth nothing, but all is in the Will? of God.” But Melancthon wholly omitted the subje& of Predestination in the Con- session of Aug/burg*%. And the Saxon“ confession declines it.

Before the Council of Trent, we are told, that the Romanisis were inclined to what has since been

| called

• Art. x. Sect. xi 11. I Art, x1. Sect. vr.

• — Hist, England. —Gilpin’s Life of Wickliffe,

ge 80.

a Burnet Hist. Ref. Vol. 2. page 107, quoted in Oxford pamphlet, page 27.— beg leave to call by that short name, or even the shorter one of Oxf. the Dissertation on the Seventeenth Article printed at Oxford in 1773, which I have heard was written by Dr. Winchester.

o Calvin’s Institutes 3. 21. 5.

2 Heylin Nina. Hist. page 810. |

See his idea of the matter in the Aug. Conf. cap. 5. de Fide. quoted in Oxf. page 31.—Heylin, page 519,-Syntagma, Page 21.

Syntagma, page 84, (2d paging).

496 BOOK IV, vII I. IX,

Predestination; that is, between knowing what would happen, and determining what ould happen. — The distinction was not then new; it is in Augustin?: predestinarians are glad to have re- course to it, as it helps them to defend themselves against the charge of making God the Author of Sin. They can, by means of such a distinction, allow his foreknowing sin, and deny his causing it, — There seems an inconsistency 1n — writers, in making the decrees of God absolute, and yet, at the same time, an exercise of the divine ? Justice in punishing. 8 viii. If we looked into the writings of the Scheolmen, we should find, that, before the scho- lastic ages, and during them, the notions of Pre- destination had been growing stronger. The intricacies, which that doctrine brings into dis- cussion, suited the Schoolmen. Bishop Burnet on this Article may furnish some instances, I could content myself with referring, as in the tenth Article, to one of Thomas Aquinas’s Indexes®. — The same differences, which prevailed between the Thomists and Scotists, the Dominicans and Franciscans*’, about Grace, prevailed also about

Predestination. 1x. Let us then pass to the of the Refer- mation : taking first the early “Þ ori without regard to Country, and mentioning the Council of Trent, as composed of persons from different countries ;

t DePrad. San&. cap. 10.

E See Fulke’s Rhemish Testament, on parts of Rom. ix. — See also expressions of Calvin in Dif. on this Article. Baret owns, or is made to own, that Sin is not the cause of Repro- . Be that «© the reprobation of the wicked is from ever- Ae.

BOOK IV. 1X. 497

countries; and then, as in the tenth Article *, let us take accounts of our doctrine as professed in different countries, without keeping to one time.

At the beginning of the Reformation, the first opposition was to popish good works.. This oc- casioned great stress to be laid upon every part of Divine Agency. Wickliffe was a predestinarian“; and so were other able Reformers; Zuingle, Calvin, and at first, Martin Luther; though he afterwards softened®; but Calvin continued in his first rigour, and his follower Beza increased upon it. We might read Calvin’s definition of Predestination. — Dr. Balguy calls his system “ nonsense; and his religion, © a religion which seems to have rested on this execrable foundation, that God is a Ty- rant. Why else did its teachers delight to represent him as governing by Will only, not by wisdom ®* — The Zuinglians held, For Predestination and Reprobation; that man doth nothing, but all is in the Will? of God.” But Melancthon wholly omitted the subje& of Predestination in the Con- session of Aug/burg®Þ And the Saxon“ confession declines it. ;

Before the Council of Trent, we are told, that the Romanisis were inclined to what has since been

| called * Art. x, Se. x111. I Art. x1. SeR. vi. = Hume’s Hist. England. —Gupin’s Life of Wickliffe,

page 80. |

n Burnet Hist. Ref. Vol. 2. page 107, quoted in Oxford pamphlet, page 27.— beg leave to call by that short name, or even the shorter one of Oxf. the Dissertation on the Seventeenth Article printed at Oxford in 1773, which I have heard was written by Dr. Winchester.

o Calvin’s Institutes 3. 21. 5.

P Heylin Qing. Hist. page 810. |

Syntagma, page 84, (2d paging).

II 2

498 BOOK 1V. ART, XVII. SECT. x.

called Calvinism* : which, considering their vene- ration for Augustin and the Schoolmen, 1s very probable in itself ; though different parties would fall into it in different degrees*.—At the Council of Trent, the Dominicans were for referring all to God, and laying down, that what relates to man, his conduct and his welfare, has been fixed and decided before all worlds. The Franciscans wished® to have it declared, that all is in the power of man: a third sort took a middle way, and would have some things declared to be fixed, others to be left to human choice and endeavours. Luther and Melancthon passed uncensured in this matter. The result we find in the Canons and decrees of the Council. From the fifteenth and seventeenth Canons, and the twelfth Chapter of the Decree, we gather, as I should exprels it, that the Romanists did not deny the reality of Predestination, but condemned every thing, by which a man could apply it to practice; or to his own particular case.

The Rhemists on Rom. viii. and ix. follow Au- gustin, and are for unconditional predestination ; but are not so decided, with regard to the motive of God, or with regard to reprobation, as their answerer Master Fulke

x. We now take a short view of Predestina- tion in different countries; leaving our own for the last, |

Of Spain* and the Jesuit Molina, I seem to have nothing new to advance: he is said to have invented the Media Scientia, by which God sees

whatsoever

t Art. xv1. Sect. vill.

u See Heylin from Father Paul, page 510,

• Art, x. Sect. xiv. W

BOOK IV. XI—XIV. 499

whatsoever would follow upon * such or such conditions?” |

XI. And, under the Head of Holland and Flanders, I have already“ said all that is needful; only I may read the decrees of the Synod of Dort as far as they relate to Predestination. The Eng- lisi divines were ordered by King James the First

to vote for universal redemption ; but they were.

out-voted. | |

I have heard, I think, that Calvinism is now the ruling religion in Holland, but that Armi- nianism is tolerated. Limborch was an Arminian,

but he read Divinity Lectures in public at Am- sterdam, and his body of Divinity was published

there : he diedin 1712, aged 79. | x11. Of Germany I have said something under the tenth Article*®, The Calvinists and Armimans

are there mixed with Romanists; the different re-

ligions prevailing in different degrees in different places. The Lutherans do not, I believe, differ much from the Romanists, or from us, with regard to Predestination.

X111. The disturbances in France? did not re- gard the doctrine of Grace only: the propositions

condemned were five. The last is agaiast® the

universality of Redemption: and therefore favours, at least, the doctrine of Predestination.

xiv. We will take the early Socinians as be- longing to Poland; as we did before“. In the Racovian Catechism, in the Chapter De libero Arbitrio, we have the Socinian definition of Pre-

destination,

Y Burnet on the Article, oftavo page 195. = Art. x. Sect. xv. LN

• Art. x. Set. & vx. b Art. x. Sect. xv11. © Mosheim, Cent. 17. 2. 1. 1. 43.

• Art. x. Sect. xv11. though there is a Confessio Polonica

in the Syntagma; but the Socinians are called Fratres Poloni.

—— .: — —

—_— uu.

a =

— nat.

destination. — . Prædestinatio Dei in seripturis aliud nihil notat, quam Dei, ante conditum mun- dum, de hominibus decretum ejusmodi; Quòd iis, qui in ipsum crederent, eique obedirent, daturus esset vitam æternam: eos vero qui in eum credere, et ei parere, recusarent, #terna damnatione puni- turus effet.” — Afterwards it is said, that Elec- tion sometimes means the fame as Vocation, some- times it implies farther, leading a Christian life.— The Socinians have been, I think sometimes said to deny the Divine Prescience; perhaps it might be thought, that they deny it in this passage; but I should rather say, they do not profess it; if God decrees to reward those, who should believe in him, he may foreknow who will believe in him, though that be not mentioned ‘ꝰ.

xv. Geneva used to be the principal mart of Calvinism ; there Calvin flourished, and Beza taught. — The Helvetic* confession says, all those are re- probate, who are not Christians, though it hopes well of all, and takes pains to prevent ebuse.— But I have been informed, that Calvinism is now a mere form at Geneva; and that Ostervald’s Catechism is chiefly taught. I believe Ostervald was a Lutheran. 1 have already, in the third - book, mentioned this change as an instance of a tacit Reformation.

The Jesuits are reckoned Semi-Pelagians.

There is a comic dialogue called Fur predeftinatus, which exposes the principal predestinarian opinions down to the Synod of Dort.

xvi. I come lastly to England. —The Neces- fary Doctrine has something very like our Article;

what

e P. S. See Burnet on this Article, near r the beginning, 190, octavo. oh and Syn

8 Book 111. Cha Iv. OE Goth vi. Þ Art. x. Se. x11. i In the Article of] Justificacion, about four pages from the end.

’ BOOK IV. XVI, 501

what one might call the seeds of it. And here all phantasticall imaginacion,. curious reasonyning, and vayn truste of predestinacion, is to be laied apart. And accordyng to the playne manner of speakyng and teachyng of scripture, in innumerable places, we oughte evermore to be in dread of our own frailtie and natural pronitie to fall to synne, and not to assure ourselfe, that we be elected any otherwyse, than by felyng of scriptural mocions in our herte, and by the tokens of good and vertuous vyng, in folowynge the grace of God, and per- everyng in the {ame to the ende.”

In the Reformatio. Legum, predestinat ion is the last subject of che part de Hæresibus; it ment ions as a fact, that many did, at the time, use the plea of predestination, as an excuse for their immoral lives: but it does not seem to hint at any penalties for such abuse. It is more of a declaration or me- morial, to prevent scandal and perversion, than a Law. No more need be said upon it at present, as it will be useful in our explanation.

In our Homilies I do not see the doctrine of Pre- destination ® treated; If I have not overlooked any passages concerning it, we might conclude, that our church did not think it a doctrine to be commonly taught to the people.

The principal zwriters at the time of the Refer-

mation in England, Cranmer, Latimer, Hooper,

Ridley, are extremely rational in treating our doc- trine : specimens may be seen in Heylin’s Historia Quinquarticularis and the Oxford Differtation : my own opinion was formed and publicly delivered before I knew theirs; and I was happy to find the best and ablest men giving me the most support z

and * From Heylin, Quinq. page 558 (2.9. 7.) one would think that our Homilies 4% mention the doctrine; but the Italics

denoting quotation are continued too long.—That work of Heylin’s is incorrectly printed, |

— U

and making my ideas seem most like those of the Church of England, | It seems clear to me, that our Church did not, at the time of the separation from the Church of Rome, properly intend to lay down any doctrine of Predestination; but only to declare against abuses actually prevailing. If it had not been for this, they would probably have followed the example of Melancthon, when he formed the confession of Augsburg. The opinions of Erasmus confirm this, as he was far from a rigorous Predestinarian; and yet they were considered as proper to help forward the Reformation in England. His paraphrase on the New Testament was placed by authority! in our churches; and the Clergy were put upon studying his zworks,—He died in 1536, aged 68.

Introduction to Book 1v. Sect. v.

w_— —

• —ů 1. —— — CO TY -* - a <oe va - vp — 8 — 5 I — 2 […] - — —_—— _ g A — . 4p * _ ä […] RT, 2. - — — - q—— —

V Le . LECTURES 29.1 VN FT F;

BY

— — ͤH—

• VOLUME THE FOURTH. ; h »

PRINTED BY JOHN BURGES PRINTER TO THE UNIVERSITY ;

AND SOLD BY J. DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE; LEIGH & SOTHEBY, ’ CHURCH=-YARD, PAYNE, MEWS-GATE, SHEPPERSON & REYNOLDS, NO. 197, AND W. H. LUNN, NO $92, OXFORD-STREET, LONDON ; AND ——

G

2 * D . - […] - […] 20 - 5 * 1 24 2 +4 2 - […] *

—

— 2 […] - […] 095-0 mn 2 […] wa A T ET = * EE […] a * 8 1

DIVINITY, &e.

BOOK IV. ;

SECT. xvII.

UEEN Mary’s court does not seem to have

intermeddled db with Predestination; they had other matters to engage their attention; their chief view was, to bring the nation back to Popery; as we: have given the decision of the Council of Trent, we need take no more notice of the popish part of our countrymen, - .

The reformed fell into disputes amongst them- A even in prison, where they were confined as Heretics, expecting, many of them, to be brought to the stake ; © they wrote against each other, and dispersed their writings abroad in the world*.”— The dottrine of Predestination was even now gaining strength amongst the generality of plain N though 2 Neal, Vol. 1. 4to. page 69. Oxf. page 67. Heylin. vol. Iv. A

2 BOOK IV. ART. XVII, SECT. xviIII.

though it was checked by some of the most improved minds. Some forms were drawn up for the prisoners to sign, in order to reduce them to amity ; but they are not extant: it seems probable, that though they did not run into the extreme of Calvinism, they ap- preached too near it to be encouraged by the prin- cipal* Reformers. Bradford and Carless are named on this occasion; both martyrs; as were many others engaged in the dispute. xV111. Elizabeth came to the throne in 1558. In the beginning of her reign the more liberal and polite sort of divines wished to lower the doctrine of Predestination, or to avoid it. The less liberal and refined pushed it forward very stoutly ; nay tyran- nically, so as to oblige some to seek tor shelter and protection. Both these things appear, I think, from Strype’s Annals. Besides, the Puritans, who were Calvinists, got considerable power in the House of Commons, and made the Queen so zealous, that their proposing to ratify by act of Parliament the Reformatio Legum, was reason sufficient* with her to set it aside. | Much of the growth of Calvinism has been ascribed to the fight of the Protestant divines from England during the reign of Queen Mary: some went to Geneva, others to Switzerland, […] Tewel

d Oxford Pamph. page 67, &c.. |

© Annals 1559, page 116. 118, Vol. 1. and page 294, (in some editions I think page 331) : my old references to the f Vol. of Strype’s Annals, seem all wrong: what Edit. did I use ? the reference in this Section to the second Vol. is right, for Sid. Coll. Library.

4 Oxford, page 45, from Collier 2. 530. |

© Some where I have mentioned the bad reception which these Refugees met with from the Lutherans, on account of their being what was called Sacramentarians, that is, denying the corporal presence of Christ in the Eucharist : the cruelty of the Lutherans made them take refuge with the Calvinists, who Le

them

#3 * * * 93 A» A 4 iy * 1

• -

Jewel went to Italy; and others to other places*, where they rather grew weaker than stronger in the doctrine about the divine decrees. Much would depend upon the notions they found associated with kindness and hospitality : but Calvinism seems to me to have been growing in England even be- fore, or during, the reign of Queen Mary.

I gave the History of the Lambeth Articles under the sixteenth Article®; I have now only to read such of them as belong to our present subject.— The cordial assent to them all, of that professed divine Matthew Hutton, Archbishop of York, may amuse the curious. The remarks of the Bishops and Divines, seem to be ingenious, and to have drawn the sting of some of them very expertly.— I suppose Archbishop Mitgift was at the head of thele i remarkers. He 1s said to have acted . faci- litate* et metu.” Though he encouraged some eminent preachers against Reprobation, he might not think Professor Whitaker a man to be bluntly opposed : but his conduct! seems to prove what has been already observed,

1. That men of improved minds, were endea- vouring to soften the rigours of Predestination.

2, That

them kindly : they were indeed of the same opinion in regard to the Sacrament.— See Mosheun, Vol. 4. 8vo. page 87, or Cent. 16. 3. 2. 2. 16. |

f Strype’s Annals, 1562, Vol. 1. page 294. (Sid.) or near that page; perhaps 293. |

i P.S. I cannot find, from Strype’s Life of Whitgift, who

. these remarkers were; Strype contradicts this writer of the

Lambeth Articles; and represents Whitgift, more than that writer does, as favouring Whitaker and Calvinism, Yet I thought he did not quite prove what he undertook. Whitgift seemed to me, even from Strype’s account, to be guided much by prudence, and to dislike Whitaker’s zeal. |

• Hist. Art. Lamb. F— 15-18, Cambr,

A 2

4 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT, xix.

2. That the less refined were very strenuous in heightening the doctrine, and were very hard to restrain.

One sentence of Neal may make students aware of the language of Puritans in whatever books

they meet with it. Though the Pelagian doc-

trine was espoused by very few of the English Reformers” —* it revived the latter end of Queen Elizabeth’s reign under the name of Arminianism®, and within the compass of a few years supplanted the received doctrine of the Reformation.”

Before we pals to another reign, it may not be amiss to mention the idea of Predestination enter- tamed by the Famili/s*. * There are two, with their members, that are predestined, or pre-or- dained; the one unto preservation, and the other unto condemnation, from the beginning : the one is Christ, the man of God, predestined unto pre- servation, and with him, all his incorporated mem- bers: the other is the man of Sin, Antichrist; predestinated unto condemnation; and in him all his incorporated members? : as for any other pre- destination than this (come it out of Turkey, or elsewhere) I know not of it.”

xIx. In the reign of James I, there seems to have been an odd mixture of Calvinism and Armi- nianism. He was bred in the Kirk, and was, at one time, calvinisic; and he favoured Prince Maurice at the Synod of Dort, who favoured the Calvinists: yet in the conference at Hampton Court, in the beginning of his reign, he dis- couraged them, and never chose to prefer them in

the = Hist. of Puritans, Vol. 1. page 70, 4to. 2 Eliz, died in 1603. Arminius in 1609 (æt. 49 )— it was early for the name of Arminiani/m. Art. vii. Sect. 111.

? Strype’s Annals, Vol. 2. page 378 This passage 1s given

by Strype from an Apology of the Familists, but it is not marked with inverted commas,

1 3 Pn — 5 e PPT LAST : a 5 TE I 1

BOOK IV. xx. 5

the Church. He preferred Arminians, yet kept up decency, and restrained the Puritans in an artful manner. He gave his preferments to men of abilities and good lives. He forbade the Puri- tans to rail against the Papists; but then every one was forbidden to rail at the Puritans; this sounded fair, but was really a great restraint. The five points were too mysterious and nice for the ordinary Clergy to preach upon ; reasonable enough ; there- - fore only Bij/hops and Deans must preach upon them; but James made Arminians Bishops and Deans; and so the Puiitans were silenced on those points which they wanted most to propagate. — And sometimes laws appearing perfectly equal, were so executed as to make the Puritans complain. It seems as if James, thcouzh a Pedant, considered things more as a statesman than as a divine; favoured those men whose manners were the most courtly, and checked, as imperceptibly as he could, those who were more rigid and uncomplying.

xx. In the reign of Charles I. Calvinism grew headstrong; but still it was not in favour at Court: there Arminianism flourished : indeed with too great openness to be consistent with prudence. One charge against Archbishop Laud, when he was 1m- peached, was Arminianism ; the opposition to that was stronger than to anything elle.

Mr. Hume remarks, that perhaps the only thing in which all the Sectaries agreed, was the notion, that the doctrines of Fate and Destiny were essen- tial to all religion. Dr. Balguy* speaks of their overturning the Monarchy, as being only a step to overturning the Church.— If we have time, I will

read

vii. — These are not the very words of Hume, but taken from two sentences.

Page 61. A 3

T

6 BOOK Iv.

read some of Mr. Ronse’s Speech in the Houle of Commons: and a Protęst of the House againft* Arminianism, in 1628.

In 1643 the Parliament, by ordinance, ap- pointed an Assembly of Divines who should reform the Church of England, bring it nearer Calvinism, and make a coalition with the Church of Scot- land : we have their Catechisms, and the Articles which they reformed ; but after debating ten weeks on the first fifteen, they stopped short, and desisted from * the task. |

XX1, The turn which religious opinions took in the reign of Charles IT. has been mentioned under the eleventh Article.—And the notions of Antinomians with regard to Election, sufficiently, under the sixteenth. It has been hinted, that Methodists * are divided into Calvinistic and Ar- minian : and that the generality of the English Clergy* are reputed Arminians. The first Earl of Chatham said, in Parliament, that we have a Cal- vinistic Creed, and an Armimian Clergy? ; I should be more willing to acknowledge the latter than the former. Dr. Fortin sfays*, Our Dissenters, in the last Century, were generally absolute Predestina- TIans ;”—they are now, I take it, mostly Sociniaus *. — The Quakers are said to profess Arminianism : and some Presbyterians, I have been told, continue Calvinists,

| xXx11. The

• See Neal’s Pur. Vol. 1. 4to. page 5 30, 532, 534. from Rushworth. 8 t Neal 1643, Vol. 2. 48. 4to. The articles are in the Appendix. “0: Art. XV. vet. x. * Art, x vi. Sect. viIII. Y See Belsham’s Memoirs of the reign of George III. Vol. 1. page 362. Ed. 1796. 2 Second Dissertation, page 112. I do not perceive that Dr. Priestley allows any decree at all, Famil. Illustr.

; 55 be 1d

ES ey Wo at SoC

a;

/ s $54 25S 4’s ry * E * n 2 A 5 4H

en * a o {; #4 \

z […] at ; g E CF a

1 — * F * 5 “7 * 8 * on « T ror Sea Ea IE,

©

Cp iz 4 ve.

• ; * I A $4 4’s FB. q. ; - […] by : A WH

BOOK iv. ART. XVI1, SECT. XXII—XXIV. 7

XxX11. The most formidable Calvinist of modern times I take to be Jonathan Edwards. He died in 1758. The modern Baptisis are represented by Wall, in his History of Infant-baptism, (Part 2. Chap. 8. Sect. 6. Subsect. 16), as more earnest about Predestination than any other people in England : As being anxious to know whether any one is a Freewiller or a Freegracer. They have also amongst them a division of persons into General men, and Particular men, from their holding a

general or a partial Redemption.

XX111. In Scotland John Knox established Cat. vinism; and in 1643 the assembly of Divines had in view the Reformation of the Church or England, but only the Preservation of the Church of Scot- land; which shews how calvinistic it was,—and puritanical in discipline. The Confesto Scotica seems to conceive the true Churck* of Christ to be the ele, and others reprobates, What are now the notions of the established presbyterian Kirk, or of the tolerated episcopal Church, I have not been well informed.

xx1V. The Iri/k* Articles were drawn in 1615 by Archbishop Upter, when Provost of Dublin College; the Lambeth Articles were 1ncorporated into them. But in 1634 Archbishop Laud got our xxxix accepted; Neal says, in the room of the others; but Waterland says the Lambeth Articles were never formally laid aside. Usher was then

Primate : his Body of Divinity is very Calvinistic,

but Waterland says, ** he renounced his Calvinian principles, as 1s well attested by Three good Hands“.“

Archbishop

b Syntagma, page 141. 148, Art. Electio. et de Ecclesia. c Neal 1.475. Waterland Suppl. Ar. Subscr. p. 51. | 4 In a MS. note in the Library of Mg College, Cam- bridge, are mentioned * Walton,

eter * _ er

8 BOOK IV, ART. XVII. SECT, xV— XXVII.

Archbishop King has left a very good discourse on Predestination.

xxv. Having in the tenth Article reserved the notion of God’s causing evil, I do the same here. — He has been pad to cause it either by iu-

fluence, or by decree; the former belonged to the

tenth Article, the latter to this.

Vice is ascribed to Fate in Homer. Agamem- non excuses himself for robbing Achilles of his prize by saying’, Eyw & uw amis , A Zeug x More — Agathias mentions it as a common notion, that wars and battles were imputed to the stars and fate: see Lardner’s account of Simplicus in his Heathen testimonies*.

xxVI. With regard to the Jews, I know not thai I need add anything to what was said under Section 111.—As Jewish expressions, arising from Jewish ideas, are the very things which cause our difficulties, they will appear of course in the solution.

XXVII. Some early Christians have been said to run into notions of fin being caused by decrees of powers above; but the accounts seem scarcely to be depenced® upon. They are mentioned by Heylin at the opening of his History of the five Articles. Chap. 1. Sect. 4—6.—But Colarbasus

n | seems,

Herbert Thorndike: with reference to Smith’s Life of Usher, and Collier’s Eccles. Hist. Vol. 2. page 868.—And Neal owns the fact, in a degree. Hist. Pur. Index.—All the Calvinists till speak respectfully (I am told) of Archbishop Usher. © Iliad, Book 19 1. 86. This expression is quoted by Heylin, « 507 ; but a few other expressions might be read: Agamemnon ays, what could he do? a divine power made him offend. This was mentioned before as an instance of ascribing events in general to Fate, Sect. 11. but it ought also to appear as an instance of ascribing evils to Fate. Natural evil may be distinguished from moral, but though war is natural evil, it is usually caused by moral. s Art. xv. Sect. 11. and Art. x vi. Sect. 11.

by o& : ,

, 5 […] 3 n „ee. —— AS

_ A EP “y a ths wn L

AJ […] CR + 32 4 + Y #3 , * J N 5 C2 * , a Y

r :

• 2 tf £

SLAG

—

seems, in Aug. de Hær. d to have believed in ons. of the Priscillianists Augustin says, « Astruunt etiam fatalibus stellis homines colli- gatos,“ &c. |

XXV111. In Augustiu’s time the Monks of Adru- metum are {ai:! to have held, that God predestinated the wicked, not only to punishment but to guz/z. —And all those who came into this notion were called Prede//inarians. But disputes have arisen concerning this part* of History. What I have seen of Augustin’s writings to Valentinus and others of that Monastery at Adrumetum, has not given me an’ idea that they held fo strange a doctrine.

xxix. Some have allowed a foreknowledge of

fin in God as a motive for reprobation, who would

not allow a foreknowledpe * of merits, as a motive to Election. Peter Lombard says, © pradestinavit

eos quos elegit, reliquos vero reprobavit, id est ad

[…]

have made Reprobation to consist merely in not electing.— The Rhemists on Rom. ix 14. speak of an illustration of Augustin’s, who compares the elect and reprobate to two debtors, one of which is forgiven all, and the other made to pay all, by the same creditor.

Some stiong expressions of Calvin may be found in the first seventeen pages of the Oxford Disser- tation: but in those expressions we see that desire

before-mentioned of making Reprobation, though

proceeding

h Mosheim, Vol. 2, page go, octavo, or Cent 5.2. f. 25.

i These Monks were for Grace excluding Free-will; which is rather a Hmptom of their being for Predestination excluding Virtue, — Jansen felt as I did; see opening of Sirmond’s Historia

[…]

bation : and I think he is of my mind : See Index to Hist, Pelag. © Predeftinationem,”” &c.

K Sect. V1. end. ! Lab. 1. Dist. 40.

U TY f +: : 1p $1 ,

proceeding from they: d pleasure of God, an act of just punishment.

At Trent the Dominicans founded reprobation on the mere pleasure of God, alledging the instance of Esau reprobated before he was born.

There has been a distinction between Supralap- farians and Sublapsarians, from Lapsus the Fall of Man. The former held, or have been charged with holding, that God decreed the Fall of Man, and all its fatal consequences; the latter, that God’s decree presupposed the Fall, or only per- mitted it, and determined the state of different men in consequence of it. One Tie has been reckoned a Supralapsarian® ; he was Prolocutor to the Assembly of Divines in 1643.

This gives an idea of all Mankind taken col- lectively ; with regard to a particular ance, Master Fulke speaks plainly in his answer to the Rhemists on Rom. ix. 17.

„The purpose for which God et up Pharao is manifest in the text, that in him he might fhew his power, &c. God made all things for ae, evex the wicked unto the evil day. Therfore was Pharao, a vessel of wrath rare to destruction, vers. 22. —His reprobation therefore was for the Glorie of God, his condemnation most zu/?, for his obstinate contempt of God and his word.”

In reading the Lambeth Articles it was not easy to avoid reading the part about reprobation with that about election: because one wished not to leave a sentence unfinished. As this remark may apply to several instances, I will here close 7he History of Reprovation, and of the Arte.

xxx, We.

[…]

„ WES _ ö os

t oF

IX LS - WM — LE, Fa I […] ; # «\ ; % Je +

;% ky A % 2.

a {+ : q A > þ

xxx. We come then to the Explanation.

The fide is, Of Predestination and Election.“ Predestination is sometimes a generic term, in- cluding Election“ and Reprobation; sometimes it signifies only predestination to happiness, which is its sense here, as appears from its being joined with Ele&ion.—And also from the first expres- sion of the Article, . Predestination to Life.” — TIpoopro pace is not in Scripture, but Tevpr_w 18, and oh.

xxxi. The first paragraph of our Article ex- hibits nothing more than a series of texts, with a word or two connecting them together. To make

such a series seems fair, yet it occasions some im-

diment to that conception of the Article, which I think the right one. The texts of scripture, on which the doctrine of Predestination has been built, seem to me chiefly expressions of sentiment, or eloquence, or even of formality and decorum.— Now to put such expressions into a series, mult give them more appearance of em and 7heory than they would have if each was read, with a right feeling, in its p/ace.

When such expressions occur as, O King“ live

for ever, - the most excellent Governor“ Felix,“

most noble […] how strange it would seem, if an Historian was to hold, that Darius was immortal, or that Felix excelled all other men as a Governor; yet when such sayings are con- nected together, the connexion gives each more

speculative meaning than it was intended to have. -—I would not be understood to say, that all the

texts

2 Usher’s Body of Divinity under God’s Kingdom, page 73. 7th Edit. — Arminius’s Works, Disp. 15. page 226. but Ar- minius prefers our sense,

0 Pan. vi. 21. Acts xxiii. 26.

1 Acts xxvi. 25.

12 BOOK IV, XXX{I—XXXV,

texts introduced have an indefinite meaning; but

only, that when the things they mention, are re-

ferred to the predetermination of God, then the meaning 15 indefinite,

Nor would I infinuate, that even then the mean- ng is as indefinite, as the meaning of the phrases just now mentioned, O King live for ever,” &c.; they are only mentioned to fhew the nature of the inconvenience complained of, not to mark out the degree of it.

Still, however, it will be proper to shew, that the Compilers of our Article did follow Scripture”.

xXX XII. Predestination to Life,” implies that there is such a thing supposed, at least, as Predesti- nation to Death. —Which is not here denied, but waved, or omitted, —The Reformatio Legum says, that wicked men used frequently to alledge Repro- bation, as an excuse for their wickedness.

xXxxxIII. [s the cverlastiug purpose of God” — we have * eternal purpose” Eph. iii. 11.—and purpose, in this sense, occurs several times. Rom. vin. 28.—ix. 11.—And Eph: I. 11,—* everlasting” is to be taken in a negative* sense, as that which has continued during a time to which we can con- ceive no limit.

« Whereby,” will be allowed as a connecting word, not scriptural.

XXX1V. ** Before the foundations of the world were laid; —See Matt. XXV. 34.—Eph. i. 4.— 2 Tim. i. 9.— This expression seems indefinite, and meant to be so taken.

XXXV. He hath constantly decreed.” —© Con- fautly,” seems again a negative term, signifying a de- cree not interrupted in any way assignable by man ;— decreed might be used as implied in .

an

See Oxf. page 20, &c. and bottom of page 74. 5 Introd. to second Part, Sect. v 11. |

La” f

we

,… —— +41

2 Þ - […] Y * & 3 C - [7 8 RS : COD YE * . ITS 1 . 4 LM 7% L n bs 4 1 8 »” D’s, ” ey by . Kol GS TAG PSS Rotc-mnoachkts. ; ö A —

pr

-_

pA, 1 — N go TH. *7

2 k k 83 o “TY DJ G ’ EF. E OE oe bo ns 4 3 . * . 0 — = q 8 3 _ h ET MM - 3 3 5 are wa A.

Ad

„ 22 6s * W’s, ht et

BOOK IV. XXXVI—XL. 13

and purpose; but it may be referred to Jer. v. 22.; in LXX. mD AN?E,Edutͤ. God’s decree is a sort of technical term in Theology 18

xxxvis © By Jas consent,” Ben Acts ii. 23.— Rom. xi. 34.—Heb. vi. 17.

XXXVIi. Secret to us, Deut. xxix. 29.— Amos iii. 7.— The secrecy is allo implied in Rom. xi. 33, 34. Fu

Secret seems to imply here that which belongs to God’s part, in the Government of the world: to be opposed to revealed, for the guidance of Mau; if what is called secret ever appear, it is by the event *, or at most by faint intimation.

XXXVIII. © To deliver from curse” — Gal. iii. 10, 13. with reference to Deut. xxi. 23. and xxvii. 26.

xxxix. And damnation,” xaraxepea Rom. v. 16. 18.— but of this enough under the ninth Article.

XL. © Those whom he hath chosen in Christ“— we have © chosen in him,” Eph, i. 4.—the words <« in Christ,” were added to the Article in 1562, though they make what comes after seem rather an harsh repetition; in order, probably, to keep close to words® of Scripture. — The term * chosen,” is one of those which were originally used of the Fews, and applied to Chri/tians in the way of com- parison or * allufion. — The expression, © those whom he Hat] chosen,” or, whom he hath fiuce chosen, seems to me to imply, that the secret pur- pose of God 1s only to be looked upon as opened by the event : the publication of Christianity is

N an * «© Made manifest by the effects.“ then“ (when a matter

is come to pass) “ it is manifest what was God’s will before

concerning the matter.” — This is Calvinistic Usher: Bod, of Divinity, page 41, 7th Edit,

• Oxf, page 20. * ‘Taylor on Romans, Key, Par. 92.

an event which ought to be referred to the Divine

Government, not limited by time. Whoever en-

tered fully into this remark, would allow me to say, that predestination of men to be Christians, ought not to be mentioned, or thought of, till they are hecome Christians : agreeably to what was? said under the tenth Article of preventing Grace ; nay, that any heathen who pleases, may to-morrow have * been © chosen” from all eternity; that is, who- ever becomes a Christian in the common way,

may, when he does become one, ascribe his con-

version to the goodness of God, acting before all time that can be limited. |

• Ont of mankind” —these words seem only for connexion.—They might have been omitted.

XL1. And to bring them by Christ to everlasting Salvation.” —Eph. i. 7, 10, 11, say the same thing, only in a manner not so suitable to the course of expression in the Article: that true Christians are to be saved eternally, is not a thing likely to be questioned by any set of Christians. Salvation was one of the terms explained in the Appendix to the eleventh Article*. The word © everlasting,” is not useless, as men are sometimes said to be

saved when they are only admitted into Christi-

anity.

408 « As vessels made to honouw” —Rom. ix. 21, 23. with reference to Jer. xvili. 1, &c.—These texts describe only comparative privileges, or dis- tinctions; and those distinctions must be supposed to be acquired in the common way, by a diligent

use of opportunities, and then referred, indistinctly,

to

Art. x, Sect. XXXV. = Rogers on this Article, mentions, as in error, those who

say, „it is is any man’s power to be elected,“ page 80, —

Theophylact is one, I see: which is a comfort. * SeRt. xV111, and Art. xi. Set, xx 1.

8, F FP = ©

1 e 1 8 ” 1 […] r

• 8 […] a

: ” 8 * * 0 x _ 7 on P

z * * . - — * WOE 2, SY Wa. E. » 15 * * FFP

o or $ iT : do A 4 E bo 4b

Coe ere

. PF wa;

— ant . #* > N wake r

=_ c n * . % Fea . we 5 1 Ty 1 1 . by why”. #4 4 og ***. 50 OE SRP edt Lot +

ROOK IV. XLIII—XLV. 15

to the Divine Providence: though the refer- ence to God will always be the stronger when we speak of men collectively, and of disposing or governing them“.

We have now got what may be called a defi- uition of our cause ; of the cause of Christianity, as existing in the Divine mind, in a manner unknown to us, from a time not to be limited by us. . The effects, that is the parts of Christianity, fall more within our comprehension. If they had been mentioned it, and then referred to their unsearcii- able cause, in indesiuile language, our ideas would have been kept in better order; but it might be thought that an Article ought to keep to the synthetical method.

XLIII. © I herefore, they which be endued with fo excellent a benefit of God” I see nothing in these words but connexion. * They which be,” seems to imply uncertainty about individuals; whoso- ever they may be, that are, 1n the fight of God, true Christians.

XLIV. “Be called according to God’s purpose,” — the expression is all taken from Rom. viii. 28. —See also 2 Tim. i. g*®.—imvited, offered election; Matt. xx. 16,— Taylor’s Key, par. 97 ,— The in- vitation must have been primarily given to quit idolatry and Paganism.

XLV. *© By his spirit working in due season” —

1 Pet. i. 2. the manner of referring conversion to God’s spirit, has been mentioned“ under the rent Article : it must not interfere with endeavours, nor take place till the conversion is pa. —“ In due season,” I do not seem to see the whole purpose

of

Art. x. Sect. xLix.

© x1 Cor. vu, 21. © calle,” is equivalent to becoming a Christian. |

4 Art. x. Set. xxxv1.

16 BOOK IV. XLVI—L.

of inserting these words; they fill up the sentence to the ear; they occur several times in scripture, bur not with regard to the working of the spirit.

XLVI. * They through Grace obey the calling,” —

obey is in Rom. vi. 17. and obedience 1 Pet. i. 2.— - It would not have been — to have omitted the

divine afiftarce.

XL VII. They be justified freely: the expres⸗ sion comes from Rom. iii. 24. but Rom. viii. 30. should be kept in mind. Of Justification we have treated under the eleventh Article.

XIVIII. © be made the Sous of God by adoption: — Gal. iv. 5, 6.— Rom. viii. 15.—Heb. Ii. 11. we were 4 in Vn. But the principal pas- sage seems Eph. i. 5.

XLiX. © They be made like the image of his ouly- begotten Son Jesus Christ: this expression comes from Rom. viii. 29.—but if we look at the goth verse, we have after ju/tified, “ glorified :” instead of which our church takes a passage out of the 29th verse: from whence it seems probable, that they had the same notion of the passage, with Taylor; namely, that the 29th verse describes the

fl and last steps of our spiritual progression ;

and that the goth enumerates the intermediate steps : 1f this be right, it comes to the same thing saying, we shall be finally glorified, and, we shall be made finally like the image of Jesus Christ. — See 2 Cor. iii. 18.—* begotten” may be opposed to adopted.

L. They walk religiously in good cor s: this seems implied in becoming Christians ; but for the same reason the twelfth “Article was inserted, a plain expression seems useful here :—1 conceive a reference to Titus ii. 14. and iii. 8.—-But Eph.

ii. 10. has the most of Predestination in it. LI. © And

FR ” N

hc:

4 I

ob

„

by oy * A W mg

WS 2.4 I a7

• ”_ 2 * * ee r

| 2 ** e 1

flexion; and

LI. * And at length, by God’s mercy,” — Tit. iii. 5.— 1 Pet. i. 3.

L II. They attain to everlasting felicit) Matt. xxv. 34. {peaks of the predestinated as attaining to endless happiness, therefore is here the proper authority.

Before we proceed, we should consider whether the distinguishing characteristics of Christians admit of various degrees. Salvation does ; justification has been said to do, under the eleventh Article; why may not Adoption? good works allow of great variety. |

LIII. We have now had a scriptural delineation of Christianity, and we have seen the scriptural method of referring it to the divine foreknowledge and © everlasting purpose.” And what is the use of such referring? that we are to see next. It may be used fo as to do good; but it, or some- thing thought to be of the same sort with it, may be used so as to do great harm. Our Article pro- poses to attain the good, and avoid the evil, — The unsearchable counsels and foreknowledge of God do so far appear to man, as to become to him a most interesting object of contemplation and re-

15 rightly contemplated, they may improve Christian piety; if wrongly, they may pro- mote vice and misery. But let us pursue the expres- sions of the AMticle. | :

LIV. As the godly consideration of Predestina- tion, and our election in Christ” - the fort of con- templation allowed, must be * godly,” that is, it

must presuppose true piety in the mind: and it must

also presuppose admission into Christianity, it must be contemplation of the Curistian scheme, as re- ferred to the purpose of God; the word “ our” was inserted in 1562, but it might as well perhaps have been omitted; if it had been wanted to shew

VOL. iv. B | | that

18 BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT, LV —LIX, that the meditation ought to be upon the Chri/tian

plan, it would have been useful; but there are

other marks of that; at present, it must either be taken impersonally, and to add little or nothing to the sense; or 1t must come too near affirming of individuals, what 1s only intended to be affirmed of Christians in general.

LV. Is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly […] godly ;” Joined to © persons,” as well as to “ consideration;” in order to make the distinction as clear as possible.

LVI. Aud such as feel in themselves the working of the spirit of Christ“ —we here distinguish between feeling the spirit, and feeling the working, vim, of the spirit; we mean, finding such dispositions and principles as we piously, though indistinctly, ascribe to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, in the man- ner mentioned under the tenth Article : for fear of mistake, the effects of the spirit, or the phæno- mena which are to make us trust we are real Christians, in some degree or other, are next specified.

LVII. © Mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members,” this is from Rom. viii. 16. —-Col. 111. 5.

LY - And drawing up their minds to high and heavenly things; more phenomena, from whence we may judge whether we are such Christians as may derive good from contemplating the Christian scheme as settled in the secret counsels of God.— Here seems to be an allusion to John vi. 44.— except the Father draw him.“

LIX. As well because it doth greatly establish

aud confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed

through Christ,” —{uppole then a Christian, with such dispositions; would it really strengthen his

faith to refer the Christian Pound back to God’s planning

2 C3 Ly UY ‘W Ke #;z £

BOOK IV. ART. XVII. SECT, Lx. IXI. 19

planning it before all time ? it must; the consfancy, the duration of it, must heighten his conceptions of its ability and importance: and the power, justice, and wisdom of God must appear in a strong and striking light. |

LX. As because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God; —in like manner we may ask, would it really inflame the devout Love of such a Christian as is here supposed, to dwell on the same contemplation ? unavoidably : for such a con- templation would shew him God as engaged, for endless ages, in acts of kindness to him; and would make the connexion between a kind Deity and him seem much more intimate than it was before.“ We love him, because he fr loved us.“

LXI. * So for curious and carnal persons, lacking the spirit of Christ.” Now we come to the persons who may make a pernicious use of the secret coun- sels of God; in the first place, they are not Chri/- tians; or if they have been baptized, they have not the internal qualifications of real Christians : © lack- ing the spirit of Christ,” may be still farther cleared by comparing it with the sixteenth * Article, « after we have received the Holy Ghost.” A Christi spiritu prorsùs alieni, says the Reformatio

Loegum.

And the persons who would do harm by think- ing much on the secret counsels of God, are not only no Christians, but they are weak or wicked men; curious Or carnal.

Curious, seems to be used with much meaning; and to describe that kind of men, who are con- tinually entering into such abstruse and sceptical speculations as are apt to make Atheists ; such as

unsettle

© 1 John iv. 19. f Art. xvi. Sect. xix. B 2

—

—

: - : n 1 , \ : : : :

, *

:

”, : 4

„

:

I

:

”

f

,

20 BOOK IV. LXII—LXVI. unsettle all principle ; perplex, but never convince.

Re ipsa curiosi, the Reformatio Legum calls

such persons : speculations of the fort here meant frequently engender melancholy and misanthropy, as well as impious murmuring against God.

& Carnal,” means men of debauched morals ; the Reformatio Legum informs us, that there were many such, who took the turn of fatalists at the time of the Reformation: © differti luxu;” having recourse to Predestination as a covering, “ male- ficiis, et sceleribus, et omnis generis perversitati.”

LXII. To have continually before their eyes the sentence of God’s predęstination, —here the object of contemplation 1s changed : it was before the Chri/- tian religion in the divine mind; here it is “ God’s predestiuation, in general; Fate, Destinys.— For bad men to have fatality before their eyes, is cer- tainly what the following words express.

LXIII. Is a most dangerous downfall,” præ- cipitium; the nature of a precipice 15, that it does not necessarily destroy, but puts one in immediate danger of being destroyed; either by any one who chuses to push one down; or by a slip of one’s on.

LIVv. Whereby the Devil doth thrust them,” about referring evil to malignant Spirits, I have {aid something * before.—** duce Diabolo, Reform. Legum.

LXV. © Either into desperation,” —despair is one natural consequence of a person’s persuading him- self that there is a fatality against him. |

In desperationem præsentem abjiciuntur precipites, Reform. Legum.

EVI. Or

5 Or, according to Bishop Hooper, ** fatal destiny: See on the Commandments ; or Heylin Quing. page 557. b Art, x. Sect. L.

7% A ; by

. * _ Wh - 8 […] . . ; 1 *

BOOK Iv. LXVI—LXVIII. 21

LXVI. © Or into wretchlessness of most unclean living,” — wretchless, means careless, „ 3 in the Rhemish Testament on Rom. 14. it is spelt retchless, which brings it nearer reckless, which occurs several times in Skakspeare* : and a character in one of his plays, says, I reck not“ for, I care not. At Sedbergh I have (above 40 years ago) heard often, “never reck,” for never mind,” (pro- nounced, meverack), do not give yourself any trouble, or concern. In the Latin, the word 1s securitatem :“ impurissimæ vitæ.“ The Refer- mat io Legum has, ad solutam quandem et mollem vitæ securitatem:“ being secure is, properly, being without apprehension of danger; whether really in danger or not.

LXVII. © No Jess perilous than desperation.” — perhaps more perilous : God may pity the despair- ing fatalist; he is more likely to be sincere than the sensualist; who must, on numberless occasions, act contrary to those principles by which he excuses his faults. |

Perhaps“ desperation” may refer to © curious,” and “ unclean living,” to “ carnal.”

Some passages from Latimer and Hooper might be read here. (quoted Heylin’s Quinq. page 5 56, &c. ; allo Oxf. page 54, &c.; allo Rhem. Test. on Rom. ix. 14. marginal note.)

LXVIII. We come now to the third Paragraph. o far we have been concerned with duly regu- lating a sublime and interesting meditation, into which men are very apt to run.

It seems proper not to conclude the Article, without laying down something relative to practice.

In the Article of 1552 the beginning of the third paragraph stood thus;

« Furthermore” i See Ayscough’s Index, Stockdale’s edition,

• Furthermore” though the decrees of Pre- destination be unknown to us,” it seems a pity the words in hooks were omitted ; they tend to keep the thoughts in the right train : some puri- tanical influence might throw them out.

LXIX. * We must receive God’s promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in holy Scripture : |

Promises are opposed to decrees ; that which sup-

• Poses man at liberty, to that which supposes him

fixed. Promises seems to include threats : they are things to af from; decrees, while © secret to us,” or © unknown to us” are only to be con- templated.

„ Generally set forth;” to all men, not to any set of men particularly favoured. Electiug is partial, promisiug extends even to those at present «lacking the Spirit of Christ.” Promises any man may apply to himself; decrees, no man may, in any definite manner.

LXX. © And in our doings,” in our conduct, or practice, © in actionibus suscipiendis,” says the Re- formatio Legum, more clearly.

LXII. That will of God is to be followed” here is a reference to the /cholaftic division of cui into different kinds; which would not have been made except, as in St. Paul’s time, perverse men said,

« who hath resisted* his 2wi//?”—lo in the age of

the Refermation, men had urged the Y of God

as an excuse for their vices: * in woluntatem Del

criminum suorum culpam conferunt.“ (Ref. Leg.) —* they say it is God’s will,” (Hooper ).—I will not, take you into all the distinctions of Arch- bishop Ufker® on the subject of will, much less into

• Rom. ix. 19.

See Heylin, page 5 56.

Body of Divinity, page 40 — 48. jth Edition.

N

F*

W

into those of Thomas” Aquinas; but some distinc- tion seems necessary, From what was said in the elementary introduction to this second part of the Articles, it will be easily allowed, that we may conceive a thing to be according to the will of God, or man, in two senses, as he permits it, and as he chuses it should be done; will, in the former sense, may be called secret * will, in God, as con- taining the rules of God’s government, which must be secret to us; 1n the latter, revealed. The secret will of God we can only contemplate, in the man- ner now settled ; the revealed will we must endea- vour to execute, God wishes us to do what is right, for our own good,

LXXIl. © Which we have expressly declared unto us in the word of […] disertè revelatam:“ this means God’s revealed will. Disertè, Livy uses for, named, mentioned by name; so it may be that will of God which is plainly called so, called his will, in scripture. However, it is opposed to God’s will “ secret to […] unknown to us.” |

LXXIII. Having now gone through the several expreshons of our Article, I conclude the Expla- nation with observing, that our Article does not deny either absolute or conditional? Predestination. And that it is filent about Reprobation, has been already observed:

Ecclus. iii. 21—23, is like the general turn and {cope of the Article.

LxX1V. According

The Index to his works, under Foluntas, is really worth looking at as a matter of curiosity. |

• Plaifere, page 342. 398.—See also Whitby on Five Points, Chap. 3. page 435; and compare John vi. 39. with Matt, xvili. 14. and 1 Tim. ii. 4. f Waterland’s Supplement to Arian Subscription, page 60, with reference to Plaifere’s Apello Evangelium. |

B 4

by — —

—_—— mn Eo IE.

r . —

: | LY

:

• p -

—

T8 — — ͤ—

24 BOOK IV. LXXIV, Lxxv.

LXX1V. According to our common order, I should now come to Proof; but there is a difficulty

in determining what is to be proved. Our Church

can scarce be said to lay down! any doctrine in this Article; it only gives a series of texts, and declares against the abuse of them. I will, how- ever, lay down one proposition, 1n order to have an opportunity of offering some remarks, tending to give the right value of those texts which have occasioned the strict doctrine of Predestination : my proposition may be,

God has predęstinated Christians, as such, to Life. But as all our knowledge of God’s secret counsels is extremely indistinct, and as therefore this pro- position, in 1ts present form, seems to have more meaning than it really has; and moreover, as in its present form it interferes with practical © exertions, I will put it into a form, better suited to the real state of our knowledge, to the real sense of scrip- ture, and the active performance of the duties of human life. In its new form, then, it may stand

thus;

LxxV. Whenever any thing important hap- pens, or is conceived to happen, of a tendency to bring Christians to heavenly happiness, they may ascribe that to the purpole of God; not limiting the duration of his purpole; 1t they do it with due diffidence, and in circumstances similar to thole in which the same is done in {cripture.

Still our ascribing is, from our 1gnorance of God’s decrees and counsels, to be extremely jun- distinft, and in the heart, rather than the head; but proving this, will justify the generality of Churches in holding /omething about Predestina- tion. |

‘The

1 Se, xv1. + Art. x. Sed. XA.

[…]

The only passages where predestination is men- tioned expressly, are Rom. viii. 29, 30.—And Eph. i. 5. 11.—These may therefore have a precedence ; others may be mentioned in the order in which they lie in the sacred volume.

Matt. xxv. 34-— John xvii. 11.—Acts ji. 23. and xiii. 48.—Rom. ix. 23.—Eph. i. 4. 9, or the whole, 4—11.—1 Thess. i. 4. and v. 9. (the latter quoted by Ulher repeatedly.) — 2 Tim. i. 9.— Titus i. 1.—1 Pet. i. 2.

These may answer our purpose; and he who has a right notion of these, may apply it to all the rest.

LXXVI. The remarks, by which I would endea- vour to give the right value of these expressions of Scripture, are much the same with those in the tenth Article; that is, applications of the elemen- tary remarks, which make the Introduction to the second part of our xxx1x Articles.

LXXVII. The popular language of Scripture, does not lay down any /y/em of speculative truth; but each expression describes some feeling for some useful purpose : we must see what this purpose is, in each instance, or we do not understand the ex- pression. There is really 20 Theory of Predestination in scripture ; there are separate pious references of important and happy events, to the unbounded foresight and superintendence of the Deity ; and out of these, men have formed theories; but such theories are merely human. Each passage of scrip- ture aims at producing Faith and Love; and we have no right to use any passage for any other purpose. |

If this is not the case, why are 7rising events never referred in scripture to Predestination? God is as much the Author of trifling events as of

important; Art. x, Sect. xxxix.

important; and it has in strictness been as long ago determined, for anything we know, that a man shall be /% foot high, as that he shall be a Christian; yet the former kind of event is not referred to the divine counsels, the latter is: why, but because it answers a good purpose to the Christian, and not to the tall man. The fine reference of the privileges of a Christian to the divine counsels, in Rom. viii. 28—30, is not for the sake of ruth, or speculation ; but for animating the converts to brave all the terrors of per section, rather than revolt from Christ. — And whoever sees the passage for a moment without seeing it aim at the hearr, misses what was principally intended, and of course fees something which the writer never thought of. The same may be said of the openings of several Epistles ; the heart is to be inflamed, by grand and affecting sentiments, however indefinite, in order that the work may be fudied with a proper interest. IXXVIII. In the texts on which Predestination is founded, great use is made of positive terms with negative significations; as may appear from the beginning of the explanation. It would greatly tend to prevent misconception, if we kept this constantly in mind; as also, that our meaning fre- quently is, when we refer to divine predetermina- tion, no more than that it would be impious to exclude the Deity; or fix on any time when he did not forsee, or intend to confer, such or such a blessing. The expressions concerning the eternal purpose” of God, have had a sense in the mind of the sacred writer (as it appears to me) much nearer this, than any Theori/t imagines.

LXX1X. Events ascribed to the Predestination of God, are not to exclude human agency; they will be ascribed to the one or the other, as the

occasiqn © Art, x. Set, XL.

” - # ; F £ ‘S } :

— bs wget” F — r e

• 8 r „ . 88 r 4 * . & g 4 — 1 - + 4 “PRI 0 5 1 + hs * 1 ae 2 * 3 1 “DX 0-0 2 322 , 8 2 RAE * 6 1 A 1 eg, p […] ly 2

occasion directs; sometimes to“ both; and when only to one, the other must be understood to be implied.

Acts ii. 23. may afford us an instance. Him

being delivered by the determinate counsel and fore-

knowledge of God ye have taken, and by wicked

hands have taken and slain.” The death of Christ

is sometimes ascribed to the will of God*, some- times to the wickedness of the Jews, (in different {senses indeed;) here to both. Whatever happens may be referred to God, in one way or other.— But the part which God acts in the Government of the world, does not in the least affect the moral nature of man; that nature is God’s imme- diate work; and men, when free, act under his government ; whenever any good purpole 1s to be answered by referring an event to the government of God, it may be so referred, even though the act be punishable? ; only in that indiftinft way, which becomes our ignorance of the divine coun- sels: when any good purpose is to be answered by referring the same event to the choice of man, that may be done; and if it should happen that a good purpose would be answered by referring one event at the same time to both the government of God, and the choice of man; the reason still remains in force : this last mode of referring must intimate,

that though man is ever so free, he is still under

the controul of God. By AQs ii. 23. the Jews | were

u Art. x, Sect. x Li. referring to Introduction to second Part, Sect. viii.

• Rom. v. 8.— iii. 32.

Y Art. x. Sect. L.—Hecuba, (Il. N. 209, &c.) says, that her fon Hector was killed by Fate; yet she desires to puni/h Achilles on account of his death.

Adipus is said to have had an hard fate, but he is blamed

just as if that had not been said :—See Batteux, Aristot. Poet. page 258, Note, |

28 BOOK Iv.

were given to understand, that they had made a bad use of their freedom, but that they depended on God; he was their Governor, and would be their Judge. Does not Mr. Pope’s expression, « His scourge the tyrant,” mix divine and human agency equally […] implies wickedness, which implies choice, or human agency; the Tyrant’s being a scourge in the hand of God, expresses the government of God, or divine agency.

xxx. We have no right to use any text of scripture without regard to the circumstances in which it was used originally. How much change of circumstances will alter the sense of words, has been carefully * shewn. If then, in scripture, we only find pajt events, or events supposed to have happened, or vietoed as having come to pals, re- ferred to the everlasting purpole of God, we have no right to refer events to the fame, without attending to that circumstance.

This again, will prevent any theory, any abstract propositions, about predestination, from being ad- mitted. — This would have been reason enough for changing the form of our propo/ition® : it was liable to be objected to thus; I know of 20 such propo- sition in Scripture; give me a fact, and perhaps 1 may refer that fact to God’s unbounded forexnow- ledge.— Matt. xxv. 34”. The kingdom of the blessed was ** prepared” for them “ from the foun- dation of the world; - but this is said when you are supposed to /ook back from the Day of Judg- ment. We might now fay, 10 any man; be you

good, and a kingdom #1] have been prepared for

you from the foundation of the world; but if you become wicked, and are fo finally, an 0 everlasting

fire

2 Book 1. Chap. x. xi. Introd. to second Part, Sect. 1x. — Art. x. Sect. XL11, 2 Sect. LXXIV. d Compare 1 Cor. ii. q.

D 3 2 […] 1 2 6 . Lr ; ”%

EET

r

ig _ Lo, A t iS W ö […] : W N

I

?

” F 1 5 0 ” e ; - * ws wa © 4 8 1 eh * * e as «0 hs 2 „ * : 28 * S N . : ’

x 88 S 5 8

BOOK Iv. ART. XVII, SECT. LXXX. 29

fire” will have been prepared for you. Both the

passages of scripture which mention Predestination expressly, have a retrospective view; and refer, in- distinctly, a present happy state of things, to the divine secret counsels. And the same may be observed of those openings of the Epistles, from

which any thing relating to Predestination has

been taken.

I think some of our Reformers and writers have seen something of this notion. The Necessary Do&rine lays down*®, that a man ought not to judge that he is elected, but by his good disposi- tion, “and by the tokens of good and virtuous living.” —When Latimer says we should * beyiz with Clrift”‘—he seems to mean we should begin with the effect, and reason a posteriori%., And Arch- bilhop Baucrost meant something of the same fort at the Hampton-Court conference, by © ascex- dendo*:” we ascend from effect to caule. hen

we reason from a known effect to a cause imper-

fectly known, we fiuisi with that which is above our comprehension ; but when we begin from a cause not* understood, we are misled in things which concern us immediately; and which are, in reality, level to our capacities.

Attention to circumstances would hinder us from referring any trivial events to God, or from making any references to his secret decrees, with- out a view to exciting some good sentiment; accord- ing to what has already been laid down: and

would

© Set. xvi… . 4 Ser. on Septuages, quoted by Heylin, page 557.—Watere land page 60. (Suppl. to Arian Subscr,)

age 36. 1 8 to second Part, end of Sect. vii. E Fanatics have referred trifling events to God’s decree or purpose, though I have no instance at hand: something /imilar to this we have had, Art. x. Sect. xxxix.

would make us aware how things are referred to the permission of God though contrary to what is most commonly called his 20/.

The more a man studies the circumstances in which our texts were used, the fewer references

to the eternal purpose of God, will he be inclined to make.

LXXXI. I have several times said, that I look

upon the passages of Scripture from which the doctrine of Predestination has been derived, as

being of the nature of E/oquence®, and not of specu- lation. That will be the case if those passages are always calculated to excite good sentiments. And they will be, of course, much 4% plain and per- spicuous, because more indefinite, than practical directions; and therefore ought to be interpreted less literally. Indeed to interpret an eloquent ex- pression, so as to give it its true value, and neither more nor less, seems scarce practicable.—- Rom. viii. 29, 30. is intended to have an effect upon the feelings of those to whom it is addressed; part of Taylor’s paraphrase on the next verse is, and what effect should they [“ these things”] have upon our Hearts?“ and though Mr. Locke on the opening of the Epistle to the Ephefians, gives predeftination the limited sense of God’s purpose to take the Heathens into the Christian Religion; yet he looks upon that whole epistle as a piece of eloquence and sublimity.

He says, in his Synopsis, that St. Paul displays in it, „the glorious state of that kingdom” (the kingdom of the Messiah) © not in the ordinary way of argumentation and formal reasoning, which had uo place in an Epistle writ as this is, all as it were in a rapture, and in a stile far above the plain didactical way; he pretends not to teack them any thing,

D Art, x, Sect. xLII.— Art. xv i. Sect. xxx.

M „ — q „ wa is , by PS; ES. 4 oF we F $ 74 bo

= . 2. n

KY & I ”> SY A bs; | Rr I

#1 Al #; +4 S; […] F 4

A g i FF $1 “3

[…]

thing, but couches all that he would drop into their minds, in Thanksgivings and Prayers; which affording a greater liberty and flight to his thoughts, he gives utterance to them in noble and sublime ex- pressions, suitable to the unsearchable wisdom and goodness of God, shewn to the world in the work of Redemption.” Mr. Locke himself makes one afraid of giving any very definite sense to any lofty expressions in the opening of such an address espe- cially; though he may rightly point out what was to be a distinguished part of the sentiment excited. |

Perhaps some passages may be made easy by observing the Few mode of referring all events to God. But this remark may be more useful when we say anything about Reprobation.

LXXXII. An observation made in the Intro- duction to this second part of our Articles, may be of use here. Sometimes expressions of Scrip- ture are not considered with sufficient freedom, because they are supposed to contain xew truths, communicated immediately from Heaven.— l do not perceive, that any sacred writer intended to teach any thing new with regard to the predeter- minations of God; I mean, it does not strike me that any sacred writer has intended to give us any knowledge of the Nature of the divine decrees, which might not be derived from natural reli- gion. The sacred writers refer new events to the everlasting purpole of God ; but it does not follow that they taught new doctrines about them.

LXXX111. I will now make a few remarks on the particular zexts which I have produced in sup- port of my proposition. — Of Matt. xxv. 34.— Acts ii. 23. and the opening of the Epistle to the Ephesians, I have already said something; Rom. ix. will come best under Reprobation : and the open-

Ing?

32 BOOK iv. ART. XVII, SECT. LXXXI1T.

ings of the first Epistle to the Thessalonians, and the Epistle to Titus have nothing peculiar in them: I will therefore confine myself to John xvii. 11. (and similar expressions;) Acts xiii. 48.— 1 Theff. v. 9.— 2 Tim. 1. 9. and 1 Pet. i. 2.

In John xvii. 11, and other passages, Christ speaks of Christians as given him by his heavenly Father; a very proper and pious acknowledge- ment! especially in prayer, or devout discourse; but containing no more doctrine than would have arisen from our King’s thanking God, on the day of his public thanksgiving, for giving him millions of affectionate subjects, rejoicing in his recovery.

Acts xiIi. 48. has occasioned many discussions. I confess it seems to me to mean no more than that as many as c/ose to become Christians, were allowed to become Christians; or as many as it pleased God to make so: none duly qualified were refused, though they were Gentiles : that was the wonder ; that Gentiles should be admitted to be God’s people! © when the Gentiles heard this” (that they might be Christians) © they were glad, 1 it was new to them at * Antioch in Pisidia;” —

« they glorified the word of the Lord! and as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed :” not one or /wo distinguished Heathens were admitted into Christianity, but Heathens were admitted just as Fews would have been. Certainly the phrase ce ordained to eternal Life,” to express being in- clined to become Christians, 1s copious ; and it 1s very solemn and grand; but fo was the occasion ; nothing less was in agitation than what 1s called the rejection of the Jews, and the adoption of all nations upon the face of the earth : the phrase

might seem natural to Jews, in describing conver-

sion to a religion, the characteristic of which was, : to

ot ‘f n 2 C % - ä […] n be . „ is # oe ah FR +. =, 1 […] [4 b] HF

I gr Ss ho, „

WF |; xF 4” p N S- > [3 Sy 4 „ . N N. + LS 2 a Mo | = A oY ths a

p e $ i, »x 1 aw - MW ET 25 2 N

3 F P 8 ² cab

fo confer © eternal Life” on its votaries; it must needs seem highly decorous -“ Believed,” is put for, becoming believers. | Archbishop Sharp and Mr. Parkhurst* under- stand by 0008 10&av TET&YPevob tis Conv &iwyiov, AS many as were in a due disposition for eternal

Life: a sense supported in a very respectable

manner, But if rrrayht meant destined, the expression might mean no more than that all such, of those present, as were destined to be converted, were converted then : that is, the conversion of the

_ Gentiles, as a solemn thing, might be referred,

when it had actually happened, in the way already described, to the divine purpose. Being destined to eternal Life, might be used for being destined to Christianity; as Christianity produces eternal life of course, all things going right; no impediment arising on the part of the convert; being admitted into Christianity is often expressed by the word Salvation“: which is generally equivalent to eternal Life. As many as were destined to be saved, were admitted Christians.— Acts ii. 47.

1 Thess. v. 9. is twice referred to by Arch-

bishop Vier in one page *: yet it is the conclusion

of an exhortation to arm; therefore cannot, at least, exclude uman agency. It, with what goes before, conveys to me this idea. Remember the state you are in; a state of warfare; you are encom-

passed

i Sermons, Vol. 3. * Greek Lexicon.

For Epictetus’s sense of rerayuwg, see afterwards, Sect. Lxxxix.

m Art. 1x. end of Sect. xx1v.—Art. x1. Set. Xũiv.— Append. to Art. xi. Sect. vIII.— Locke on Eph. ii. 8.—

Taylor’s Key.

2 One might suppose what effect the phrase would have had, which was used with regard to Lydia’s conversion, Acts xvi. 14- Page 73. 7th Edit, Body of Divinity. VOL, Iv. C

34 BOOK IV, ART. XVII. SECT, LxxxIII.

passed with enemies; they may come upon you by surprize; put on © the whole armour of God ;” if you are surprized, you will incur disgrace and punishment : yet, believe me, that was not the desigu of your being placed in a state of wartare ; it was, that you might attain to honour, victory, reward. If this be right, there 1s a likeness between. this passage and James 1. 2, 12. My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations ;” that is trials, difficult situations; ** Blessed is the man that endureth temptation: for when he is tried, he shall receive the Crown of Life, which the Lord hath promised to them that love him.“ But no doctriue of decrees do I perceive.

In 2 Tim. 1. 9. and what immediately precedes. it, St. Paul exerts all his powers of eloquence to tir up” Timothy to exercise his ministerial func- tions: St. Paul himself was a prisoner when he wrote, and under affliction on account of the Gospel; his minister seems to have been of a mild disposition®, we read of his “ tears,” of his drink-

ing no wine,” of his being * ashamed,” of a

« spirit of fear;” such a CE of things was N the ministers of the Church which we are told of, seem to have been very few, consider- ing the number of countries in which Christianity was planted; Timothy was to be animated in the most forcible manner; the Gospel was to be set in its highest light; to be shewn as existing in the divine mind time without end. Let any one read our text with these ideas, and he will see much

noble vekemence in it, but no speculative teaching ; nothing didactic,

I Pet.

0 Compare the. dispirited exposialations of Elijab, 1 Kings xix. 4. 9, 10. *

BOOK IV. Lxxxv. 35

1 Pet. i. 2. has been explained before*; with relation to our present subject, we have only to observe, that it is a fine exordium of an interesting and affecting Epistle. The author instead of ad- dressing the converts by the bare appellation of ,* Christians,” enumerates the most striking cha- raFeristics of Christians ; and in order to raise their minds the more, he directs their views back to the foreknowledge of the heavenly Father. But teaches nothing new; points to nothing which is not

I conclude, that to refer in an indefinite manner, the important things of religion, to the purpose of God, may be highly proper and decorous, on great occasions, as a part of devotion or exhortation ; but that no practical rule, no speculative proposition, can be justly deduced from those passages of scrip- ture, which have given birth to the doctrine of Predestination.

LXXXIVo will now come to some proof of the indirett kind; or to the answering of a few objeftions e premising, that what was said in answer to objections under the preceding Article, might be of use here. The immutability of God used to be urged by the Predestinarians at the time of the Reformation, in favour of their notions.— It may be proper to keep in mind the objections in the tenth Article. |

LXXXV. Is not what has here been laid down, too intricate* for common people to attend to? It does not seem so to me. Indeed, common people

do in reality know as much of the subject, as the learned ;

2 Art. X1. Sect. xx11, f Art. xvi. Sect. xxx.— In Heylin, 557th! page. Oxford, Art. x. Sect. xL v.

C 2

36 BOOK iv. LXXXV,

learned; if they would not frighten themselves with fancies: and as all ranks may feel uneasiness from what they hear of predestination, all should be provided with the remedy. In our method, all distinctions between absolute and conditional Pre- destination are set aside; all theory is dismissed ; nothing remains, but what 1s to be dispatched by common feeling and common sense. Nay, no man is required as matter of duty, to think any- thing about predestination; only it is a pity any one should lose a species of meditation, which © is full of sweet, pleasant and unspeakable comfort,” when rightly performed. Mr. Whitehead lays, that sages formed civil socteties,

By heaven’s permission, or by heav’n’s command; and afterwards,

And men are Born to trifle, or to reign.

In these two lines are couched all the mysteries of God’s different wills, and of each man’s destiny; but they give no sort of trouble, so long as men have no superstitious fear about them. If we would carry the feelings and sense with which we read these, to Scripture, that would occasion no greater perplexity. The plainest things seem ab- {truse whilst we are obliged to examine them minutely ; but use soon makes examination un- necessary. 3

In short we seem to have little to do in re-

ferring

© See William Whitehead’s Works, Vol. ii. Elegy iii. ad- dressed to the present Earl Harcourt, (1796.)—Marmontel puts these words into the mouth of one of his characters in his Tale of La Bergere des Alpes, (Contes Moraux, Tome 2. p. 50.) % Puisque je ui Pasteur” —“ il faut bien que je sois 2c“ pour Petre.”—Any common expressions, of the sort here quoted,

used without any idea of their being abstruse, . or of their

—_— relation to religious disputes, are to our present pur- pose,

ferring events to God’s purpose ; but to let our feel-

ings” ply freely to the case.

IxxxvI. Is not the general language of scrip- ture as if men were* frze? yes; and fo is the language of our Article: *in our doings,” we are to conceive ourselves free; though looking back,

‘we may acknowledge our dependence on God in every thing. Our moral and accountable nature 1s immediately”? from God. The texts about pre- destination are few, and so are the occasions on which they ought to be used. It may not be necessary to ule them ever. Even those men who favour predestination in the way of Theory, have

such faint notions of it that they do not act from it. Calvinisis act from free-will as much as other men : sometimes men may evade their duty, by

pretending to act from a belief of destiny, but 1 do not call this acting from a such belief; they act from the notion of their being free, in every thing else,

Bishop Butler proves, that the doctrine of men’s not being at liberty, if it could be true in Theory, must be false in practice: we must act as free; therefore there must be a fallacy some- where.

LXXXVII. Is not the doctrine of Predestination hurtful to Virtue? No; Virtue 1s, in our Article, Presupposed, before men are allowed ro meddle with Predestination : those who are to hope that God’s purpose will prove favourable to them, must * walk righeoufly in good works;” those who may

meditate

u Hecuba does this, in the passage mentioned Se. Lxxix.

Il. N. 209, &c. she uses Fate to raise a sentiment of Consolation: refers an event back to fate, though she has no precise idea what Fate means. |

• Art. x. Sect. xi. vi. Y Set. Lxxix.

• Analogy 1. 6.

ce 3

[…] - © —

—

Y q by ;

——

meditate on the Christian dispensation as having been planned in the divine counsels, must not be * carnal,” but © godly persons.” And even these, according to our notions, ought only to dwell upon the decrees of God, as far as it will promote and strengthen their virtue. —Besides, those texts which mention predestination, are so /inked with the mention of virtue and holiness*, that no in- genuous man can take the former and leave the latter. If, on reading any text seeming to favour predestination, we ask, whose virtue could this hurt? we shall find that it could hurt no one’s, without some misapplication.

LXXXVIII. Does not the doctrine of Predesti- nation interfere with the duty of Prayer” # No more than with any other exertion for attaining good: no more than with any Virtue: indeed, accord-

ing to the representation of our Article, referring:

important and sacred events to the divine purpose, is itself a species of devotion.

Of Prophecy J have said enough befores. LXXX1x. I would lastly propose the same quel. tion which I have proposed in some preceding *

Articles; will not the doctrine before us, disgy/?

thinking men? I think it ought not; particularly if our observation be true, that the scriptures give nothing new upon it. If, as a Christian, I were asked what I meant by Predestination, I should give an answer which would suit natural religion,

as

d Art. x. Sect xLVII.

< Append. to Art. xi. Sect. xx vit.

4 Art. 1X, Sect. xL. — Art. x. Sect. xl. x. See the Heads of

Lectures in each Article, and the Appendix to Art. xi.

Sect, xx ix.

as well as revealed. I should say, I mean that, which, in the divine mind, 1s the cause of order and regularity ; of such order and regularity, as, in man, would be ascribed to foresight and pre- determination. To this, events have been ever ascribed, in all ages of the world. Epictetus uses Tera ywevos much like the Author of the Acts of the Apostles*: and certainly reasonable men could, in no age of the world, deny or /imit, the prede- terminations of God: If we can only turn re- flexions upon the divine decrees to a moral purpose, we may be well satisfied.

xc. But while I am upon the subject of natu- ral religion, I should take notice of the famous difficulty arising out of the Divine Prescience. If God foreknows my actions, they are fixed, though seemingly voluntary; therefore I have no choice, I am no agent. But, according to our notions, repeatedly * stated, we have no right to ascribe to God a certain knowledge of our voluntary actions, if we have no such thing ourselves, nor any idea of such a thing: do we know that it is not an impossibility? We have analogies, by which we can conjefture, with great probability, how men will act 3

an

• The passage, to which I mean to refer, I find in Cap. 21. in a Glasgow Edit. with a Latin translation, page 30.— In Stan- hope’s Edit. with Simplicius, about the 26th or 27th Chap. — Simplicius, in his comment, makes the paslage belong rather to the tenth Article: to which might perhaps be referred the Prayer, with which Simplicius concludes his Comment,— (Lardner’s Testimonies. ) | .

[…]

Here the true end of referring ations to God, seems to be discerned: not speculative truth, but moral feelings; assisting 2 principles of human agency, and mixing it with

vine.

Art. xv1. beginning of Sect. xxx.

and God must have something of the same sort in an unbounded degree ; but these must, by their nature, fall short of certain knowledge. This is a different thing from denying the Prescience of God, as the Socinians are said to do: God has certainly all pofible knowledge; but if he has a certain fore- knowledge of our voluntary actions, it is a thing of a kind® of which we know nothing; and there- fore if we admit it, and act from it, we are answer- able for the consequences. We must not, through a fear of detracting from the wisdom of God, en- danger our own morals ; they are the principal objects of the divine administration.

xc1, I would also recall“ to your mind, that there may be two different trains of thought, seem- ingly inconsistent with each other, and yet in either you may go on without coming to an end. Study the regularity of God’s government, the constancy of the rules or laws of nature; you come to no end: Study the freedom of voluntary agents, and the interpositions of God’s particular Providence; again you come to no end; what remains, but that here, as in former instances , we leave two things to exist together as they may, though we are un- able to make them fit and suit each other ? assuring ourselves, that there is some way of reconciling them, though we may not understand it ; now, or ever.

What we have said of the Divine Prescience and Immutability *, may put us into a right way

of understanding the Repentance’ of God, and other

r It is one of the secret things which belong unto the Lord

our God. Deut xxix. 29.

bh Book 111. Chap. xv. Sect. ix.

i Sect. v. with references.

• Art. xv1. beginning of Section xxx.

! Compare Num. xxiii. 19. with Jer. xvii. 8, 10,

2 * a4 ; 5 1 1 * wth 5 8 ; 2 2 1 mo N . . in F | 2 : OP” 2 — 8 […] ER 2 — „ : Cy. oY TE On […] tte 6 - 1 1 * - dt RR + wu For - 1a 2 5 . 1 4 3 Pen 8 of 3 a > 8 15 4 3 Hh ” . ON N * 7 * 05 3 # 7 . be ”= * 7 ** F ”= Si, = * 3 rs py 4 n e 2 8 ? i * 22 2 * 8 0 * 2 . n N 9 rr - N ’ 3 FY * _ 5

. * e. 2 3 4 . e Lite. - Kyo + Pr

• CY

2 IE 2 —_ * 88

a = 2 4 . 6 a 4 tia” ae hee = “x nates ove a RIO .

» = D 3 Py 3

b.

$4 7 a > 4 # * r RT… ” A -

BOOK IV. xcit. 41

other things ascribed to the Deity, which seem rather to belong to man. Each is, (as before, repeatedly) the cause, in God, of those effeas, which, in man, would be ascribed to that quality : and each quality is ascribed to God in any situ- ation, as far as, in that situation, it is a Per- fectiou.

We speak of Rules of the Divine Government; but, in strictness, we know no such: when any- thing goes on 1uiformly, we presume and suppose a rule; but we know not the mind of the Lord; the unexpected violation of that uniformity which we have observed, may be as much from rule, as the uniformity itself.

I conclude this topic of natural religion, with observing, that I do not see how the divine prede- termination makes any difference in the doctrine of Liberty and Necessity, which was laid down * under the tenth Article; and therefore I do not say anything here on that subject.

xc11. I now come to say something of the Doctrine of Reprobation. As in the tenth Article I reserved to the last, the subject of referring evi to God, so I do in the present Article. Evil has been referred to God as znspired® by him, or de- creed, the former part was treated in the tenth Article, the latter must be mentioned here.

] should imagine, that as we have already seen the manner of referring good to God, if. we gave some account of the etymology of reprobation, and shewed in what respects referring evi to God is more complicated than referring good, (and there- fore how any scriptural expression ascribing evil, should be construed 14% friftly than one ascribing good,) we should, with the help of what has been

already said, be prepared to examine any particular texts of scripture.

Probe

Art. x. SeQ. xLix, » Art, x. Sect. 1.

Probe signifies to try, and so, in the common course of things, to approve : a tried friend is an approved friend. — Reprobo is, after trial, to throw away, as refuse, that which has not answered the trial.

In the trial of metals, what is thrown away, is in English, called aross, 1 in Greek“, a dor sprov (aęyveor). —]n any contests, in running, &c. the loser was called adJoupcs; to this St. Paul seems to allude when he says, of himself, [Tres & NNO¹ ung & bro a Joxupoc Yevwpor?, Man is in a state of probation; if he does tolerably well, he is dJoxipues, but if he is so bad as to be deemed incorrigible, he is &doxipros, Or reprobate®, I do not fee why Locke and Taylor should run away from this sense; there 15 nothing more rightful 1 in it, than in the expref- fion, © he gave them up;” when it is seen what they were given up to.

Reprobation seems generally to give more alarm, by the /ound, than condemnation; yet one had rather be neglected as refuse, than adjudged to positive punishment. A man may be comparatively repro- bated ; as when another who is preferred to him, is said to be elected; reprobated, being the correla- tive, —Nay, one might conceive one who is re— probated in comparison of ove man, to be elected, in comparison of another. As a thing thrown aside, may be used for some other purpose from that it was tried for; and in preference to some- thing elle.

XCIII. The difterence between referring good and evil to God, seems to consist in this; God may have evil ascribed to him, because none can

nappen

Prov. xxv. 4.—Is. i. 22. according to the Lxx.

So that with us, a difanced horse, 5 a reprobate horse.

4 In our Homily, reproveable is the word for reprobate. On Faith, beginning; from Titus i. 16.

BOOK IV, ART. XVII. SECT, xc111. 43

happen which he does not permit, and which, therefore, does not, in some sense, make a part of his Government ; (and every part of his Govern- ment is good;) or because there is no evil which he does not controll, so as to prevent its operating beyond certain limits. Evil may also be ascribed to God, when he punistes it, and thereby produces good; but more directly. when the evil ascribed is used as a punishment, It is also ascribed to him when he brings iucidental good out of it. Langnage must, to be sure, be far from literal, which al- cribes evil to God in any sense; but it is usually a

\

fact which is ascribed, and that fact is good in

some respefts and evil in others. At bottom, it is only good which 1s ascribed to God, or what is good to him who ascribes it; and common sense sees this, though it may not be conscious of every step in the process. When God only permits evil, there is, no doubt, good, if it were only in the liberty, accountableness, &c. and in every other case just now mentioned, the good appears more plainly.

But good is ascribed to God more simply and directly; it is unmixed; he not only permits it, but rewards and encourages it; so that both the liberty of conferring and attaining good, and the encouragements to ule that liberty, are his.

Though language in which evil is ascribed to God, is more imperfect than language in which g00d 1s ascribed ; yet even the latter is capable of being perverted :—God is * the author of peace ;” then what occasion, says a man who wants to evade his duty, for me to be a Peace-maker - perhaps

this

r Some references might be made from this Section, and the next to the goth Section of the tenth Article; but the bet method would be, to look at that before reading this part.

44 BOOK iv.

this evasion might be too gross to pass; but others do pals, which are of the same kind.

When one man is preferred to another, we some- times hear the comparative disadvantage called evil, injury, or even punishment. Of such evil God may be the immediate author. He may prefer one of his creatures to another, or make them into differ- ent ranks, in any kind of life. (Rom. ix. 15.)

There seems to be Reprobation spoken of 2 Priori and d posteriori.

XCIV. Some have had a notion, that God, by a direct act, ordains a number of men to misery ; but there is no warrant in scripture for saying any such thing. Take an evil, a fact, and you may refer it to the divine government, with that indis- tinctness which your ignorance demands, if you can answer a good purpose by so referring it; if you can excite a pious or virtuous sentiment; but not otherwise. An attention to circumstances, is required in referring evil as well as in referring good*; nay, a greater degree of attention, But let us take some ance.

Let us take first the rejection of the Fews; as a great part of the doctrine of reprobation has been taken from scriptural expressions relating to that event. The plain fact, if told in common lan- guage, was, the Jews, or part of them, rejected the Christian religion: but when this fact was taken in a religious light, and considered as part of God’s government, and referred to God, the expression then was, God rejected the Jews; which to the Jews themselves would seem natural and easy language.

The Jews, in this case, were reprobated; and important good, no doubt, they lost; but they

| | might s Consider Matt. xxv. 41. in this light, as before, Section

LXXX,

BOOK IV. xcv. 45

might any of them embrace Christianity when they pleased ; and then, when their conversion was spoken of in a religious light, and as part of divine government, they would be said to have been elect, predestinated, according to God’s pur- pose. In both cases, of rejecting and embracing Christianity, the act must come fir, and then be referred back to the divine counsels; in such re- ference language implying divine agency would be rightly used.

Xcv. Now let us take a few particular texts. I will take them chiefly, or entirely, from Arch- bishop User’s proof of Reprobation*, which he favours. I do not perceive Jude 4, amongst his texts; which I wonder at.

Prov. xvi. 4. gives me no other idea than this: God’s government 1s universal ; what he created he always designed to superintend : he created all things as subjects of his government; it extends to the punishment of the wicked. Though God hates fin, yet the permission of it, and the punish- ment of it when committed, is as much a part of his plan, as even the rewarding of goodness.

Let us now go to the ainth Chapter to the Romans, and first take the 13th verse, ** Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.” This whole chapter is written to prove, that God might /et a/ide the Jews, or leave them out of the kingdom of the Messiah, that 1s, reprobate them, notwithstanding his pro- mises to their forefathers. - Their notion seems to me to have been this; — the Christian religion cannot be the true, or if it is, we need not be anxious about it, because we mult be of the true, in consequence of the promises of God. No, says St. Paul, that reason is not valid; you cannot depend upon descent, because you inherit from

| Jacob, Body of Divinity, page 73, 74. jth edition.

[…] - E EY

46 BOOK IV. ART. XVI f. SECT. XCV.

Jacob, and he was not regularly descended from Abraham; Esau was his elder brother: — that in- stance of quitting the direct line, St. Paul well knew, the Jews would not object to; the preference of the descendants of Jacob, that is, of the Israel- ites, to those of Esau, or the Edomites, was a favourite subject : but, say the Jews, Esau was ditinherited, because of his bad caracter: that, replies the Apostle, was not the reason; for the disinheriting was announced before the birth of the twins; therefore God may make a similar change when it seems good to him. The expres- fion of the Apostle, © Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated,” 1s, very properly, borrowed from a Prophet”; and the language of the prophet, means, that the Israelites were a much more pros- perous people than the Edomites :—there is not the least in the passage of any individuals, or of any punishment in a future state.

The 17th verse is another support* of Repro- bation : It contains another instance, which the Jews would readily adopt, the punishment of the enemies of their forefathers, the punishment of the Agyptians, and Pharao their King.—It is men- tioned in the Book of Exodus“. God raised up Pharaoh in order to shew his power; the plain fact was, while Pharaoh was under the rod, under any of the plagues, he was Jumble and submissive; ; when they were remitted, he exalted* himself, and grew arrogant again.

Bur though 1n plain language he exalted himself, yet when the transactions were considered as a part of God’s government, the expression was, God

exalted: him, or raised him up; by allowing him that

u Mal:i.2, 3. Obadiah seems all on this subject.

• Rhemists on the place, Usher, Page 74- Y Exod. ix. 16. Z Exod. ix. 17.

BOOK IV. ART. xv II. SECT. xcv. 47

that relaxation from punishment, which occasioned his infolence. And this was very suitable to Jewish phraseology. The effect of Pharaoh’s in- solence was, to make God’s protection of the Israelites much more striking, and much more celebrated than it would otherwise have been; which 1s, in hke manner, as a part of divine government, thus expressed, that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.” Now why might not God, in the fame: sense, raise up the Fews © the more they exalted themselves, and the more obstinate they grew in rejecting the Gospel, the more would the fame of the Gospel be declared throughout the world. Indeed the situation of the Jews has been, and is, molt wonderful; and has, in fact, greatly assisted in proving the divine authority of the Gospel. But the paslage before us is so little to Reprobation, in the usual sense of the word, that we have lost all idea of reprobation merely by examining it.

We must take one more passage out of this famous chapter; the 22d verse : © vessels of wrath, fitted to destruction: but we must look back, per- haps as far as our last instance, the 17th verle. My idea of the whole passage, is this;—a taunting Jew had said; we make God’s name“ to be glo- rious? do we so? then God cannot be angry with 75; in truth, as yet, (continuing the sarcasm) we have suffered: no great harm |—On this the Apostle is indignant; Insolence! he exclaims, You know your cavil to be insolent, as well as sophistical: but dare you insult God! are not you, according to- your own prophets, in his hands, as clay in the hand of the Potter? may not you be appointed to a. more or less noble office? He might defroy you,

and

2 Ezek. xyiii. a Jew makes a taunting cavil; see the ninth Art, Sect. xxxv111.

and he does not ; is this your complaint ? forgive him this wrong : it may not continue; He only knows how near your destruction is; He only knows how soon you may weep over your Temple, and find not one stone left upon another ! Because destruction is not actually arrived, do you con- dude that Christianity is not the kingdom of the true Messiah ? that would be a most unwarrant- able conclusion. Remember how God acted with the Agyptians; if, in the same manner, he makes your refusal of the Gospel, the means of promoting its honour, you cannot, after praising the measure in one cale, blame it in another, exactly similar.

Thus we see, that the passage has no relation to individuals, or to Christians, or to punishment in a

future life. There is some appearance as if St.

Paul had not been wholly without an idea of the destruction of Jerusalem ; but how far he was in- formed of that event, does not appear. One thing seems evident, that St. Paul, by his reason- ing was endeayouring to promote conversion to Christianity ; and from thence we may conclude, that any individual Jew might have escaped from any kind of destruction which was impending over the Jewish people.

We have now only 1 Pet. ii. 8. and Jude 4, re- maining: they are so much alike, that I will take them together: indeed they seem so little different from Prov. xvi. 4. that if that is explained, so are these. All three consist in referring evil to God, in order to shew, that the most daring offenders cannot exempt themselves from the restraints of his Government. You will find learned and inge- nious solutions of them all; but I am most in- clined to solve them from hat has been laid down,

about In Benson, Le Clerc, Whitby on the five points, &c.

BOOK iv. xcv. 49

about the difference between referring? good and evil to the Supreme Being. When men run into great crimes, they are apt to triumph in their free- dom from those fetters, in which they fancy the good are confined: _— tends more to hamble them, and make them sober-minded, than to make them feel, that they are totally under the government of God; and that, though they are really guilty, yet their very crimes may be instru- ments of good in the hands of God; this makes them feel impotent and despicable ; and the more if they are made sensible of the boundless duration of the divine schemes of Government.— These are the ideas which seem to me to prevail in the minds of the sacred writers when they throw out, te appointed” to this evil; © of old ordained to this condemnation.”

And we should really consider what a world we should be in, if God was ignorant of man’s wicked- ness; or if the profligate were really /awless ; or if evil was simply evil; if no good came out of evil; or if a fin was never made the punishment of a sin. It frequently happens, that the good which springs out of evil incidentally is fo great, that we dare not wish the evil had not happened. To be sure when we express God’s permission, regulation, improvement of evil, by speaking as if he were the author of evil, our language is very imperfect ; but so indeed is the generality of our language; often, I apprehend, not less imperfect: custom re- conciles us to it; and practising upon it, serves to define it : the case might soon be the same with language ascribing evil to God. It has been easy and familiar to the Jews; it might become fo to us. |

| Xcvi. At e Se, xC111. VOL. IV. | D

[…]

xcvi At length we come to our Application. If what has been“ said is just, we may have here | an Article of natural religion“. © I have already * returned thanks to Providence for making me a member of my religious associ- ation: Its laws and regulations must improve me

and bring me to happiness; but 1 cannot think that those laws existed fr when I first knew them.—how long then may the plan have existed in the divine mind ?—the heavenly planner only knows ! When I reflect on the blessed Institution, as settled by divine wisdom, before all time, I am filled with sacred wonder : could I flatter myself that I was a worthy member of it, I should be happy; I try my principles and my conduct; and in proportion as they satisfy me, I feel a confidence in God as the protector of it, and an affeftionate gratitude towards him.—Yet I can see, that if a bad man was to act from a notion that all things are settled, it could only lead him to despair, or licentiousness.” * No; the decrees of God may be an interesting subject of contemplation to a good mind; but prac- tice must spring from the endeavours of man, animated by the hopes of pleasing God, and being rewarded by him.” xcvii. A Christian might say thus; © That I am a member of the Church of Christ, is matter of sincere rejoicing to me: what a pri- vilege! to be invited into such a society, to be

considered j 4 End of SeR. Lxxx11:; © These forms proceed according to the hint at the end of Set. xL II: first comes the fa#, then the cause, in God’s pur- pose, formed before any assignable time: then the good and ; bad /e of contemplating God’s purposes, or decrees: then the nature of practical rules. f Art. X111, Sect. xxvII. - Art. X11, Sect. xxvIi.— Art. XI. Sect, xxx. a 8

considered as free from any great fault, to be re- 33 in the light of a brother to my Lord and

aviour! to be led naturally to imitate his perfec- tions, and to be put into a way which leadeth to eternal life The importance of the blessing till grows upon me when I consider, that the Church of Christ has been an object of attention in the Divine mind ever since the Fall of our first Parent. So far I am expressly taught; but had not the Christian dispensation been conceived or planned before the Fall? I must not fay or chink it: 1 look back, and time keeps opening upon me: I can fix no period when it seems at all probable that the gracious design had a beginning.”

• Christianity, existing in the divine mind before the foundation of the world, and opening gradu- ally upon mankind, is the most argu? and affefing object which an human being can contemplate.— And when an examination of my heart and actions gives me any reason to think that I am really a member of it, my Zope is confirmed, and my de- vout affectious enlivened, by the confkancy of the divine benevolence. Nevertheless, it is intelligible how an opinion, that all things are fixed by the Deity, may lead a man into a state of despondency, or into a negligent and diffolute course of lite.”

• Though therefore I am happy in having such a subject of meditation, to raise my mind to piety and devotion; yet I shall endeayour to strengthen and improve my practical principles by attending to the promises of God, and to the revealed descrip- tions of that conduct, which he wishes man to pursue, for the improvement of human happiness.”

XCVIII. With regard to mutual concessions, I would not say much ;—Dupin® makes no objection to this Article: there is great room for candour in

a debating s Mosheim, Vol. 6. page 77, octavo. D 2

debating about it. If divine agency does not ex- dude human, nor human“ divine, and both are iudlistinct, different modes of referring events, to God and man, should be allowed; and different phrases, according to mens different feelings and concep- tions. St. John seems to have been of an affec- tionate temper, and that influences his stile. — And if you and your adversary may get into two dif- ferent trains, of thought and expression, and both bei right, to what purpose is dispute ? Our form of aflent seems to be such (as we said on a former occasion *®) as an Heathen would subscribe to, ex- cept in those particulars which must be common to all Christians ; and if it be fo, no denomination of Christians need dissent from it. But till it appear how our method would be accepted, one cannot tell what conceflions to propose. — Even User, {peaking of Reprobation, seems to have had some ideas of referiing evil to God, which might, with {ome tempering, be made to coalesce with ours. Indeed our method has favoured Reprobation as much as Election; and poshbly might be accept- able to some as setting aside xo texts of scripture, in order to favour commonly-received notions of hu- man® Philosophy.

xc1x. We come, in the last place, to In;prove- ments. Shall we, in imitation of Melan&hon, strike out this seventeenth Article? I had much rather our method of explaining and defending it, were accepted. The mind wants something to lean upon with regard to the divine Counsels; and those pas- {ages of Scripture which speak of them. The disquisitions and meditations on such paslages

might

b Se. LXXIX. LXXXV I.

i See Sect. xC1. referring to Book 111. Chap. xv. Sect. 1x.

k Art. x. Sect. L111. | | I Page 74, Body of Divinity, 5th Edition,

m Dr. Powell’s 3d Charge.

might be called a fine species of devotion : they are all sentiment and sublimity.—One would do a good deal to suit weak brethren; but there is no suffi- cient reason why those who are not weak should lose such sublime devotion: especially as those who are perplexed by meditations on the benign purposes and plans of the Supreme Being are under no, sort of obligation to dwell upon them. (Sect. Lxxxv1.)

A transpoition of the former and latter parts of the first * paragraph, might prevent some wrong conceptions. |

It must be tried, in Natural Theology, Heathen writings, the Scriptures, and common * discourse, whether the observations which have been hazarded are just.

c. When Milton assigned to his fallen angels the employment of reasoning,” on our present sub- jects, I hope he did not mean to deny, that, when rightly conceived and made the subject of our con- templation, they are * full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable* comfort.“ |

n Se. xL II. o Art, x. Sect. LIV.

? Paradise Lost, Book ii. 557.

4 It may be a satisfaction to some hearers of the Lectures, who took notes, to know, that the five last Sections of this 17th Article, were omitted April 1, 1791, for want of time ; even though the LeQure that day was supernumerary.

EY

+. a—

CMPYM_NCXYT _ WWII, EWTRS

ge […] bY

— © - […] e oe A2n

„

FF ˙ A ˙ A _ <<

rr

— _ […] er. .

Notes

• In the Book de Divinatione, there are many things con- cerning Fate, &c. © Homer II. g. 209, 210. — Plautus, Aulularia, Act 4. Scene 10. Deus impulsor mihi fuit, &c.
• 1 Lecture I read two Heads out of the Inde x to the works of Thomas Aquinas; beginning, Prædestinatio juvatur precibus sanctorum, &c. and Præscientia meritorum non est causa, &c. Art. xl. Sect. x. |
• See his idea of the matter in the Aug. Conf. cap. 5. de Fide. quoted in Oxf. page 31.—Heylin, page 519,-Syntagma page 21. |
• Dean Tucker’s Letters to Dr. Kippis, page 8 I, &c. quoted Oxf. page 79.
• Art. xi. Sect. v11l, n Strype’s Whitgift, p. 478.
• Waterland’s Suppl. to Arian Subscr. page 44, &c.
• A. D. 1644. Vol. 5. 4to. p. 371, near the bottom: Chap.
• Eph. i. 4.“ he hath chosen us in him before the founda- tion of the world, that we should be holy and without Same.“ &c.—See also Eph. ii. 10. created unto good works, © ordained that we should walk in them: and so in other passages.