Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

malefactors, is a positive act; but leaving the rest to suffer the sentence of the law is præterition, and nothing more; whether any previous determination had been made on the subject, or not. Both these writers, however, lose sight of this circumstance, that these two millions (or two millions of millions, if they choose,) of men were viewed, in the divine prescience, " as children of wrath," and vessels of wrath fitted for destruction;" and the decree was, effectually to interpose to rescue some of them from this awful condition, in which all might most justly have been left; and to leave the rest to suffer the just punishment due to their rebellions. Now, if this will be just when carried into effect at the day of judgment, why should it not be just in the great Governor of the universe previously to decree it? Whatever argument holds good against the non-election of some, holds good also against the election of others. But no scriptural argument holds good against either of them, when properly stated and explained.

'If God of his own good pleasure elected cer*tain persons exclusively to be eternally happy, by 'furnishing them, through his especial grace, with 'his own appointed means of faith in the death of 'Christ; it is implied that those means are denied 'to the rest of the human race, who are passed over and left to their own unassisted powers. "This denial or præterition is in fact reprobation; 'for both Calvinists and ourselves believe, that "man by his own natural strength and good works cannot turn to faith,' the only appointed mean of salvation; and that the fault and cor

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ruption of every man that is naturally engendered ' of Adam deserveth God's wrath and damnation,' ' which he is of himself unable to avert; and, consequently, in the words of the 4th Lambeth 'Article, Those who are not predestinated to 'salvation shall be necessarily or inevitably 'damned for their sins.' This was unquestionably 'the doctrine of former Calvinists, who were fully 'sensible that election and reprobation are inseparably connected. If therefore reprobation be 'unfounded, which some modern Calvinists allow, 'it follows, upon their own principles, that election also is unfounded, since the latter cannot 'exist without the former.'1

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

The expression, furnishing them, through his special grace, with the appointed means of faith,' by no means conveys our sentiment. It is a special grace, or favour, to be furnished with the means of believing; which God grants to the inhabitants of this favoured island, but not to those of China or Japan. And, in fact, the divine conduct might as justly be objected to in this respect as in the other. But means of faith' do not always bring men to believe in Christ to salvation; indeed never, without the regenerating grace of his holy Spirit: and this grace God is pleased, for wise and holy purposes, which he has not seen good to reveal, to give to some and not to others. This indeed is implied in what is stated to be the common belief both of Calvinists and their opponents. It follows from the concessions of those who consider the doctrine of non-election unfounded, that they cannot consistently hold the

[blocks in formation]

doctrine of election: but their concessions prove nothing as to the doctrine itself, whether it be scriptural or not.

It being contended that reprobation is un'founded, because it is obviously inconsistent with 'the mercy and goodness of God, it may be ' asked, Whether it be not also inconsistent with 'the mercy and goodness of God, to create men who he saw would be hereafter miserable? I answer, Certainly not, and for this plain reason; ‘because, according to the system which we main'tain, God has enabled every man born into the 'world to work out his own salvation. Whoever 'therefore is finally unhappy, is unhappy through 'his own fault; and the mercy of God is fully 'vindicated by his giving to every individual of the human race the means of happiness." 1

[ocr errors]

God created the angels who fell, and became most wicked and miserable. Did he not foresee this when he created them? But was this'incon'sistent with his goodness and mercy,' or with his justice? The angels who sinned not are called "the elect angels: "2 let fallen angels then be called the non-elect or reprobate. Now, after their fall, did God give to every individual,' or to any, of them' the means of happiness?'" He spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them "down to hell, and delivered them into chains of "darkness, to be reserved unto judgment."3 But will any man plead their cause, or impeach the divine perfections on their account? Had he not spared man when he sinned, or any of the fallen 21 Tim. v. 21.

'Ref. 257.

32 Pet. ii. 4. Jude 6.

race, he would not have acted inconsistently with his justice; nor even with his goodness, as Creator, towards his obedient creatures. All the advantages afforded to fallen man are from unmerited grace and mercy; and what is of grace cannot be of debt; and might therefore be justly withheld. To suppose that God would not have acted towards us as it became him, had he not given us the gospel, is to take away the very foundation of the gospel; and to suppose that, instead of the gift ' of free mercy,' it is a sort of amends made to those who would otherwise have been injuriously treated. It does not appear, in what sense 'God ' hath enabled every man born into the world to 'work out his own salvation.' A vast majority of the human race have hitherto not had the means ' of grace,' or of happiness; but have been "with"out Christ, without hope, and without God in the "world." They have been and are nearly, though not exactly, in the case in which all would have been, if God had left the whole human race, without any interposition, to walk "in their own ways," without a Saviour, a gospel, a Sanctifier. And it will be as hard (if fallen man have any claim on his offended Creator,) to clear up this difficulty, as that which attends the election of some and not others among the same fallen creatures, to eternal life. Whoever, on the Calvinists' system, as well as on that of their opponents, is finally unhappy, 'is unhappy through his own fault.' Whoever, being favoured with the gospel, lives and dies rejecting it, perishes through his own fault. No decree of God compelled him to sin, or prevented his repentance; but the love of the world and of sin,

with the pride, enmity and wickedness of his own heart. God merely determined not to work in him a new creation to prevent this. And the question is, whether, if he had determined thus to leave us all, with or without the means of grace, to ourselves, we should not universally have broken his commandments, and lived, and died, and perished in obstinate rebellion against him. This Calvinists firmly believe: they think that, according to the testimony of scripture, this would have been the case and that election, and efficacious calling as the consequence, alone make any man to differ, in this essential manner, from others of his fellow creatures.1

[ocr errors]

'Thus the Calvinist, in maintaining the doctrine ' of partial redemption, without any regard to merit 'or demerit in the objects of God's favour or re'jection, triumphantly asks, 'Had not the glorious 'Being, who created the universe, a right to create 'it for what purpose he pleased' It is not denied that God had a right, founded on the un'controllable will of the Creator over his creatures, to consign the far greater part of men to eternal 'misery, and to bestow eternal happiness on a 'chosen few, although there was in themselves no ground whatever for such a distinction.' 2

Calvinists certainly think (however it may appear to others,) that their views are not only consistent with all the perfections of God, but that they peculiarly display the harmonious glory of his whole character; the glory of his infinite justice and mercy, power and wisdom, holiness and faithEph. ii. 1-5. Tit. iii. 2-7.

2 Ref. 257, 258.

« AnteriorContinuar »