Theological institutes : or, A view of the evidences, doctrines, morals and institutions of Christianity

/£./3,//

from 1 0e £t6rare of

(Ret), (gtffen jE)enrg (grotwi, ©. ©.

(jgcqueaf^eo fig #m *°
f0c &t6rarg of

(prtncefon tfleofogicaf Jlemindrg

sec

*3

THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES:

"Or

* DEC 13 1911
& Utcto of tljr \^

r"££$/ML sew

%^/cii sti\^y

EVIDENCES, DOCTRINES, MORALS AND INSTITUTIONS

CHRISTIANITY

BY RICHARD WATSON.

THEOLOGIZE autem objectum est ipse Deus. — Habent aliae omnes scienliae sua objecta,
nobilia certe, et digna in quibus humana mens considerandis tempus, otium, et diligen-
tiam adhibeat. Hsec una circa Ens entium et Causam causarum, circa Principiwm
naturse, et gratia; in natura existentis, natura; adsistentis, et naturam circumsistciiiis
versatur. Dignissimum itaquc hoc est Objectum et^plenum veneranda) Majestatis, prx
■jellensque reliquis.

ARMINIUS.

VOL. III.

NEW-YORK,

PUBLISHED BY J. EMORY AND B. WAUGH, FOR THE METHODIST

EPISCOPAL CHURCH, AT THE CONFERENCE OFFICE,

14 CROSBY-STREET.

James Collord, Printer.

182*.

PART SECOND.

CONTINUED.

DOCTRINES OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.

CHAPTER XXV.

Extent of the Atonement.

We have already spoken of some of the leading blessings derived
to man from the death of Christ, and the conditions on which they
&re made attainable. Before the remainder are adduced, it may
be here a proper place to inquire into the extent of that atonement
for sin made by the death of our Saviour, and whether the blessings
of justification, regeneration, and adoption, are rendered attainable
by all to whom the Gospel is proclaimed.

This inquiry leads us into what is called the Calvinistic contro-
versy ; a controversy which has always been conducted with great
ardour, and sometimes with intemperance. I shall endeavour to
consider such parts of it as are comprehended in the question before
us, with perfect calmness and fairness ; recollecting, on the one
hand, how many excellent and learned men have been arranged on
each side ; and, on the other, that, whilst all honour is due to great,
names, the plain and unsophisticated sense of the Word of inspired
Truth must alone decide on a subject with respect to which it is
not silent.

In the system usually called by the name of Calvinism, and which
shall subsequently be exhibited in its different modifications, there
are, I think, many great errors ; but they have seldom been held
except in connexion with a class of vital truths. By many writers
who have attacked this system, the truth which it contains, as well
as the error, has often been invaded ; and the assault itself has been
not unfrequently conducted on principles exceedingly anti-scriptural,
and fatally delusive. These considerations are sufficient to inspire
caution. The controversy is a very voluminous one ; and yet no
great dexterity is required to exhibit it with clearness in a compara-
tively small compass. Its essence lies in very limited bounds ; and,
according to the plan of this work, the whole question will be tested,
litst and chiefly, by scriptural authority. High Calvinism, indeed,

4 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

affects the mode of reasoning a priori, and delights in metaphysics.
To some also it gives most delight to see it opposed on the same
ground ; and to such disputants it will be much less imposing to
resort primarily, and with all simplicity, to the testimony of the
Sacred Writings. " It is sometimes complained," says one, " that
the mind is unduly biassed in its judgment, by a continual reference
to the authority of the Scriptures. The complaint is just, if the
Scriptures are not the Word of God : but if they are, there is an
opposite and corresponding danger to be guarded against, that of
suffering the mind to be unduly biassed in the study and interpret-
ation of the revealed ,will of God, by the deductions of unaided
reason."(l)

With respect to the controversy, we may also observe, that it
forms a clear case of appeal to the Scriptures : for to whom the.
benefits of Christ's death are extended, whether to the whole of our
race, or to a part, can be matter of revelation only ; and the sole
province of reason is that of interpreting, with fairness, and consist-
ently with the acknowledged principles of that revelation, those
parts of it in which the subject is directly or incidentally introduced.

The question before us, put into its most simple form, is, whether
our Lord Jesus Christ did so die for all men, as to make salvation
attainable by all men ; and the affirmative of this question is, we
think, the doctrine of Scripture.

We assume that this is plainly expressed,

1. In all those passages which declare that Christ died "for all
men," and speak of his death as an atonement for the sins " of the
whole world."

We have already seen, in treating of our Lord's atonement, in
what sense the phrase, to die "for us," must be understood ; that
it signifies to die in the place and stead of man, as a sacrificial obla-
tion, by which satisfaction is made for the sins of the individual, so
that they become remissible upon the terms of the evangelical
covenant. When, therefore, it is said, that Christ " by the grace
of God tasted death for every man ;" and that "he is the propitia-
tion for our sins, and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the
whole world ;" it can only, we think, be fairly concluded from such
declarations, and from many other familiar texts, in which the same
phraseology is employed, that, by the death of Christ, the sins of
every man are rendered remissible, and that salvation is consequently
attainable by every man. Again, our Lord calls himself "the
Saviour of the world ;" and is, by St. Paul, called " the Saviour of
all men." John the Baptist points him out as "the Lamb of God
(l) Dr. Whiteley's Essays

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 0

which taketh away the sin of the world ;" and our Lord himself
declares, " God so loved the world, that he gave Ms only-begotten
Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life : for God sent not his Son into the world to condemn
the world ; but that the world through him might be saved." So,
also, the apostle Paul, " God was in Christ, reconciling the world
unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them."

2. Jn those passages which attribute an equal extent to the effects
of the death of Christ as to the effects of the fall of our first parents.
" For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the
grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus
Christ, hath abounded unto many.'''' " Therefore, as by the offence
of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation ; even so by
the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justi-
fication of life." (2)

As the unlimited extent of Christ's atonement to all mankind, is
plainly expressed in the above cited passages, so is it, we also as-
sume, necessarily implied,

1. In those which declare that Christ died not only for those that
are saved, but for those who do, or may perish ; so that it cannot
be argued, from the actual condemnation of men, that they were
excepted from many actual, and from all the offered, benefits of his
death. " And through thy knowledge shall thy weak brother perish,
for whom Christ died.'''' " Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom
Christ died.'''' " False teachers, who privily shall bring in damnable
heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon
themselves swift destruction.'''' So also in the case of the apostates
mentioned in the Epistle to the Hebrews, " Of how much sorer

(2) To these might be added, all those passages which ascribe the abolition of
bodily death, to Christ, who, in this respect, repairs the effect of the transgression
of Adam, which he could only do in consequence of having redeemed that body
from the power of the grave. This argument may be thus stated. It is taught,
in Scripture, that all shall rise from the dead. It is equally clear from the same
authority, that all shall rise in consequence of the interposition of Christ, the
second Adam, the representative and Redeemer of man — "as in Adam all die,
even so in Christ shall all be made alive." It follows, therefore, that if the wicked
are raised from the dead, it is in consequence of the power which Christ, as Re-
deemer, acquired over them, and of his right in them. That this resurrection is
to them a curse, was not in the purpose of God, but arises from their wilful rejec-
tion of the gospel. To be restored to life is in itself a good ; that it is turned to
an evil is their own fault ; and if they are not raised from the dead in consequence
of Christ's right in them, acquired by purchase, it behoves those of a different
opinion to show under what other constitution than that of the gospel, a resurrec-
tion of the body is provided for. The original law contains no intimation of this,
nor of a general judgment, which latter supposes a suspension of the sentenco
inconsistent with the strictly legal penalty. " in the day thoit catcst thereof thoil
fihalt surely die

*> THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath
trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of
the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath
done despite unto the Spirit of Grace 1" If any dispute should here
arise as to the phrase, " wherewith he was sanctified," reference
may be made to chap, vi, of the same epistle, where the same class
of persons, whose doom is pronounced to be inevitable, are said to
have been " once enlightened ;" to have " tasted of the heavenly
gift ;" to have been " made partakers of the Holy Ghost ;" to have
" tasted the good word of God," and " the powers of the world to-
come :" all which expressions show that they were placed on the
same ground with other Christians as to their interest in the new
covenant, — a point to which we shall again recur.

2. In all those passages which make it the duty of men to believe,
the Gospel ; and place them under guilt, and the penalty of death,
for rejecting it. " Fie that believeth on the Son hath everlasting
life : and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life ; but the
wrath of God abideth on him." " But these are written, that ye
might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God ; and that
believing ye might have life through His name." " He that believeth
not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the Name
of the only-begotten Son of God." " And he said unto them, Go
ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He
that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved ; but he that believeth
not, shall be damned." " How shall we escape, if we neglect so great,
salvation 1" " The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with
his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that
know not God, and that obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus
Christ." The plain argument from all such passages is, that the
Gospel is commanded to be preached to all men ; that it is preached
to them that they may believe in Christ, its Author ; that this faith
is required of them, in order to their salvation, — " that believing ye
may have life through His name ;" that they have power thus to t
believe to their salvation ; (from whatever source, or by whatever
means this power is derived to them, need not now be examined :
it is plainly supposed ; for not to believe, is reckoned to them as a
capital crime, for which they are condemned already, and reserved
to final condemnation ;) and that having power to believe, they have
the power to obtain salvation, which, as it can be bestowed only
through the merits of Christ's sacrifice, proves that it extends to
them. The same conclusion, also, follows from the nature of that
faith, which is required by the Gospel, in order to salvation. This,
wo have already seen, is not m^ro. assent to the doctrine of Christ V

SECOND. ; iifllOJ.OGH \\. INSTI1 f I (.-. '•

sacrificial death, but personal trust in it as our atonement ; which
those, surely, could not be required by a Cod of truth to exercise,
if that atonement did not embrace them. Nor could they be guilty
for refusing to trust in that which was never intended to be the.
object of their trust ; for if God so designed to exclude them from
Christ, he could not command them to trust in Christ ; and if they
are not commanded thus to trust in Christ, they do not violate any
command by not believing ; and, in this respect, are innocent.

3. In all those passages in which men's failure to obtain salvation
is placed to the account of their own opposing wills, and made
wholly their own fault. " How often would I have gathered thy
children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her
wings, and ye icould not /" " And ye anil not come to me that ye
may have life." " Bringing upon themselves swift destruction."
" Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely." It is
useless here to multiply quotations, since the New Testament so
constantly exhorts men to come to Christ, reproves them for ne-
glect, and threatens them with the penal consequences of their own
tolly : thus uniformly placing the bar to their salvation, just where
Christ places it, in his parable of the supper, in the perverseness of
those, who having been hidden to the feast, would not come. From
these premises, then, it follows, that since the Scriptures always
attribute the ruin of men's souls t0 their own will, and not to the
will of God ; we ought to seek for no other cause of their condem-
nation. We can know nothing on this subject but what God has
revealed. He has declared that it is not his will that men should
perish : on the contrary, " He willeth all men to be saved ;" and
therefore, commands us to pray for " all men ;" ht has declared,
that the reason they are not saved, is not that Christ did not die for
them, but that they will not come to him for the " life" which he
died to procure for " the world ;" and it must therefore be con-
cluded, that the sole bar to the salvation of all who are lost is in
themselves, and not in any such limitation of Christ's redemption,
as supposes that they were not comprehended in its efficacy and
intention.

It will now be necessary for us to consider what those who have
adopted a different opinion have to urge against these plain and
literal declarations of Scripture. It is their burthen, that they are
compelled to explain these passages in a more limited and qualified
sense, than the letter of them and its obvious meaning teaches ; and
that they must do this by inference merely ; for it is not even pre-
tended that there is any text whatever to be adduced, which declares
as literallv, that Christ did not die for the salvation of nil, as thos<

b' THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

which declare that he did so die. We have no passages, therefore,
to examine, which, in their clear literal meaning, stand opposed to
those which we have quoted, so as to present apparent contradic-
tions which require to be reconciled by concession on one side or
the other. This is at least, prima facie, strongly in favour of those
who hold that, in the same sense, and with the same design, " Jesus
Cririst tasted death for every man."

To our first class of texts it is objected, that the terms " all men"
and " the world" are sometimes used in Scripture in a limited sense.
This may be granted, without injury to the argument drawn from
the texts in question. But though in Scripture, as in common lan-
guage, all, and every, and such universals, are occasionally used
with limitation when the connexion prevents any misunderstand-
ing ; yet they are, nevertheless, strictly universal terms, and are
most frequently used as such. The true question is, whether, in
the places above cited, they can be understood except in the largest
sense ; whether " all men," and " the world," can be interpreted
of the elect only, that is of some men of all countries.
We may very confidently deny this,

1. Because the universal sense of the terms, " all," and " all men,"
and " every man," is confirmed, either by the context of the pas-
sages in which they occur, or by other Scriptures. When Isaiah
says, " All we like sheep have g"olie astray ; and the Lord hath laid
on him the iniquity of us oH (* he affirms that the iniquity of all
those who have gone astray, was laid on Christ. When St. Paid
says, " We thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead ;"
he argues the universality of spiritual death, from the universality
of the means adopted for raising men to spiritual life : a plain proof
that it was received as an undisputed principle in the primitive
church, that Christ's dying for all men was to be taken in its utmost
latitude, or it could not have been made the basis of the argument.
When the same apostle calls Christ the " Saviour of all men, and
especially of those that believe," he manifestly includes both be-
lievers and unbelievers, that is, all mankind, in the term " all men ;"
and declares, that Christ is their Saviour, though the full benefits of
his salvation are received through faith only by them that believe.
When again he declares that, " as by the offence of one judgment
came upon all men to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness
of one, the free gift came upon all men, (tig,) in order to justifica-
tion of life ;" the force of the comparison is lost if the term " all
men," is not taken in its full extent ; for the apostle is thus made
to say, as by the offence of one, judgment came upon all men ;
JBv£n so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon a few

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 9

men. Nor can it be objected, tbat the apostle uses the terms,
" many," and " all men," indiscriminately in this chapter ; for there
is in this no contradiction, and the objection is in our favour. All
men are many, though many are not in every case all. But the
term, " many," is taken by him in the sense of all, as appears from
the following parallels : " death passed upon all men ;" " many be
dead ;" " the gift by grace hath abounded unto many ;" " the free
gift came upon all men." " By one man's disobedience many were
made (constituted) sinners," made liable to death ; " so by the
obedience of one shall many be made (constituted) righteous." On
fhe last passage we may observe that, " many," or " the many,'"
must mean all men in the first clause ; nor is it to be restricted in
tlie second, as though, by being " made righteous," actual personal
justification were to be understood ; for the apostle is not speaking
of believers individually, but of mankind collectively, and the oppo-
site conditions in which the race itself is placed by the offence of
Adam and the obedience of Christ in all its generations.

It is equally impracticable to restrict the phrases, " the world,"
" the whole world ;" and to paraphrase them the " world of the
elect :" and yet there is no other alternative ; for either " the whole
world" means those elected out of it ; or else Christ died in an
equal sense for every man. " God so loved the icorld, that he gave
his only-begotten Son," &c. Here, if the world mean not the elect
only, but every man, then every man was " so loved" by God, that
he gave his own Son for his redemption. To say that the world,
in a few places, means the Roman empire, and in others Judea, is
nothing to the purpose, unless it were meant to affirm, that the elect
were the people of Juik a, or those of the Roman empire only. It
proves, it is true, a hyperbolical use of the term in both instances ;
but this cannot be urged in the case before us : for,

1 . The elect are never called " the world" in Scripture ; but are
distinguished from it. " I have chosen you out of the Avorld ; there-
fore the world hateth you."

2. The common division of mankind, in the New Testament, is
only into two parts ; the disciples of Christ, and " the world." " If
ye were of the world, the world would love its own." " Ye are not
of the world, even as I am not of the world." " We know that we
are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness."

3. When the redemption of Christ is spoken of, it often includes
both those who had been chosen out of the world, and those who
remained still of the world. "And you halh he reconciled," say
the apostles to those that had already believed ; and as to the rest,
" God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto lumself, not impute

Vol. II T. 2

10 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

ing their trespasses unto them ; and hath committed to us the word
of reconciliation," plainly that they might beseech this " world" to
be reconciled to God : so that both believers and unbelievers were
interested in the reconciling ministry, and the work of Christ. " And
he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only ; but also for
the sins of the whole ivorld :" words cannot make the case plainer
than these, since this same writer, in the same epistle, makes it evi-
dent how he uses the term " world," when he affirms that " the world
lietli in wickedness," in contradistinction to those who knew that
they were " of God."

4. In the general commission before quoted, the expression
" world" is connected with universal terms which cany it forth into
its utmost latitude of meaning. " Go ye into all the world, and
preach the Gospel (the good news) to every creature ;" and this too
in order to his believing it, that he may be saved ; " he that be-
lieveth shall be saved ; and he that believeth not (this good news
preached to him that he might be saved) shall be damned."

5. All this is confirmed from the gross absurdity of this restricted
interpretation when applied to several of the foregoing passages.
" For God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son,,
that ichosoever believeth in him should not perish." Now, if the
world here means the elect world, or the elect not yet called out of
it, then it is affirmed, that " ichosoever,'" of this elect body, believeth
shall not perish ; which plainly implies, that some of the elect might,
not believe, and therefore perish, contrary to their doctrine. This
absurd consequence is still clearer from the verses which immediately
follow. John iii, 17, 18, " For God sent not his Son into the world
to condemn the world ; but that the world through him might be
saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned : but he that
believeth not is condemned already." Now here we must take the
term " world," either extensively for all mankind, or limitedly for
the elect. If the former, then all men "through him may be
saved," but only through faith : he, therefore, of this world that
believeth may be saved ; but he of this world that believeth not is
condemned already." The sense is here plain and consistent ; but
if, on the other hand, we take " the world" to mean the elect only,
then he of this elect world that believeth may be saved, and he of
the elect world that " believeth not is condemned ;" so that the
restricted interpretation necessarily supposes that elect persons may
remain in unbelief, and be lost. The same absurdity will follow
from a like interpretation of the general commission. Either " all
the world" and " every creature" mean every man, or the elect
only. If the former, it follows, that he of this " world," anv indi-

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 11

vidual among' those included in the phrase, " every creature," who
believes, " shall be saved," or, not believing, " shall be damned :**
if the latter, then he of the elect, any individual of the elect, who
believes, " shall be saved," and any individual of the elect who
believes not, "shall be damned." Similar absurdities might be
brought out from other passages ; but if these are candidly weighed,
it will abundantly appear, that texts so plain and explicit cannot be
turned into such consequences by any true method of interpreta-
tion, and that they must, therefore, be taken in their obvious sense,
which unequivocally expresses the universality of the atonement.

It has been urged, indeed, that our Lord himself says, John xvii, 9,
" I pray for them : 1 pray not for the world, but for them which
thou hast given me." But will they here interpret " the world" to
be the world of the elect 1 if so, they cut even them off from the
prayers of Christ. But if by " the world" they would have us un-
derstand the world of the non-elect, then they will find that all the
prayers which our Lord puts up for those whom " the Father hath
given him," had this end, " that they," the non-elect " ' world,' may
believe that thou hast sent me," verse 21 : let them choose either
side of the alternative. The meaning of this passage is, however,
made obvious by the context. Christ, in the former part of his
intercession, as recorded in this chapter, prays exclusively, not for
his church in all ages, but for his disciples then present with him ;
as appears plain from verse 12, "While I was ivith them in the
world, I kept them in thy name :" but he was only with his first
disciples, and for them he exclusively prays in the first instance ;
then, in verse 20, he prays for all who, in future, should believe on
him through their words ; and he does this in order that " the world
might believe." Thus " the world," in its largest sense, is not cut
off, but expressly included in the benefits of this prayer.

John x, 15, "I lay down my life for the sheep," is also adduced,
to prove that Christ died for none but his sheep. But the conse-
quence will not hold ; for there is no inconsistency between his
having died for them that believe, and also for them that believe not.
Christ is said to be " the Saviour of all men, and especially of them
that believe ;" two propositions which the apostle held to be per-
fectly consistent. The very context shows that Christ laid down
his life for others besides those whom, in that passage, he calls " the
sheep." The sheep here intended, as the discourse will show, were
those of the Jewish "fold ;" for he immediately adds, "other sheep
I have, which are not of this fold," clearly meaning the Gentiles :
" them must I bring." He, therefore, laid down his life for them
also ; for the sheep in the fold, who "knew his voice and followed

12 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

him," and lor them out of the fold, who still needed "bringing in;"
even for " the lost, whom he came to seek and save," which is the
character of all mankind : " all we like sheep have gone astray ;"
and " the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."

A restrictive interpretation of the first two classes of texts we
have quoted above, may then be affirmed directly and expressly to
contradict the plainest declarations of God's own word. For, it is
not true, upon this interpretation, that God loved " the world," if
the majority he loved not ; nor is it true, that Christ was not " sent
to condemn the world," if he was sent even to enhance its con-
demnation ; nor that the Gospel, as the Gospel, can be preached
" to every creature," if to the majority it cannot be preached as
" good tidings of great joy to all people ;" for it is sad and doleful
tidings, if the greater part of the human race are shut out from the
mercies of their Creator. If, then, in this interpretation there is so
palpable a contradiction of the words of inspiration itself, the sys-
tem which is built upon it cannot be sustained.

As to the texts which we have urged, as necessarily implying the
unrestricted extent of the death of Christ, the usual answers to
those which speak of Christ having died for them that perish, may
be briefly examined. " Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom
Christ died," Rom. xiv, 15. Him, says Poole, (4) for whom, "in
the judgment of charity," we are to presume Christ died. To say
nothing of the danger of such unlicensed paraphrases, in the inter-
pretation of Scripture, it is obvious that this exposition, entirely
annuls the motive by which the apostle enforces his exhortation.
Why are we not to be an occasion of sin to our brother 1 The
answer is, lest we " destroy him ;" and, in the parallel place, 1 Cor.
viii, 11, lest " he perish." But what is the aggravation of the offence 1
truly that " Christ died for him ;" and so we have no tenderness
for a soul on whom Christ had so much compassion as to die for
his salvation. Let the text then be tried, as paraphrased by Poole
and other Calvinists : " Destroy not him, for whom, in the judg-
ment of charity, it may be concluded, Christ died ;" and it turns
the motive the other way. For if I admit that none can be destroyed
for whom Christ died, then, in proportion to the charity of my judg-
ment, that any individual is of this number, I may be the less cau-
tious of ensnaring his conscience in indifferent matters ; since at
least, this is certain, that he cannot perish, and I cannot be guilty
of the aggravated offence of destroying him who was an object of
the compassion of Christ. Who can suppose that the apostle would
thus counteract bis own design 1 or that he should seriously admon-

M") Annotations.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 1 ! j

ish his readers not to do that which was impossible it', in fact, he
taught them that Christ died only for the elect ; and that they for
whom he died, could never perish 1 Another commentator, of the
same school, explains this as a caution against doing that which had
a " tendency to the ruin of one for whom Christ died ; not that it im-
plies, that the weak brother would actually perish." (5) But in this
case, also, as it is assumed, that it was a doctrine taught by St. Paul
and received by the churches to whom he wrote, that the elect
could not perish, the motive is taken away upon which the admo-
nition is grounded. For if the persons, to whom the apostle wrote,
knew that the weak brother, for whom Christ died, could not perish,
then nothing which they could do had any " tendency" to destroy
him. It might injure him, disturb his mind, lead him into sin,
destroy his comforts ; all, or any of which, would have been appro-
priate motives on which to have urged the caution : but nothing can
have even a tendency to destroy him whose salvation is fixed by an
unalterable decree. Mr. Scott is, however, evidently, not satisfied
with his own interpretation ; and gives a painful example of the
influence of a preconceived system in commenting upon Scripture,
by charging the apostle himself with careless writing. " We may,
however, observe, that the apostles did not write in that exact sys-
tematical style, which some affect, otherwise they would scrupulously
have avoided such expressions." This is rather in the manner of
Priestley and Belsham, than that of an orthodox commentator ; but
it does homage to the force of truth by turning away from it, and
by tacitly acknowledging that the Scriptures cannot be Calvinistic-
ally interpreted. The same commentators, following, as they do,
in the train of the Calvinistic divines in general, may furnish, also,
the answer to the argument, from 2 Pet. ii, 1, " Denying the Lord
that bought them, and bringing upon themselves swift destruction."
Poole gives us three interpretations : the first is, " The Lord that
bought Israel out of Egypt ;" as though St. Peter could be speak-
ing of the Mosaic, and not of the Christian Redemption ; and as
though the Judaizing teachers, supposing the apostle to speak of
them, denied the God of the Jews, when it was their object to set
up his religion against that of Christ. The second is, that " they
were bought," or redeemed, by Christ, from temporal death, their
lives having been spared : but we have no such doctrine in Scrip-
ture, as that the long suffering of wicked men, procured by Christ's
Redemption, is unconnected in its intent with their eternal salvation.
The barren fig tree was spared at the intercession of Christ, that
means might be taken with it, to make it fruitful ; and in this same
(.V) Rev. T. Scott's Note*?.

U THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

epistle of St. Peter, he teaches us to " account the long suffering
of the Lord salvation;" meaning, doubtless, in its tendency and
intention. To this we may add, that there is nothing in the con-
text to warrant this notion of mere temporal redemption. The
third interpretation is, " that they denied the Lord, whom they pro-
fessed to have bought them." This also is gratuitous, and gives a
very different sense from that which the words of the apostle con-
vey. But it is argued, that the offence would be the same in
denying Christ, whether he really died for them, or that they had
professed to believe he died for them. Certainly not. Their crime,
as it is put by the apostle, is not the denying of their former profes-
sion, or denying Christ, whom they formerly professed to have
bought them ; but denying Christ, who had actually bought them,
and whom, for that reason, they ought never to have denied, but
confessed at the hazard of their lives. Farther, if they merely
denied that which they formerly professed, namely, that Christ had
bought them, and, in point of fact, he never did buy them, they
were in error when they professed to believe that he bought them,
and spoke the truth only when they denied it ; and if it be said,
that they knew not but he had bought them, when they denied him,
this might be a reason for their not being rewarded for renouncing
an error, as being done unwittingly ; but can be no reason for their
being punished, though unwittingly they went back to the truth of
the case. There can be no great guilt in our denying Christ, if
Christ never died for us.

Mr. Scott partly adopts, and partly rejects Poole's solution of
this scriptural difficulty. But as he charged St. Paul with want of
exactness in writing to the Romans, so also St. Peter, in the passage
before us, comes in for his share of the same censure. " It was
not the manner of the sacred writers, to express themselves with
that systematic exactness, which many now affect." The question
is not, however, one of systematic exactness ; but of common
intelligible writing. Mr. Scott's observation on this passage, is, that
Christ's ransom was of infinite sufficiency ; and the proposal of it,
in Scripture, general ; so that men are addressed according to their
profession : but that Christ only intended to redeem those, whom he
foresaw would eventually be saved." (6) On this we may remark,
1. That the sufficiency of Christ's Redemption, is not in question ;
but the Redemption itself of these deniers of Christ : he is called
" the Lord that bought them." In thai sufficiency, too, Mr. Scott
affirms, in fact, that they had no interest ; for Christ did not " intend
to redeem them ;" on this showing, therefore, the Lord did not
f6> Notes nn 9 Peter.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. i O

" buy them," wliich contradicts the apostle. 2. That the " proposal
of the benefits of Christ's Redemption is general ;" and that men
are addressed, accordingly, as those who are interested in it : we
grant, and feel how well this accords with the doctrine of general
Redemption ; but the difficulty lies with those who hold the limita-
tion of Christ's Redemption to the elect only, to explain, not merely
how it is that men are addressed generally ; but how the sins ot
those who perish, can be aggravated by the circumstance of Christ's
having bought them, if he did not buy them ; and how they can be
punished for rejecting him, if they could never receive him, so as
to be saved by him. This aggravation of their offence, by the
circumstance of Christ having bought them, is the doctrine of the
text, of the force of which the above interpretations are manifest,
evasions.

We come now to the case of the apostates, mentioned in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, vi, 4-8, and x, 26-31. With respect to
these passages, it is agreed that they speak of the ultimate and
eternal condemnation and rejection of the persons mentioned in
them. The question then is, whether Christ died for them, as he
died for such as persevere 1 which is to be determined by another
question, whether they were ever true believers, and had received
saving grace 1 If this be allowed, the proposition is established, that.
Christ died for them that perish ; but in order to arrest this con-
clusion, all Calvinistic divines agree in denying that the persons
referred to by the apostle, and against whom his terrible denuncia-
tions are directed, were ever true believers, or capable of becoming-
such ; and here again we have another pregnant instance of the
violence done to the obvious meaning of the word of God, through
the influence of a preconceived system. For,

1. It will not be denied, that the Hebrews to whom the epistle
was addressed, were, in the main at least, true believers ; and that
the passages in question were written to preserve them from apos-
tasy ; of which the rejection, and hopeless punishment, described
by the apostle, is represented as the consequence. But if St. Paul
had taught them, as he must have done, if Calvinism be the doctrine
of the New Testament, that they never could so fall away, and so
perish, this was no warning at all to them. To suppose he held
out that as a terror, which he knew to be impossible, and had taught
them also to be impossible, is the first absurdity which the Calvin-
istic interpretation involves.

2. It will not be denied, that he speaks of these wretched apos-
tates, as deterring examples to the true believers amongst the
Hebrews; but as such apostates neve]- were believers, and were

\ii THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

not even rendered capable, by the grace of God, of becoming such,
they could not be admonitory examples. To assume that the
apostle, for the sake of argument and admonition, supposes believers
to be in the same circumstances and case as those who never were,
and never could be believers, and when he had instructed them
that their cases could never be similar, is the second absurdity.

3. The apostates in question are represented, by the apostle,
" as falling away" from " repentance," and from Christ's " sacrifice
for sins." The advocates of the system of partial redemption,
affirm, that they fell away only from their profession of repentance
and doctrinal belief of Christ's sacrifice for sins, in which they never
had, and never could have, any interest. Yet the apostle places
the hopelessness of their state on the impossibility of " renewing
them again to repentance ;" which proves that he considered their
first repentance genuine and evangelical ; because the absence of
such a repentance, as they had at first, is given as the reason of the
hopelessness of their condition. He moreover heightens the case,
by alleging, that there remained " no more sacrifice for sins ;" which
as plainly proves that, before their apostasy, there was a sacrifice
for their sins, and that they had only cut themselves off from its
benefits by " wilfully" renouncing it ; in other words, that Christ
died for them, and that they had placed themselves out of the reach
of the benefit of his death, by this one act of aggravated apostasy.
The contrast lies between a hopeful and a hopeless case. Theirs
was once a hopeful case, because they had " repented," and be-
cause there was then a " sacrifice for sins ;" afterwards it became
hopeless, because it was " impossible to renew them again unto
repentance," and the sacrifice for sin no more remained for them :
they had not only renounced their profession of it ; but had re-
nounced the sacrifice itself, by renouncing Christianity. Now, so
to interpret the apostle, as to make him describe the awful condition
of apostates, as a " falling away" into a state of hopelessness, when,
if Calvinism be the doctrine of the New Testament, their case was
never really hopeful, but was as hopeless, as to their eternal salva-
tion, before as after their apostasy, is the third absurdity.

4. But it is plain that theirs had been a state of actual salvation,
which could only result from their having had an interest in the
death of Christ. The proof of this lies in what the apostle affirms
of the previous state of those who had finally apostatized, or might
so apostatize. They were " enlightened ;" this, the whole train of
Calvinistic commentators tell us, means a mere speculative reception
of the doctrine of the Gospel ; they had " tasted of the heavenly
jrift," and of " the good word of God ;" that is. say Poole and

SECOKD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 17

others, " they tasted, not digested ; they had superficial relishes of
joy and peace," and are to be compared " to the stony ground
hearers, who received the word with joy." " And were made
partakers of the Holy Ghost ;" that is, say some commentators of
this class, in his operations, " trying how far a natural man may be
raised, and not have his nature changed:" (7) others, "by the
communication of miraculous powers." They had " tasted of the
powers of the world to come ;" that is, they had felt the powerful
doctrines of the Gospel, but as all reprobates may feel them, some-
times powerfully convincing their judgment, at others troubling their
consciences. " All these tilings," says Scott, (8) " often take place
in.the hearts and consciences of men, who yet continue unregene-
rate." These interpretations are undoubtedly forced upon these
authors by the system they have adopted ; but it unfortunately
happens for them, that the apostle uses no term less strong in
describing the religious experience of these apostates than he does
in speaking of that of true believers. They were " enlightened" is
said of these apostates, " the eyes of your understanding being
enlightened," is said of the Ephesians ; and " being turned from
darkness to light" is the characteristic of all believers. The apos-
tates " tasted the heavenly gift ;" this, too, is affirmed of true be-
lievers, " much more they which receive abundance of grace, and
of the gift of righteousness, shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ,"
Rom. v, 17. To be made "partakers of the Holy Ghost," is also
the common distinctive character of all true Christians. " If any
man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his ;" " but ye are
not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God
dwell in you." " To taste the heavenly gift" and " the good word
of God," is also made the mark of true Christianity : " if so be ye
have tasted that the Lord is gracious." Finally, " the powers of the
world to come ;" that is, of the Gospel dispensation, or the power
of the Gospel, stand in precisely the same case. This Gospel is the
" power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." Since,
then, the apostle expresses the prior experience of these apostates,
by the same terms and phrases as those by which he designates the.
work of God in the hearts of those whose Christianity is, by all,
acknowledged to be genuine, where is the authority on which these
commentators make him describe, not a saving work in the hearts
of these apostates, during the time they held fast their profession,
but a simulated one 1 They have clearly no authority for this at
all ; and their comments arise not out of the argument of St. Paul,
nor out of his terms or phrases, or the connexion of these passagef
(7) Poole in loc. (8) Notes

Vol. HI.

18 THEOLOGICAL INSTrTtTTES. [part

with the rest of the discourse ; but out of their own theological
system alone ; in other words, out of a mere human opinion which
supplies a meaning to the apostle, of which he gives not the most
distant intimation. To make the apostle describe the falling away
from a mere profession unaccompanied with a state of grace, by
terms which he is constantly using to describe and characterize a
state of grace, is the fourth absurdity.

We mark, also, two other absurdities. The interpretations above
given are below the force of the terms employed ; and they are above
the character of reprobates.

They are beloio the force of the terms employed. To " taste the
heavenly gift," is not a mere intellectual or sentimental approval -of
it ; for this heavenly gift is distinguished both from the Holy Spirit,
and from the word of God, mentioned afterwards ; which leaves us
no choice but to interpret it of Christ : and then to taste of Christ,
is to receive his grace and mercy ; " if so be ye have tasted that the
Lord is gracious." Thus the Greek fathers, and many later divines,
understand it of the remission of sins ; which interpretation is greatly
confirmed by Rom. v, where " the gift" " the free gift," and " the
gift by grace," are used both for the means of our justification, and
for justification itself. To " taste the heavenly gift," then, is, in this
sense, so to taste that the Lord is gracious as to receive the remission
of sins. To be made " partakers of the Holy Ghost," follows this
in the usual order of describing the work of God in the heart. It
is the fruit of faith, the Spirit of adoption and sanctification — the
Spirit in his comforting and renewing influences following our justi-
fication. To restrain this participation of the Holy Ghost to the
endowment of miraculous powers, requires it to be previously
established, either, 1. That all professing Christians, in that age,
were thus endowed with miraculous powers, of which there is no
proof; or, 2. That only those who were thus endowed with mira-
culous gifts were capable of this aggravated apostasy ; and then
the apostle's warning would not be a general one, even to the
Christians of the apostolic age, nor even to all the believing Hebrews,
which it manifestly is. On the other hand, since all true believers
in the sense of the apostle, received the Holy Ghost in his comforting
and renovating influences, the meaning of the phrase becomes
obvious, and it lays down the proper ground for a general admo-
nition. Again ; "to taste the good word of God," is still an advance
in the process of a genuine experience. It is tasting the good word,
that is, the goodness of the word in a course of experience and
practice ; having personal proof of its goodness and adaptation to
man's state in the world : for to argue from the term " taste" a?

SECOND. J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 19

though something- superficial and transitory only were meant, is as
absurd as to argue from the threat of Christ that those who refused
the invitation of his servants should not " taste" of his supper, that
he only excluded them from a superficial and transient gustation of
his salvation here and hereafter ; or that, when the psalmist calls
upon us to " taste and see that the Lord is good," he excludes a
full, and rich, and permanent experience of the Divine goodness.
Finally, if by the " powers of the world to come," it could be proved
that the apostle meant the miraculous evidences of the truth of the
Gospel, it would not follow, that he supposes the persons spoken
of to be endowed with miraculous powers ; but that to taste these
powers, was rather to experience the abundant blessings of a religion
thus confirmed and demonstrated by signs and wonders and divers
miracles, according to what he urges in chap, ii, 4, of the same
epistle. The phrase, however, is probably a still farther advance
upon the former, and signifies a personal experience of the mighty
energy and saving power of the Gospel. Thus the interpretation
of the Calvinists has the absurdity of making the apostle speak little
things in great words, and of using unmeaning tautologies. To
" partake of the Holy Ghost" is, according to them, to have the gift
of miracles, and to taste " the powers of the world to come" is to
have the gift of miracles. To taste the " heavenly gift," is to have
a superficial relish of Gospel doctrine, and " to taste the good word
of God," is also to have a superficial relish of Gospel doctrine : but
how, then, are we to take the term "taste," when the apostle speaks
of tasting " the powers of the world to come 1" According to these
comments, this can only mean that they had a superficial taste of
the power of working miracles !

But as these interpretations are below the force of the terms, so
they are above the capacity of the reprobate. " They had, moreover,"
says Scott, " tasted of the good word of God, and their connexions,
impressions, and transient affections made them sensible that it was
a good word, and that it was for their good to attend to it ; and
their purposes of doing so had produced such hopes and joys, a«
have been described in the case of the stony ground hearers, Matt,
xiii, 21, 22." That Mr. Scott had no right apprehension of the
class of persons intended by those who received the good seed upon
stony ground, might easily be proved ; but this is beside our present
purpose. We find in the words quoted above, (and we refer to
Mr. Scott rather than to the older divines of the same school,
because it is often said that Calvinism is now modified and improved,)
" convictions," " impressions of the goodness of the word," and
purposes of attending to it, ascribed to the non-elect : persons tb

ZO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAR'l

whose salvation this bar is placed, that, according to this comment-
ator, and all others who adopt the same system, Christ never
" intentionally" died for them. We ask, then, are these "convictions,
impressions," and " purposes," from the grace of God working in
man, or from the natural man wholly unassisted by the grace of
God ] If the latter, then what becomes of the doctrine of the entire
corruption of human nature, which they profess to hold, and that
so strenuously 1 " In me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good thing."
By the flesh, the apostle means, doubtless, his natural and unassisted
state. Yet how many " good things" are ascribed, by Mr. Scott,
to the very reprobate 1 " Conviction of the truth of the Gospel" was
doubtless " good," and showed, in that day especially, when the
prejudices of education had not yet come in to the aid of truth, an
honest spirit of inquiry, and a docile mind. " Impressions" are still
better, as they argue affection to truth which the natural man, as
such, hates ; and these are improved into an acknowledgment " of
the goodness of the word," though it is a reproving word, and a
doctrine of holiness, and consequently of restraint. To this the
merely "carnal mind," which St. Paul declares to be "enmity
against God," is here allowed not only to assent, but also to perceive
with some taste and approving relish. " Purposes of attending to
this good word," are also admitted, which is a still farther advance,
and must by all be acknowledged to be " good," as they are the
very basis of real religious attainment. Yet if all these, which, in
the judgment of every spiritual man would be considered as placing
such persons in a very hopeful state, and would give joy to angels,
unless they were admitted to the secret of reprobation, are to be
ascribed to nature ; then the carnal mind is not absolutely and in all
cases " enmity against God ;" in our " flesh some good thing may
dwell ;" and we are not by nature " dead hi trespasses and sins."

Let us then suppose, since this position cannot be maintained in
defiance of the Scriptures, that these are the effects of the grace of
God, and the influences of the Holy Spirit in man ; to what end is
that grace exerted 1 Is it that it may lead to salvation 1 This is
denied, and consistently so ; for can such convictions, and desires,
and purposes, lead to true repentance, when Christ gives true
repentance to none but to the elect 1 Nor can they lead to pardon,
because Christ has not intentionally " died for the persons in ques-
tion." Is the end, then, as Poole, or rather his continuator states
it, that the Holy Spirit may " try how far a natural man may be
raised" without ceasing to be so 1 If that is affirmed, for whose sake
is the experiment tried 1 Not surely for the sake of the Holy Spirit,
whose omniscience needs no instruction by experiment : not fpr

Second.] theological institutes. 21

ours ; for this, instead of being- edifying, only puzzles and confounds
us, for who can tell how far this experiment may go, and how far
it is making upon himself? This, too, is so very unworthy an
aspersion upon the Holy Spirit, that it ought to make sober men
very much suspect the system which requires it. Is it then, finally,
as some have affirmed, to make the persons more guilty, and to
heighten their condemnation 1 How few Calvinists, in the present
day, are bold enough to affirm this, although the advocates of that
system have formerly done it ; and yet this is the only practical end
which their system will allow to be assigned to such an act as that
which, by a strange abuse of terms, is called the operation of
" common grace" in the hearts of the reprobate. In no other
practical end can it issue, but to aggravate their guilt and damna-
tion, as the old divines of this school perceived and acknowledged.
Either, then, their interpretation of these passages affirms a change
in the principles and feelings of the persons spoken of by the apostle
in this epistle, much above the capacity and power of reprobates,
greatly as it falls below the real import of the terms used ; or else
those who advocate the doctrine of reprobation are bound to the
revolting conclusion, that the Holy Spirit thus works in them only
to promote and deepen their destruction.

To that class of texts, which make it the duty of men to believe
the Gospel, and threaten them with punishment for not believing,
and which we adduced to prove, by necessary implication, that
Christ died for all men, it has been replied ; that it is the duty of
all men to believe the Gospel, whether they are interested in the
death of Christ or not ; and that they are guilty and deserving of
punishment for not believing it. By this argument it is conceived,
that all such passages are made consistent with the doctrine of the
limited extent of the death of Christ.

On both sides, then, it is granted, that it is the bounden duty of
all men who hear the Gospel to believe it, and that the violation ol
this duty induces condemnation ; but if Christ died not for all such
persons, we think it is plain, that it cannot be their duty to belie\re
the Gospel ; and if this can be established, then does the scriptural
principle of the obligation of all men to believe, which is acknow-
ledged on both sides, refute all limitation of the extent p( Christ's
atonement.

To settle this point, it is necessary to determine what is meant
by believing the Gospel. Some writers in this controversy seem to
take it only in the sense of giving credit to the Gospel as a Divine
Revelation ; and not for accepting and trusting in it in order to sal-
vation. But we have, in the New Testament, no such division of

H THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the obligation of believing into two distinct duties, one laid upon one
class of persons, and the other upon another class. So far from
this, the faith which the Gospel requires of all, is trust in the Gos-
pel ; — " repentance towards God, and faith (trust) in our Lord
Jesus Christ." Will any say, that when all men are commanded
" every where to repent," two kinds of repentance are intended,
one ineffectual, the other effectual ; one to death, the other to life ?
And if not, will he contend that God commands one kind of faith
to some, a faith which cannot lead to salvation ; another kind of
faith, which does lead to salvation, to others ] that he commands a
dead faith to the reprobate, a living faith to the elect 1 For, accord-
ing to the intention of the command, such must be the duty ; and
if it is the duty of the reprobate to believe with the mere faith of
assent, which, as to them, is dead, then no more was ever required
of them, in the intention of God, than this dead faith. But if men
will affirm this, they must show us such a restricted and modified
command from God ; and they must point out, in the commands
which we have to believe in Christ, such a distinction of the obliga-
tion of believing into a higher and lower duty. There is no such
modified command, and there is no such distinction ; but, on the
contrary, the faith which is required of all is that, and not less than
that, whereof cometh salvation ; for with remission of sins and sal-
vation it is constantly connected. "He that believeth shall be
saved." " Whosoever believeth on him shall not perish." " That
believing ye might have life through his name." " To him give all
the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in
him shall receive remission of sins." The faith, then, required of
all, is true faith ; true faith following true repentance, the trust of
a true penitent in the sacrifice of Christ as offered for his sins, that
he may be forgiven, and received into the family of God.

If this, then, be the faith which is required of all who hear the
Gospel, it is not, and cannot be the duty, of those to believe the
Gospel, in the scriptural sense of believing, for whom Christ died
not. 1. Because it is impossible, and God cannot command a
thing impossible, and then punish men for not doing it ; for this
contradicts all notions of justice and benevolence. Nor does it alter
the case whether the impossibility arises from a positive necessitat-
ing decree, or from withholding the aid necessary to enable them
to comply with the command ; such persons as those for whom
Christ died not, never had, and never can have, the power to exer-
cise the saving faith which is enjoined upon them ; and being
impossible to them, it never could be the subject of express com-
mand and obligation as to them ; which nevertheless it is. 2. B<'~

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 23

cause, according to the Calvinistic opinion, it is not in the intention
of God that they should believe and be saved : what, therefore, he
never intended, he could not command ; and yet he has plainly
commanded it. 3. Because what all are bound to believe or trust
in, is true : but it is false, according to this system, that Christ died
for the reprobate, and therefore they are not bound to believe, or
trust in him, though they are both commanded to believe, and
threatened with condemnation if they believe not.

Here, then, is the dilemma into which all must fall, who deny
that the necessary inference from the universal obligation to believe
in Christ, is, as we have stated it, that he died for all. If they deny
the universality of the obligation to believe, they deny plain and
express Scripture, which commands all men to believe ; if they
affirm the obligation to believe to be universal, they hold that men
are bound to do that which is impossible ; that the Lawgiver com-
mands them to do what he never intended they should do ; and that
they are bound to believe and trust in what is not true, namely, that
Christ died for them, and thus to lean upon a broken reed, and to
trust then salvation to a delusion.

This is a difficulty which the theologians of this school have felt.
The synod of Dort says, (9) " It is the promise of the Gospel, that
whosoever believes in Christ crucified should not perish, but have
everlasting life ; which promise, together with the injunction of
repentance and faith, ought promiscuously and without distinction,
to be declared and published to all men and people to whom God
in his good pleasure sends the Gospel." But as some of the later
Calvinists found themselves perplexed with this statement, they
began to differ from the synod ; and, allowing that Christ died for
all whom he commands to believe in him, denied that God had
commanded all men so to believe. (1) These divines chose to fall
on the opposite horn of the dilemma, and thus expressly to deny
the word of God. Others have endeavoured to escape the difficulty
by making faith in Christ a command of the moral law, under which
even reprobates, as they take it, unquestionably are, and argue,
that as by the principle of moral law, all are bound to believe every
thing which God hath revealed, so by that law all are bound to
believe in Christ, and, failing of that, are by the moral law justly
condemned. It were easy, in answer to this, to show, that no man
in the state of a reprobate, as they represent it, is under law of any
kind, except a law of necessity to do evil ; but waiving this, it wen
as easy to prove, that, because the moral law obliges us, " in prin-

(fl) Act. Syn. Dord. part 1, cap. 2. art. 5. (1) Vide Womack's Arcana Do<r-
matum. p. 67

24 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

ciple," to do all which God commands, the command to the Jews
to circumcise their children was a command of the moral law, as
that to believe in Christ is a command of the moral law, because,
in principle, it obliges us to believe what God has revealed. But
should it be admitted that all are bound, by the moral law, to believe
all that God reveals, yet, according to them, it is not revealed that
Christ died for all ; this we contend for, but they contend against :
all are not, upon that very principle, therefore, bound to believe
that Christ died for them. Farther, those who hold this notion,
contend that the moral law commands us to do a thing impossible,
and contrary to truth ; and thus they fall upon the other horn of
the dilemma.

The last class of texts we have adduced in favour of general
redemption consist of those which impute the blame and fault of
their non-salvation to men themselves. If Christ died for all men,
so as to make their salvation practicable, then the fault, according
to the doctrine of Scripture, lies in themselves ; if he died not so for
them that they may be saved, then the bar to their salvation lies out
of themselves, and in the absence of any saving provision for them
in the Gospel, which is contrary to the doctrine of Scripture.

We enter not now upon the questions of the invincibility of grace,
and free and bound will. These will come under consideration in
their place ; and we now confine ourselves to the argument, as it
is grounded upon texts of this class, as given above. The common
reply to our argument, grounded upon these texts, at least among
the more moderate kind of Calvinists, is, that the fault is indeed in
the will of man, and that if men willed to come to Christ, that they
might have life, they would have life ; and thus, they would have it
understood, that the argument is answered. This, however, we
deny : they have neither refuted it, nor escaped its force ; and
nothing which is thus apparently conceded weakens the force of
the conclusion, that if the bar to men's salvation be wholly in them-
selves, it lies not in the want of a provision made for their salvation
in the Gospel ; and therefore they are so interested in the death of
Christ, that they may be saved by it.

For let us put the case as to the non-elect, who are indeed the
persons in question. Either it is possible for them to will to come
to Christ, and to believe in him ; or it is not. If the former, then
they may come to Christ, and believe in him, without obtaining life
and salvation ; for he can dispense these blessings only to those for
whom he purchased them, which, it is contended, he did for the
elect only. If the latter, then the bar to their salvation is not in
themselves ; but in that which makes it impossible for them to will

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 25

to come to Christ, and to believe in him. If it be said, that though
this is impossible to them, yet that still the bar is in themselves,
because it is in the obstinacy and perverseness of their own wills,
we ask, whether the natural will of the elect is so much better than
that of the reprobate, that by virtue of that better natural will, they
come to Christ, and believe in him? This they will deny, and
ascribe their willing, and coming to Christ, and believing in him,
to the influence only of Divine grace. It will follow then, from this,
that the bar to this same kind of willing, and believing, on the part
of the reprobate, lies not in themselves, where the Scriptures con-
stantly place it, and so charge it upon men as their fault, and the
reason of their condemnation ; but in something without them, even
in the determination and decree of God not to bestow upon them,
that influence of his grace, by which this good will, and this power
to believe in Christ, are wrought in the elect : which is precisely
what the synod of Dort has affirmed. " This was the most free
counsel, gracious will, and intention of God the Father ; that the
lively and saving efficacy of the most precious death of his Soil
should manifest itself in all the elect, for the bestowing upon them
only, justifying faith ; and bringing them infallibly by it unto
eternal life."(2) This doctrine cannot, therefore, be true ; for the
Scriptures plainly place the bar to the salvation of them that are
lost, in themselves, and charge the fault only on the wilful disobe-
dience and unbelief of men ; whilst this opinion places it in the
refusal, on the part of God, to bestow that grace upon the non-elect,
by which alone the evil of their natural will can be removed.

Nor is this in the least remedied by arguing, that as Christ Is
rejected freely and voluntarily by the natural will of man, the guilt
is still chargeable upon himself. For, not here to anticipate what
may be said on the freedom of the will, it is confessed by Calvinists
that the will of the reprobate is not free to choose to come to
Christ, and believe in him, since without grace, not even the elect
can do this. But if it were free to choose Christ, and believe in
him, the not doing it would not be chargeable upon them as a fault
For they do not reject Christ as a Saviour, since he is not offered
to them as such ; and they sin not, by not believing, that is, by not
trusting in Christ for salvation. For as it is not the will of God
that, they should so believe, they violate no command given to them
to believe, unless it be held that God commands them to do that
which he wills they should not do ; which is only absurdly to say
that he wills, and he does not will the same thing. And seeing that
his commands are the declarations of his will, if the command

(2) Cap. 2, Art. 8
v., HI. 1

26 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

reaches to them, it is a declaration that he wills that concerning
them, which, on this system, he does not will ; and this contradic-
tion all are bound to maintain, who charge the want of faith, as a
fault upon those to whom the power of believing is not imparted.

But the argument from this class of texts is not exhausted. They
not only place that bar and fault which prevents the salvation of
men in themselves; but they as expressly exclude God from all.
participation in it, contrary to the doctrine before us. " He willeth
all men to be saved ;" he has "no pleasure in the death of him that
dieth." " He sent his Son not to condemn the world, but that the
World through him might be saved ;" and he invites all, beseeches
all, obtests all, and makes even his threatenings merciful, since he
interposes them to prevent men from going on still in their trespasses^
and involving themselves in final ruin.

Perhaps not many Calvinists in the present day are disposed to
resort to the ancient subterfuge, of a secret and a revealed will of
God ; (3) and yet it is difficult to conceive how they can avoid
admitting this notion, without totally denying that which is so clearly
written, that God " willeth all men to be saved, and to come to the
knowledge of the truth ;" and that he commands, by his apostle,
that prayers should be made " for all men." The universality of
such declarations has already been established ; and no way is left
for escaping the difficulty in this direction. The incompatibility of
such declarations, with the limited extent of Christ's death, is there-
fore obvious, unless the term " ivill" can be modified. But if God
declares his will in absolute terms, whilst he has yet secret reserves
of a contrary kind, (to say nothing of the injury done, by such a
notion, to the character of the God of truth, whose words are
without dross of falsehood, " as silver tried in a furnace of earth,
purified seven times ;") this is to will that all men may be saved in
u-ord, and yet not to will it in fact, which is in truth not to will it at
all. No subtlety of distinction can reconcile this. Nor, according
to tins scheme of doctrine, can God in any way, will the salvation
of the non-elect. It is only under one condition, that he wills the
salvation of any man : namely, through the death of Christ. His
justice required this atonement for sin ; and he could not will man
to be saved to the dishonour of his justice. If then that atonement
does not extend to all men, he cannot will the salvation of all men ;
for such of them as are not interested in this atonement, could not
be saved consistently with his righteous administration, and he could
not, therefore, will it. If, then, he wills the non-elect to be savedr

(3) The scholastic terms are voluntas signi, and voluntas bene plariti.a. signified
or revealed will, and a will of pleasure or purple

SECOKD. | THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 2"

In any sense, he must will this independently of Christ's sacrifice for
sins ; and if he cannot will this for the reason just given, he cannot
" will all men to be saved," which is contrary to the texts quoted :
he cannot, therefore, invite all to be saved ; he cannot beseech all
by his ministers to be reconciled to him ; for these acts could only
proceed from his willing them to be saved : and for the same reason,
" all men" ought not to be prayed for by those who hold this doc-
trine, since they assume, that it is not the will of God that all men
should be saved. Thus they repeal the apostle's precept, as well
as the principle upon which it is built, by mere human authority ;
or else they so interpret the principle, as to impeach the truth of
God, and so practise the precept, as to indulge reserves in their
own mind, similar to those they feign to be in the mind of God.
Whilst, therefore, it remains on record, that " God willeth all men
to be saved, and to come to the knowledge of the truth ;" and that
he " willeth not that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance," it must be concluded, that Christ died for all ; and
that the reason of the destruction of any part of our race lies not
in the want of a provision for their salvation ; not in any limitation
of the purchase of Christ, and the administration of his grace ; but
in their obstinate rejection of both.

CHAPTER XXVI.

The same Subject Continued.

So far, then, we have advanced in this discussion as to show,
that whilst no passage of Scripture can be adduced, or is even
pretended to exist, which declares that Christ did not die equally
for all men, there are numerous passages which explicitly, and in
terms which cannot, by any fair interpretation, be wrested from that,
meaning, declare the contrary ; and that there are others, as nume-
rous, which contain the doctrine by necessary implication and
inference. To implication and inference the Calvinist divines also
resort, and the more so, as they have not a direct text in favour of
their scheme. It is necessary, therefore, in order to obtain a com-
prehensive view of this controversy, compressed into as narrow
limits as possible, to examine those parts of Scripture which, ac-
cording to their inferential interpretations, limit not merely the
actual, but the intentional efficacy of the death of Christ to the
elect only.

The first are those passages which treat of persons, said to be
elected, foreknown, and predestinated to the spiritual and celestial

28 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAR'I

blessing's of the new dispensation ; and the argument from the texts
in which these distinctions occur, is, that the persons so called,
elected, foreknown, and predestinated, are, by that very distinction,
marked out as the only persons to whom the death of Christ inten-
tionally extends.

We reserve it to another place to state the systematic views which
the followers of Calvin, in their different shades of opinion, take of
the doctrines of election, &c, lest our more simple inquiry into the
sense of Scripture should be disturbed by extraneous topics ; and
we are now, therefore, merely called to consider, how far this
argument, which is professedly drawn from Scripture and not from
metaphysical principles, is supported or refuted, by an examination
of those portions of Holy Writ on which it is usually built : and it
will not prove a difficult task to show, that, when fairly interpreted,
they contain nothing which obliges us to narrow our interpretation
of those passages which extend the benefit of the death of Christ to
all mankind ; and that, in some views, they strongly corroborate
their most extended meaning. Of a divine election, or choosing-
and separation from others, we have three kinds mentioned in the
Scriptures.

The first is the election of individuals to perform some particu-
lar and special service. Cyrus was " elected" to rebuild the temple ;
the twelve apostles were "chosen," elected, to their office by Christ ;
St. Paul was a " chosen," or elected, " vessel," to be the apostle of
the Gentiles. This kind of election to special office and service has,
however, manifestly no relation to the limitation of eternal salvation,
either in respect of the persons themselves so chosen, or of others.
With respect to themselves, it did not confer upon them an absolute
security. One of the twelve elected apostles was Judas, who fell
and was lost ; and St. Paul confesses his own personal liability to
become "a castaway," after all his zeal and abundant labours.
With respect to others, the twelve apostles, and St. Paul afterwards,
were "elected" to preach the Gospel in order to the salvation of all
to whom they had access.

The second kind of election which we find in Scripture, is the
election of nations, or bodies of people, to eminent religious privi-
leges, and in order to accomplish, by their superior illumination, the
merciful purposes of God, in benefiting other nations or bodies of
people. Thus the descendants of Abraham, the Jews, were chosen
to receive special revelations of truth ; and to be " the people of
God," to be his visible church, and publicly to observe and uphold
his worship. " The Lord thy God hath chosen thee to be a peculiar
people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 2(3

earth." " The Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and
he chose their seed after them, even you, above all people." It was
especially on account of the application of the terms elect, chosen,
and peculiar, to the Jewish people, that they were so familiarly
used by the apostles in their epistles addressed to the believing Jews
and Gentiles, then constituting the church of Christ in various
places. For Christians were the subjects, also, of this second kind
of election ; the election of bodies of men to be the visible people
and church of God in the world, and to be endowed with peculiar
privileges. Thus they became, though in a more special and exalted
sense, the chosen people, the elect of God. We say in a more
special sense, because as the entrance into the Jewish church was
by natural birth, and the entrance into the Christian church, properly
so called, is by faith and a spiritual birth, these terms, although many
became Christians by mere profession, and enjoyed various privi-
leges in consequence of their people or nation being chosen to
receive the Gospel, have generally respect, in the New Testament,
to bodies of true believers, or to the whole body of true believers
as such. They are not, therefore, to be interpreted, according to
the scheme of Dr. Taylor, of Norwich, by the constitution of the
Jewish, but by the constitution of the Christian church.

To understand the nature of this " election," as applied some-
times to particular bodies of Christians, as when St. Peter says,
" the church which is at Babylon, elected together with you," and
sometimes to the whole body of believers every where ; and also
the reason of the frequent use of the term election, and of the occur-
rence of allusions to the fact, it is to be remembered, that a great
religious revolution, so to speak, had occurred in the age of the
apostles ; with the full import of which we cannot, without calling
in the aid of a little reflection, be adequately impressed. This was
no other than the abrogation of the church state of the Jews,
which had continued for so many ages. They had been the onI\
visibly acknowledged people of God in all the nations of the earth ;
for whatever pious people might have existed in other nations, they
were not, in the sight of men, and collectively, acknowledged as
" the people of Jehovah." They had no written revelations, no
appointed ministry, no forms of authorized initiation into his church
and covenant, no appointed holy days, no sanctioned ritual. All
these were peculiar to the Jews, who were, therefore, an elected
and peculiar people. This distinguished honour they were about
to lose. They might have retained it, had they, by believing the
Gospel, admitted the believing Gentiles of all nations to share it
with them ; but the great reason of their peculiarity and election.

SO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

as a nation, was terminated by the coming of the Messiah, who was
to be " a light to lighten the Gentiles," as well as " the glory of his
people Israel." Their pride and consequent unbelief resented this,
which will explain their enmity to the believing part of the Gentiles,
who, when that which St. Paul calls " the fellowship of the mystery"
was fully explained, chiefly by the glorious ministry of that apostle
himself, were called into this church relation and state of visible
acknowledgment as the people of God, which the Jews had for-
merly enjoyed, and that with even a higher degree of glory, in pro-
portion to the superior spirituality of the new dispensation. It was
this doctrine which excited that strong irritation in the minds of the
unbelieving Jews, and in some partially Christianized ones, to which
so many references are made in the New Testament. They were
" provoked," were made " jealous ;" and were often roused to the
madness of persecuting opposition by it. There was then a new
election of a new people of God, to be composed of Jews, not
by virtue of their natural descent, but of their faith in Christ,
and of Gentiles of all nations, also believing, and put, as believers,
on equal ground with the believing Jews ; and there was also a
rejection, a reprobation, if the term please any one better; but
not an absolute one : for the election was offered to the Jews
first, in every place, by offering them the Gospel. Some embraced
it, and submitted to be the elect people of God, on the new ground
of faith, instead of the old one of natural descent ; and therefore
the apostle, Rom. xi, 7, calls the believing part of the Jews, " the
election," in opposition to those who opposed this "election of
grace," and still clung to their former and now repealed election as
Jews and the descendants of Abraham ; — " but the election hath
obtained it, and the rest were blinded." The offer had been made
to the whole nation ; all might have joined the one body of believ-
ing Jews and believing Gentiles ; but the major part of them refused :
they would not " come in to the supper ;" they made " light of it;"
light of an election founded on faith, and which placed the relation
of " the people of God" upon spiritual attainments, and offered to
them only spiritual blessings. They were, therefore, deprived of
election and church relationship of every kind : — their temple was
burned ; their political state abolished ; their genealogies confound-
ed ; their worship annihilated ; and all visible acknowledgment of
them by God as a church withdrawn, and transferred to a church
henceforward to be composed chiefly of Gentiles : and thus, says
St. Paul, Rom. x, 19, "were fulfilled the words of Moses, I will
provoke you to jealousy by them that are no people, and by a foolish
(Ignorant and idolatrous) people I will anger you."

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 31

It is easy now to see what is the import of the " calling" and
" election" of the Christian church, as spoken of in the New Tes-
tament. It was not the calling and the electing of one nation in
particular to succeed the Jews ; but it was the calling and the
electing of believers in all nations, wherever the Gospel should be
preached, to be in reality what the Jews had been but typically, and,
therefore, in an inferior degree, the visible church of God, "his
people," under Christ " the Head ;" with an authenticated revela-
tion ; with an appointed ministry, never to be lost ; with authorized
worship ; with holy days and festivals ; with instituted forms of
initiation ; and with special protection and favour.

This second kind of election being thus explained, we may inquire,
whether any thing arises out of it, either as it respects the Jewish
church, or the Christian church, which obliges us in any degree to
limit the explicit declarations of Scripture, as to the universal extent
of the intentional benefit of the atonement of Christ.

With respect to the ancient election of the Jews to be the pecu-
liar people and visible church of God, we may observe,

1 . That it did not argue such a limitation of the saving mercy of
God to them, as that their election secured the salvation of every
Jew individually. This Avill be acknowledged by all ; for, as the
foundation of their church state was their natural relation to Abra-
ham, and our Lord, with allusion to this, says to Nicodemus, " that
which is born of the flesh is flesh," none of them could be saved by
virtue of being " Jews outwardly."

2. That it did not argue, that sufficient, though not equal means
of salvation, were not left to the non-elected Gentile nations. These
were still a " law unto themselves ;" and " in every nation," says
St. Peter, "he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is
accepted with him."

3. That, so far from the election of the Jewish nation arguing
that the mercy of God was restrained from the Gentile nations, it.
is manifest that, great reason as the Almighty had to be provoked
by their idolatries, the election of the Jews was intended for their
benefit also ; that it was not only designed to preserve truth, but to
diffuse it, and to counteract the spread of superstition and idolatry.
The miracles wrought from age to age among them, exalted " Jeho-
vah" above the gods of the heathen ; rays of light from their sacred
books and institutions spread far beyond themselves ; the temple of
Solomon had its court of the Gentiles, and the " stranger" from " a
far country" had access to it, and enjoyed his right of praying to the
true God ; their captivities and dispersions wondrously fulfilled the
purposes of justice as to them, and of mercy as to the nations into

•32 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- [PART

which they were carried ; and their whole history bore an illustrious
part in that series of the Divine dispensations by which the Gentile
world was prepared for the coming of Christ, and the establishment
of his religion. This subject has already been adverted to and illus-
trated in the first part of this work. Jerusalem was, in an inferior
sense, literally " the joy of the whole earth ;" and " in the seed of
Abraham," all the nations of the earth have, in all ages, in some
degree, been blessed.

With respect to the " election" of the Christian church, we also
observe,

1 . That neither does its election suppose such a special grace of
God, as secures infallibly the salvation of every one of its members ;
that is, in other words, of every elected person. For to pass over
the case of those who are Christians but in name, even true Chris-
tians are exhorted to give diligence to make their "calling and
election sure ;" and are warned against " turning back to perdition."
We have also seen, in the case of the apostates mentioned in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, that, in point of fact, some of those who
had thus been actually elected, and brought into a state of salvation,
had fallen away into a condition of extreme hazard, or of utter
hopelessness.

2. That the election of Christians, as members of the church of
Christ, concludes nothing against the saving mercy of God being
still exercised as to those who are not of the church. Even the
Calvinists cannot deny this ; for many who are not now of the body
of the visible and true church of Christ, may, according to their
scheme, be yet called and chosen into that body, and thus partake
of an election which, whilst they are notoriously wicked and alien
from the church of Christ, they do not actually partake of, whatever
may be the secret purposes of God concerning them.

3. That Christians are thus elected, and made the church of God,
not in consequence of others being excluded from the compassions
and redeeming mercy of Christ ; but for their benefit and salvation,
that they also may be called into the fellowship of the Gospel. " Ye
are the light of the world ;" " ye are the salt of the earth." But in
what sense could the church be " the light of the world," were
there no capacity in the world to receive the same light with which
it is itself enlightened 1 or " the salt of the earth," if it did not exist
for the purifying of the mass beyond itself, with the same purity 1
Yet if such a capacity exists in " the world," it is from the grace of
God alone that it derives it, and not from nature ; a grace which
could be imparted to the world only in consequence of the death of
Christ. Thus nothing is to be aruued from the actual election of

SECOND.

THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 33

the Christian church, as God's visible and acknowledged people on
earth, in favour of the doctrine that election limits the benefits of
our Lord's atonement ; but, on the contrary, this election of the
church has, for one of its final causes, the illumination of the world.
But as Calvinistic commentators have so generally confounded this
collective election with personal election, (a doctrine to which, in its
proper place, we shall presently advert,) and have, in consequence,
misunderstood and misinterpreted the argument of St. Paul, in the
ix, x, and xi chapters of his Epistle to the Romans : this celebrated
discourse of the apostle requires to be briefly examined.

Let the reader, then, take the epistle in his hand, and follow the
argument in these chapters, with reference to the determining of
the two main questions at issue, namely, whether personal or col-
lective election be the subject of the apostle's discourse ; and
whether the election, of which he speaks, of whatever kind it may
be, is, in the sense of the Calvinists, unconditional.

Let us examine the discourse, first, with reference to the question
of personal or collective election.

It is acknowledged by all, that, whatever other subjects the
apostle may or may not connect with it, he treats of the casting oft'
of the Jews, as the visible church of God, and the calling of the
Gentiles into that relation. For the case of the Jews he expresses
great " sorrow of heart ;" not indeed because God had now deter-
mined to compose his visible church upon a new principle, that of
faith, and to constitute it no longer upon that of natural descent
from Abraham ; for to announce this doctrine St. Paul was chosen
to be an apostle, and to call, by earnest and extensive labours, not
only the Gentiles, but the Jews thankfully to submit to it, by re-
ceiving the Gospel : but he had great " sorrow of heart," both on
account of their having rejected this gracious offer, and of the
calamities which the approaching destruction of their nation would
bring upon them, ver. 1, 2. The enumeration which he makes in
verses 4 and 5, of the religious honours and privileges of the Jewish
nation, whilst it remained a church accomplishing the purposes of
God, shows that he did not intend, by proclaiming the new founda-
tion on which God would now construct his church, and elect to
himself a people out of all nations, to detract at all from the divinity
or glory of the Mosaic dispensation.

The objection made, in the minds of the Jews, to this doctrine
of the abolition of the Jewish visible church as founded upon descent
from Abraham, in the line of Isaac, was, as we may collect from
ver. 6, that it was contrary to the word and promise of God made
to Abraham. This objection St. Paul first refutes :—" Not as
Vol. III. 5

34 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

though the word of God hath taken none effect," literally " has
fallen," or "fallen to the ground," that is, has not been accomplish-
ed ; or as though this election of a new church, composed only of
believing Jews and Gentiles, was contrary to the promises made to
Abraham, Gen. xvii, 7, 8, " I will establish my covenant between
me and thee, for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee,
and to thy seed after thee." This he proves, from several events,
which the Jews could not deny, as being in the records of their own
history. By these facts he shows, that the exclusion of a part of
the seed of Abraham, at various times, from being the visible church
of God, was not, as the Jews themselves must allow, any violation
of the covenant with Abraham. He first instances the case of the
descendants of Jacob himself, although he was the son of Isaac.
':' All are not Israel, (God's visible church and acknowledged peo-
ple,) who are of Israel," or Jacob ; for a great part of the ten tribes
who had been carried into captivity before the Babylonian invasion
of Judah, had never returned, had never been again collected into
a people, and had, for ages, been cast out of their ancient church
state and relation, though, by natural descent, they were "of Israel,"
that is, descendants of Jacob.

From Jacob he ascends to Abraham, ver. 7 : " Neither, because
they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children," that is, Abra-
ham's " seed" in the sense of the promise ; " but in Isaac," not in
Ishmael, "shall thy seed be called;" "that is, they which are the
children of the flesh," Ishmael by Hagar, and his descendants,
'? these are not the children of God. But the children of the pro-
mise," Isaac, born of Sarah, and his descendants, " are counted for
the seed," meaning, obviously, for that seed to whom the promise
refers. He gives a third instance of this election and exclusion
taken from the children of Isaac, ver. 10-13, " And not only this ;
but when Rebecca, also had conceived by one, even by our father
Isaac ; (for the children being not yet born, neither having done
good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election," the
election of one in preference to the other, " might stand, not of
works, but of him that calleth ;) it was said unto her, The elder
shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but
Esau have I hated." On this last passage, so often perverted to
serve the system of Calvinian election and reprobation, a few
remarks more at large may be allowed.

1. The argument of the apostle, of which this instance is in
continuance, requires us to understand that he is still speaking of
" the seed" intended in the promise, which did not comprise all the
descendants either of Abraham, or Isaac, or Jacob, for he bring?

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 35

instances of exclusion from each ; but such as Cod elected to be
his visible church : he is not therefore speaking of the personal
election or rejection of Isaac, or Ishmael, or Jacob, or Esau ; but
of their descendants in certain lines, as elected to be the acknow-
ledged church of God.

2. This is proved, also, from those passages in the history of
Moses, which furnish the facts on which the apostle reasons, and
which he quotes briefly as being well known to the Jews. " As it
is written, The elder shall serve the younger." Now this is written,
Gen. xxv, 23, " Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner
of people shall be separated from thy bowels ; and the one people
shall be stronger than the other people ; and the elder," the
descendants of the elder, " shall serve the younger." So far, in-
deed, was this prophecy from being intended of Esau personally*
that he himself did never serve his brother Jacob, although he
wantonly surrendered to him Ms birthright. Another passage is
found in the prophet Malachi, i, 2, 3, and expresses God's dealings,
not with the individuals Jacob and Esau ; but with their descend-
ants, who, according to frequent usage in Scripture, are called by
the names of their first ancestors. " Was not Esau Jacob's brother ?
yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and
his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness !" judgments
which fell not upon Esau personally, but upon the Edomites his
descendants.

3. If the apostle, in this instance of Jacob and Esau, speaks of
the rejection or reprobation of individuals, he says nothing at all to
his purpose, because he is discoursing of the rejection of the Jews,
as a nation, from being any longer the visible and acknowledged
church of God in the world ; so that instances of individual repro-
bation would have been impertinent to his purpose. But to proceed
with the apostle's discourse.

Having shown, by these instances, that God had limited the
covenant to a part of the descendants of Abraham, at different
periods, he puts it to the objecting Jews to say, whether, on that
account, there was a failure of his covenant with Abraham ; "What
shall we say then, Is there unrighteousness with God 1 God forbid."
The word unrighteousness is usually taken in the sense of injustice,
but is sometimes used in the sense of falsehood and unfaithfulness,
by the writers of the New Testament, as well as by the LXX ; and
in this sense it well agrees with the apostle's reasoning ; " Is there
then unfaithfulness with God," because he has so frequently limited
the promise made to the seed of Abraham, to particular branches
of that seed 1 The apostle denies that in this there was any wfttith-

38 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

fulness, or, in the sense of injustice, which perhaps is to be prefer-
red, any " unrighteousness in God ;" and the Jews themselves were
bound to agree with him, since, as the apostle adds, it was a gene-
ral principle laid down in their own law, by the Lawgiver himself
when speaking to Moses, and by which, therefore, all such promises
of special favour must be interpreted, — " I will have mercy on
whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I
will have compassion." The connexion of these words, as they
stand in Exodus xxxiii, 19, shows that the mercy and grace here
spoken of, refer not, as Beza would have it, to that mercy exercised
to individuals which supposes misery, and consists in the exercise
of pardon ; but to the granting of special favours and privileges.
For the words are spoken to Moses, in answer to his prayer, " I
beseech thee, show me thy glory." To him God had before said,
verse 1 7, ¥ Thou hast found grace in my sight, and I know thee by
thy name." He was not, therefore, in the case of a guilty, miserable
man. Nor do the words refer to the forgiveness of the people at
his intercession. This had been done ; the transaction, as to them,
had been finished, as the history shows ; and then Moses, encour-
aged by the success of his intercessions for them, makes a bold but
wholly personal request for himself. " And he said, I beseech thee,
show me thy glory. And he said, I will make all my goodness pass
before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee ;
and will be gracious," in showing these great condescensions, " to
whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show
mercy." God has a right to select whom he pleases to enjoy spe-
cial privileges ; in this there is no " unrighteousness," and, there-
fore, in limiting those favours to such branches of Abraham's seed,
as he chose to elect, neither his justice nor his truth was impeached.
This is obvious, when the words are interpreted of the election of
collective bodies of men, and of the individuals which compose
them, to peculiar favours and religious privileges ; whilst yet all
others have still the means of salvation. The onus lies only upon
them who interpret this part of Scripture of personal unconditional
election and reprobation, to show how it can be a " righteous" pro-
ceeding to punish men for not availing themselves of means of
salvation which are never afforded them. This is manifestly " un-
righteous ;" but in the election and rejection spoken of by the
apostle, he expressly denies that there is " unrighteousness with
God ;" he does this in a solemn manner, " God forbid :" and, there-
fore, the kind of election and rejection, of which he speaks, is not
the unconditional election and reprobation of individuals to or from
eternal salvation.

.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. .j?

The conclusion of the apostle's answer to the objection of the
Jews, that the casting off a part of the Jewish nation, even all who
did not believe in Christ, Was contrary to the promises made to
Abraham, is, " So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that
runneth, but of God that showeth mercy." He grants special
favours, as the term " showing mercy," in the preceding verse, has
been already proved to mean ; and in granting these special favours
he often acts contrary to the designs and efforts of men, and frus-
trates both. The allusion contained in these words, to the case of
Isaac and Esau, is, therefore, highly beautiful and appropriate —
" it is not of him that to'Jleth, nor of him that runneth" Isaac willed
that Esau, the first-born, should have the blessing ; and Esau ran
for the venison as the means of obtaining it ; but still Jacob obtained
it. The blessing was not, however, a personal one, but referred
to the people of whom Jacob was to be the progenitor, as the history
given by Moses will show. Thus this case also affords no example
of personal election.

The apostle having proved that there was neither unfaithfulness
nor unrighteousness in God, in selecting from his own good pleasure,
from his sovereignty if the term please better, the persons to be
endowed with special religious honours and privileges, proceeds to
show, with reference not only to the exclusion of the Jews, as a
nation, from the visible church, but also to the terrible judgments
which our Lord himself had predicted, and which were about to
come upon them, that he exercises also the prerogative of making
some notorious sinners, and especially when they set themselves to
oppose his purposes, the eminent and unequivocal objects of his
displeasure. Here again he uses for illustration an example taken
from the Jewish Scriptures. But let the example be marked. Had
it been his intention to show, that the personal election of Isaac and
Jacob necessarily implied the personal reprobation of Ishmael and
Esau ; and that their not receiving special privileges necessarily cut
them off from salvation, so that being left to themselves they became
objects of wrath, then would he have selected them as his illustrative
examples, for this would have been required by his argument. But
he selects Pharaoh, not a descendant of Abraham ; a person not
involved in the cases of non-election which had taken place in
Abraham's family ; but a notoriously wicked prince, and one who
resolved to oppose himself to the designs of God in the deliverance
of Israel from bondage. His doctrine, then, manifestly is, that when
these two characters meet in individuals, or in nations, notorious
vice and flagrant opposition to God's plans and purposes, he often
makes them the objects of his special displeasure ; giving them up

38 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to the hardness of their hearts, and postponing their destruction to
make it more impressively manifest to the world. In every respect
Pharaoh was a most appropriate example to illustrate the case of
the body of the unbelieving Jews, who, when the apostle wrote,
were under the sentence of a terrible excision. Pharaoh had
several times hardened his own heart ; now God hardens it, that is,
in Scripture language, withdraws his all gracious interposition, and
gives him up. So the Jews had hardened their hearts against
repeated calls of Christ and his apostles ; now God was about to
give them up, as a nation, to destruction. Pharaoh was not sud-
denly cut off, but was spared ; " for this same purpose have I
raised thee up" from the effect of so many plagues ; that is, I have
not destroyed thee outright. The LXX translate, " thou hast been
preserved ;" for the Hebrew word rendered by us, " raised up,"
never signifies to bring a person or thing into being, but to preserve,
support, establish, or make to stand. Thus, also, the Jews had not
been instantly cut off; but had been "endured with much long
suffering," to give them an opportunity of repentance, of which
many availed themselves ; and the remainder were still endured,
though they were filling up the measure of their iniquities, and
would, in the end, but by their own fault, display more eminently
the justice and severity of God. Pharaoh's crowning offence was
his rebellious opposition to the designs of God in taking Israel out
of Egypt, and establishing them in Canaan as an independent nation,
and as the church of God ; the Jews filled up the measure of their
iniquities by endeavouring to withstand the purpose of God as to the
Gentiles ; his purpose to elect a church, composed of both Jews
and Gentiles, only on the ground of faith, and this made the cases
parallel. Therefore, says the apostle, it follows from all these exam-
ples, that " he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy," gives
special religious advantages to those whom he wills to elect for this
purpose ; " and whom he will," whom he chooses to select as
examples from among notorious sinners who rebelliously oppose
his designs, " he hardeneth," or gives up to a hardness which they
themselves have cherished. In verse 19, the Jew is again intro-
duced as an objector. " Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth
he yet find fault 1 for who hadi resisted his will 1" And to this St.
Paul answers, " Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against
God 1 Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast
thou made me thus ?' verse 20. The usual way in Avhich the
objection is explained, by non-Calvinistic commentators, is ; — if the
continuance of the Jews in a state of disobedience was the conse-
quence of the determination of God to leave them to themselves.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 39

why should God still find fault 1 If they had become obdurate by
the judicial withholding of his grace, why should the Jews still be
blamed, since his will had not been resisted, but accomplished 1 If
this be the sense of the objection, then the import of the apostle's
answer Avill be, that it is both perverse and wicked for a nation
justly given up to obduracy, " to reply against God," or " debate"
the case with him ; and that it ought, silently at least to submit to
its penal dereliction, recollecting that God has an absolute power
over nations, not only to raise them to peculiar honours and privi-
leges, and to take them away, as " the potter has power over the
clay to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour ;" but
to leave them to fill up the measure of their sins, that his judgments
may be the more conspicuous. That ihis is a better and more con-
sistent sense than that forced upon these words by Calvinistic com-
mentators, may be freely admitted ; but it is not wholly satisfactory.
For, 1. One sees not what can be expected from a people judi-
cially given up, but a " replying against God ;" or what end is to be
answered by taking any pains to teach a people, in this hopeless case,
not " to reply against God," but to suffer his judgments in silence.

2. As little discoverable, if this be the meaning, is the appro-
priateness of the apostle's allusion to the parable of the potter, in
Jeremiah, chap, xviii. There Almighty God declares his absolute
power over nations to give them what form and condition he pleases ;
but still under these rules, that he repents of the evil which he
threatens against wicked nations, when they repent, and withdraws
his blessings from them when they are abused. But this illustra-
tion is surely not appropriate to the case of a nation given up to
final obduracy, because the parable of the potter supposes the time
of trial, as to such nations, not yet passed. " O house of Israel,
cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold,- a?
the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of
Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and
concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to
destroy it : if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn
from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto
them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation and
concerning a kingdom, to build .and to plant it ; if it do evil in my
sight, that it obey not my voice, then I will repent of the good,
wherewith I said I would benefit them." There is here no allusion
to nations being kept in a state of judicial dereliction and obduracy,
in order to make their punishment more conspicuous.

3. When the apostle speaks of the potter making of the " same
lump, one vessel to honour and another to dishonour" the last term

40 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAKT

does not fully apply to the state of a people devoted to inevitable
destruction. It is true, that in a following verse he speaks of
" vessels of wrath fitted to destruction ;" but that is in another view
of the case of the Jews, as we shall immediately show ; nor does
he affirm that they were 'fitted to destruction" by God. There he
speaks of what men fit themselves for ; or that fitness for the inflic-
tion of the Divine wrath upon them, which they themselves, by their
perverseness, create. Here he speaks of an act of God, using the
figure of a potter forming some vessels " to honour, others to dis-
honour." But dishonour is not destruction. No potter makes
vessels to destroy them ; and we may be certain, that when Jeremiah
went down to the potter's house, to see him work the clay upon
" the wheel," that the potter was not employed in forming vessels
to destroy them. On the contrary, says the prophet, when the
lump of clay was " marred in his hand ;" so that not for want of
skill in himself, but of proper quality in the clay, it took not the
form he designed, of the same lump he made " another vessel, as it
seemed good to the potter to make it ;" — a meaner vessel, as the
inferior quality or temper of the clay admitted, instead of that finer
and more ornamental form which it would not take. The applica-
tion of this was natural and easy to the house of Israel. It had
become a lump of marred clay in the hands of the potter, which
answered not to his design, and yielded not to his will. This illus-
trated the case of the Jews, previous to the captivity of Babylon :
they were marred in his hand, they were not answering the design
for which he made them a people ; but then the potter gave the
stubborn clay another, though a baser form, and did not cast it
away from him : he put the Jews into the condition of slaves and
captives in a strange land, and reduced them from their honourable
rank among the nations. This might have been averted by their
repentance ; but when the clay became utterly " marred," it was
turned into this inferior, and less honourable form and state. But
all this was not excision ; not destruction. The proceeding was
corrective, as well as punitive ; it brought them to repentance in
Babylon ; and God " repented him of the evil." The potter took
even that vessel which had been made unto dishonour for seventy
years, and made of it again " a vessel unto honour," by restoring
the polity and church relation of the Jews.

4. The interpretation to which these objections are made, also
supposes that the body of the Jewish nation, had arrived at a state
of dereliction already. But this epistle was written several years
before the destruction of Jerusalem ; and although the threatening
had gone forth, as to the dereliction and " hardening;" of the per-

SECOND, j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE'S. 41

severingly impenitent, it is plain, from the labours oi' the apostle
himself to convert the Jews every where, and from his "prayers,
that Israel might be saved," chap, x, 1 ; that he did not conrider
them, as yet at least, in this condition ; though most of them, and
especially those in Judea, were hastening to it.

Let us then take a view of this part of the apostle's discourse, in
some respects different. The objecting Jew, upon the apostle
having stated that God shows mercy, or special favour to whom he
will, and selects out of the mass of sinners whom he pleases, for
marked and eminent punishment, says, "Why doth he yet find
fault ?" " Why does he, by you, his messenger, allowing you your
apostolic commission, continue to reprove and blame the Jews 1 for
who hath resisted his will ?" According to your own doctrine, he
chooses the Gentiles, and rejects us ; his will is accomplished, not
resisted : " why then doth he still find fault V We may grant that
the objection of the Jew goes upon the Calvinistic view of sove-
reignty and predestination, and the shutting out of all conditions ;
but then it is to be remembered, that it is the objection of a perverse
and unbelieving Jew ; and that it is refuted, not conceded, by the
apostle ; for he proceeds wholly to cut off all ground and pretence
of " replying against God," by his reference to the parable of the
potter in Jeremiah. This reference, according to the view we have
already given of that parable, shows, 1. That " the vessel" was not-
made " unto dishonour," until the clay of which it was formed, had
been " marred in the hand of the potter ;" that is, not until trial
being made, it did not conform to his design ; did not work ac-
cording to the pattern in his mind. This is immediately explained
by the prophet ; the nation did not " repent," and " turn from its
wickedness," and therefore God dealt with them " as seemed good"
to him. Thus, in the time of the apostle, the Jewish nation was
the clay marred in the hands of God. From its stubbornness and
want of temper, it had not conformed to his design of bringing it to
the honourable form of a Christian church, in association with the
Gentiles. It was therefore made " a vessel unto dishonour," un-
churched, and disowned of God, as its forefathers had been in
Babylon. This was the dishonoured, degraded condition, of all the
unbelieving Jews in the apostle's day, although the destruction of
their city, and temple, and polity, had not taken place. They were
rejected from being the visible church of God from the rending of
the veil of the temple, or at least, from the day of Pentecost, when
God visibly took possession of his new spiritual church, by the
descent of the Holy Ghost. But all this was their own P fault ;"
and therefore, notwithstanding the objection of the perverse Jew,
Vol. IIT. fi

42 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

" fault" might be found with them who refused the glory of a higher
church estate than that which their circumcision formerly gave ;
and which had been so long and so affectionately offered to them :
with men Avho, not only would not enter " the kingdom of God"
themselves, but attempted to hinder even the Gentiles from entering
in, as far as lay in their power.

2. The reference to the parable of the potter served to silence
their " replying against God" also ; because, in the interpretation
which Jeremiah gives of that parable, he represents even the vessel
formed unto dishonour, out of the mass which was " marred in the
hand of the potter," as still within the reach of the Divine favour,
upon repentance ; and so the conduct of God to the Jews, instead
of proceeding as the Jew in his objection supposes, upon rigid
predestinarian and unconditional grounds, left their state still in their
own hands : they had no need to remain vessels of dishonour, since
the Christian church was still open to them, with its higher than
Jewish honours. The word o[ the Lord, by his prophet, immedi-
ately on his having visited the potter's house, declares that if a nation
" repent," he will repent of the evil designed against, or brought
upon it. The Jews in Babylon, although they were there in the
form of dishonoured vessels, did repent ; and of that dishonoured
mass " vessels of honour" were again made, at their restoration to
their own land. Instead of replying against God, they bowed to
his judgments in silence ; and, as we read in the prayer of Daniel,
confessed them just. Every Jew had this option when the apostle
"Wrote, and has it now ; and therefore St. Paul does not here call
upon the Jews, as persons hardened and derelict of God, to be
silent, and own the justice of God ; but as persons whose silent
submission would be the first step to their recovery. Nor will they
always, even as a people, remain vessels of dishonour ; but be
formed again on the potter's wheel as vessels of honour and glory,
of which the return from Babylon was probably a type. The object
of the apostle was, therefore, to silence a rebellious and perverse
replying against God, by producing a conviction, both of his sovereign
right to dispense his favours as he pleases, and of his justice in
inflicting punishments upon those who set themselves against his
designs ; and thus to bring the Jews to repentance.

3. What follows verse 22 serves farther, and by another view, to
silence the objecting Jew. It was true, that the body of the Jewish
people in Judea, and their polity, would be destroyed : our Lord
had predicted it ; and the apostles frequently, but tenderly, advert
to it. This prediction did not, however, prove that the Jews were,
at. the time the apostle wrote, generally, in a state of entire and

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 43

hopeless dereliction ; or the apostle would not so earnestly have
sought, and so fervently have prayed for their salvation. Nor did
that event itself prove, that those who still remained, and to this
day remain, were given up entirely by God ; for if so, why should
the church have been, in all ages, taught to look for their restora-
tion : no time being fixed, and no signs established, to enable us to
conclude that the dereliction had been taken off] The temporal
punishment of the Jews of Judea had no connexion with the question
of their salvability as a people. To this sad national event, however,
the apostle adverts, in the next verses. " What," or besides, " if
God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known,
endured with much long suffering, the vessels of wrath fitted to
destruction : and that he might make known the riches of his glory,
on the vessels of mercy, which he had before prepared to glory,
even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the
Gentiles. As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people,
who were not my people," &c, ver. 22-25. The apostle does not
state his conclusion, but leaves it to be understood. He intended
it manifestly, farther to silence the perverse objections of the Jews ;
and he gives it as a proof, not of sovereignty alone, but of sove-
reignty and justice ; sovereign mercy to the Gentiles ; but justice
to the Jews : as though he had said, this procedure is also righteous,
and leaves no room to reply against God.

The metaphor of " vessels" is still carried on ; but by " vessels
of dishonour, formed by the potter," and " vessels of wrath, fitted
for destruction," he does not mean vessels in the same condition ;
but in different conditions. This is plain, from the difference of
expression adopted : " vessels unto dishonour," and " vessels of
wrath ;" but as the apostle's reasoning is evidently influenced by
the reference he has made to the parables of the potter, in the
eighteenth and nineteenth chapters of Jeremiah, we must again
refer to that prophecy for illustration. In all the examples which,
in this discourse, St. Paul takes out of the Old Testament, it has
been justly observed by critics, that he quotes briefly, and only so
as to give to the Jews, who were well acquainted with their Scrip-
tures, the key to the whole context in which the passages stand to
which he directs their attention. So in the verses before us, b)
referring to the potter forming the vessels on the wheel, he directs
them to the whole section of prophecy, of which that is the intro-
duction. By examining this it will be found, that the prophet, in
delivering his message, makes use of the work of the potter tor
illustration, in two states, and for two purposes. The first we have
explained : — the giving to the mass, marred in the hands of tho

44 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

potter, another form ; which expressed that dishonoured, and
humbled state, in which the Jews, both for punishment and correc-
tion, were placed under captivity in Babylon. But connected with
the humbling of this proud people, by rejecting them for seventy
years, as God's visible church, was also the terrible destruction of
Jerusalem, and the temple itself. With reference to this, the pro-
phet, in the nineteenth chapter, which is a continuation of the
eighteenth, receives this command, " Thus saith the Lord, Go and
^et a potter's earthen bottle, and take of the ancients of the people,
and the ancients of the priests ; and go forth unto the valley of the
sons of Hinnom, which is by the entry of the east gate, and pro-
claim there the words that I shall tell thee, and say, Hear ye the
word of the Lord, O kings of Judah, and inhabitants of Jerusalem ;
Thus saith the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel ; behold, I will
bring evil upon this place, the which whosoever heareth, his ears
shall tingle." And then having delivered his awful message in
various forms of malediction, he is thus commanded, in verse 10,
" Then shalt thou break the bottle in the sight of the men that go
with thee, and shalt say unto them, Thus saith the Lord of Hosts ;
even so will I break this people and this city, as one breaketh a pot-
ter's vessel, that cannot be made whole again." As this stands in
the same section of prophecy as the parable of the forming of ves-
sels out of clay by the potter, can it be doubted to what the apostle
refers when he speaks, not only of " vessels made unto dishonour,"
but also of vessels of wrath fitted for destruction ?" The potter's
Earthen bottle, broken by Jeremiah, was " a vessel of wrath fitted
for destruction," though not in the intention of the potter who formed
it ; and the breaking or destruction of it, represented, as the pro-
phet himself says, the destruction of the city, temple, and polity of
the Jews, by the invasion of the forces of the king of Babylon. The
coming destruction of the temple, city, and polity of the Jews by
the Romans was thereby fitly represented by the same figure in
words, that is, the destruction of an earthen vessel by violent frac-
ture, as the former calamity had been represented by it in action.
Farther, the circumstances of these two great national punishments
signally answer to each other. In the former, the Jews ceased to
be the visible church of God for seventy years ; in the latter, they
have been also unchurched for many ages. Their temporary rejec-
tion as the visible church of God when they were taken into cap-
tivity by Nebuchadnezzar, was marked, also, by circumstances of
severe and terrible vengeance, by invasion, and the destruction of
their political state. Their longer rejection, as God's church, was
also accompanied by judgments of the same kindL, and by their

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE:-. i.">

more terrible excision and dispersion, as a body politic. As . the
prophet refers to both circumstances, so, in his usual manner of
teaching by action, he illustrates both by symbols. The first, by
the work of the potter on the wheels ; the second, by taking " an
earthen bottle, a vessel out of the house of the potter, and destroy-
ing- it before the eyes of the ancients of the people and the ancients
of the priests." The apostle, in like manner, refers to both events,
and makes use of the same symbols verbally. The " dishonoured"
state of the Jews, as no longer acknowledged by God as his people,
since they would not enter the new church, the New Jerusalem,
by faith, is shown by the vessel formed by the potter unto " disho-
nour ;" the collateral calamities brought upon their city, temple,
and nation, arising out of their enormous sins, is shown by allusion to
the prophet's breaking another vessel, an earthen bottle. This
temporal destruction of the Jews by the Roman invasion, was also
figurative of the future and final punishment of all persevering un-
believers. As to the Jews of that day living in Judea, the nation of
the Jews, the punishment figured by the broken vessel, was final,
for they were destroyed by the sword, and wasted by slavery ; and
as to all who persevered in unbelief, the future punishment in
eternity would be final and hopeless, " as one breaketh a potter's
vessel that cannot be made xchole again :" a sufficient proof that St.
Paul is not speaking of the vessel in its state of clay, on the potter's
wheel, which might be made whole again ; and, therefore, the
punishment figured by that was not final, but corrective ; for the
Jews, though made vessels unto dishonour in Babylon, were again
made vessels of honour on their restoration ; and the Jews now,
though for a much longer period existing as " vessels of dishonour,"
shall be finally restored, brought into the church of Christ, acknow-
ledged to be his people, as the believing Gentiles are, and thus,
united with them, again be made " vessels unto honour."

The application of the apostle's words, in the verses just com-
mented upon, as intended to silence the " repl)ing" of the Jews
against God, is now obvious. They could urge no charge upon
God for making them vessels of dishonour by taking away their
church state, for that was their own fault ; they were " marred in
his hands," and they yielded not to his design. But their case was
no more hopeless than that of the Jews in Babylon ; they might
still be again made vessels of honour. And then, as to the case of
the "vessels of wrath fitted for destruction," those stubborn Jews,
who were bringing upon themselves the Roman invasion, with the
destruction of their city and nation ; and all perverse, unbelieviag
Jews, who continued, in other parts of the world, to reject the Gos-

lii THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

pel ; although their approaching punishment would be final and
remediless, yet was there no ground for them "to reply against
God" on that account, as though this dispensation of wrath were
the result of unconditional predestination and rigid sovereignty.
On the contrary, it was an act of pure and unquestionable justice,
which the apostle proves by its being brought upon themselves by
their own sins ; and by the circumstance that it did not take place
until after God had " endured them with much long suffering."

1. The destruction was brought upon themselves by their own
sins. This is manifest from all the instances in the New Testa-
ment, in which their sins are charged upon them as the cause of
their calamities, and which need not be quoted ; and also from the
expression in the text before us, vessels "fitted to destruction."
The word might as well have been rendered '„' adapted to destruc-
tion," which fitness or congruity for punishment can be produced
only by sin ; and this sin must have been their own choice and
fault, unless we should blasphemously make God the author of sin,
which but a few Calvinistic divines have been bold enough to affirm.
Nor are we to overlook the change of speech which the apostle
uses (4) when speaking of " the vessels of mercy." Their " prepa-
ration unto glory" is ascribed expressly to God, — " which he had
afore prepared unto glory ;" but of the vessels of wrath the apostle
simply says passively, " fitted to destruction," leaving the agent to
be inferred from the nature of the thing, and from the testimony of
Scripture, which uniformly ascribes the sins of men to themselves,
and their punishment to their sins.

2. The justice of God's proceeding as to the incorrigible Jews
is still more strongly marked by the declaration, that these vessels
of wrath fitted, or adapted, to destruction, were " endured with
much long suffering." To say that their punishment was delayed
to render it more conspicuous, after they had been left or given up
by God, would be no impeachment of God's justice ; but it is
much more consonant to the tenor of Scripture to consider the
" long suffering" here mentioned, as exercised previously to their
being given up to the hardness of their hearts, like Pharaoh, and
even after they were, in a rigid construction of just severity, " fitted
for destruction :" the punishment being delayed to afford them still
farther opportunities for repentance. The barren tree, in our
Lord's parable, was the emblem of the Jewish nation, and no one
can deny that after the Lord had come for many years " seeking
fruit and finding none," this fruitless tree was "fitted" to be cut
down ; and yet it was " endured with much long suffering." This

(4) Wolfius, in loc.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTED. 47

view is, also, farther supported by the import of the word " long:
suffering," and its use in the New Testament. Long suffering is a.
mode of mercy, and the reason of its exercise is only to be found in
a merciful intention. Hence " goodness, and forbearance, and long
suffering," are united by the apostle, in another part of this epistle,
when speaking of these very Jews, in a passage which may be con-
sidered as strictly parallel -with that before us. " Or despisest thou
the riches of his goodness, and forbearance, and long suffering ; not
knowing that the goodness of God leadeih thee to repentance ? But
after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself
wrath against the day of wrath, and revelation of the righteous
judgment of God ;" which " wrath" the long suffering of God was
exercised to prevent, by leading them " to repentance," Rom. ii,
4, 5. So also St. Peter teaches us, that the end of God's long suf-
fering to men is a merciful one : he is " long suffering to us-ward,
not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to
repentance." The passage in question, therefore, cannot be under-
stood of persons derelict and forsaken of God, as though the long
suffering of God, in enduring them, were a part of the process of
" showing his wrath and making his power known." Doddridge,
a moderate Calvinist, paraphrases it : " What if God, resolving" at
last " to manifest his wrath, and make his power known, hath," in
the meantime, " endured with much long suffering" those who shall
finally appear to be " the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction V to
which there is no objection, provided it be allowed that in this
" meantime" they might have repented and obtained mercy.

Thus the proceedings of God as to the Jews shut out all " reply"
and " debate" with God. Nothing was unjust in his conduct to the,
impenitent among them, for they were " vessels of wrath fitted for
destruction," wicked men justly liable to it, and yet, before God
proceeded to his work of judgment, he endured them with forbear-
ance, and gave them many opportunities of coming into his church
on the new election of believers both of Jews and Gentiles. And
as to this election the whole was a question not of justice but of
grace, and God had the unquestionable right of forming a new
believing people, "not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles," and
of filling them, as " vessels of honour," with those riches, that fulness
of glory, as his now acknowledged church, for which he had " afore
prepared them" by faith, the only ground of their admission into
his covenant. The remainder of the chapter, on which we have,
commented, contains citations from the prophecies, with respect
to the salvation of the "remnant," of the believing Jews, and the
calling of the Gentiles. The tenth and eleventh chapters, winch

48 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

continue the discourse, need no particular examination ; but will
be found to contain nothing but what most obviously refers to the
collective rejection of the Jewish nation, and the collective election
of the " remnant" of believing Jews, along with all believing Gen-
tiles, into the visible church of God.

We have now considered this discourse of the apostle Paul, with
reference to the question of personal or collective election, and find
that it can be interpreted only of the latter. Let us consider it,
secondly, with reference to the question of unconditional election,
a doctrine which we shall certainly find in it ; but in a sense very
different from that in which it is held by Calvinists.

By unconditional election, divines of this class understand an
election of persons to eternal life without respect to their faith or
obedience, these qualities in them being supposed necessarily to
follow as consequences of their election ; by unconditional repro-
bation, the counterpart of the former doctrine, is meant a non-
election or rejection of certain persons from eternal salvation ;
unbelief and disobedience following this rejection as necessary
consequences. Such kind of election and rejection has no place
in this chapter, although the subject of it is the election and
rejection of bodies of men, which is a case more unfettered with
conditions than any other. We have, indeed, in it several instances
of unconditional election. Such was that of the descendants of
Isaac to be God's visible church, in preference to those of Ishmael ;
such was that of Jacob, to the exclusion of Esau ; which election
was declared when the children were yet in the womb, before they
had done " good or evil ;" so that the blessing of the special cove-
nant did not descend upon the posterity of Jacob, because of any
righteousness in Jacob, nor was it taken away from the descendants
of Esau, because of any wickedness hi their progenitor. In like
manner, when Almighty God determined no longer to found his
visible church upon natural descent from Abraham in the line of
Isaac and Jacob, nor in any line according to the flesh ; but to
make faith in his Son Jesus Christ the gate of admission into this
privilege, he acted according to the same sovereign pleasure. It is
not impossible to conceive that he might have carried on his saving
purposes among the Gentiles through Christ, without setting up a
visible church among them ; as, before the coming of Christ he
carried on such purposes in the Gentile nations, (unless we suppose
that all but the Jews perished,) without collecting them into a body,
and making himself their head as his church, and calling himself
"their God" by special covenant, and by visible and constant signs
acknowledging them to be "his people." Greatly inferior would

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 19

have been the mercy to the Gentile world had this plan been
adopted ; and, as far as it appears to us, the system of Christianity
would have been much less efficient. We are, indeed, bound to
believe this, since Divine wisdom and goodness have determined on
another mode of procedure ; but still it is conceivable. On the
contrary, the purpose of God was now not only to continue a visible
church in the world, but to extend it in its visible, collective, and
organized form, into all nations. Yet this resolve rested on no
goodness in those who were to be subjects of it : both Jews and
Gentiles were " concluded under sin," and " the whole world was
guilty before God." As this plan is carried into effect by extending
itself into different nations, we see the same sovereign pleasure. A
man of Macedonia appears to Paul in a vision by night, and cries,
*' Come over and help us ;" but we have no reason to believe that
the Macedonians were better than other Gentiles, although they
were elected to the enjoyment of the privileges and advantages of
evangelical ordinances. So in modern times parts of Hindostan
have been elected to receive the Gospel, and yet its inhabitants pre-
sented nothing more worthy of this election than the people of
Tibet, or California, who have not yet been elected. We call this
sovereignty ; not indeed in the sense of many Calvinistic writers,
who appear to understand by the sovereign acts of God those pro-
cedures which he adopts only to show that he has the power to
execute them ; but because the reasons of them, whether they are
reasons of judgment, or wisdom, or mercy, are hidden from us —
either that we have no immediate interest in them, or that they are
too deep and ample for our comprehension, or because it is an
important lesson for men to be taught to bow with reverent sub-
mission to his regal prerogatives. This is the unconditional election
and non-election taught, by the apostle in this chapter; but what
we deny is, that either the spiritual blessings connected with reli-
gious privileges follow as necessary consequences from this election ;
or that unbelief, disobedience, and eternal ruin follow in the same
manner from non-election. Of both these opinions the apostle's
discourse itself furnishes abundant refutation.

Let us take the instances of election. The descendants of Abra-
ham in the line of Isaac and Jacob were elected ; but true faith,
and obedience, and salvation, did not follow as infallible consequents
of that election. On the contrary, the "Jew outwardly," and the
" Jew inwardly," were always distinguished in the sight of God ;
and the children of Abraham's faith, not the children of Abraham's
body, were the true " Israel of God." Again, the Gentiles were
at length elected to be the visible church of God ; but obedience

Vol. III. 7

50 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and salvation did not follow as necessary consequents of this election,
On the contrary, many Gentiles chosen to special religious privi-
leges have, in all ages, neglected the great salvation, and have
perished, though professing the name of Christ ; and in that pure
age in which St. Paul wrote, when comparatively few Gentiles
entered the church but with a sincere faith in Christ, he warns all
of the danger of excision for unbelief and disobedience : — " Thou
standest by faith ; be not high minded, but fear." " For if God
spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not
thee." — " Toward thee goodness, if thou continue in his goodness ;
otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." Certain, therefore, it is, that
although this collective election of bodies of men to religious privi-
leges, and to become the visible church of God, be unconditional,
the salvation to which these privileges were designed to lead, de-
pends upon personal faith and obedience.

Let us turn, then, to the instances of non-election or rejection ;
and here it will be found that unbelief, disobedience, and punish-
ment, do not follow as infallible consequents of this dispensation.
Abraham was greatly interested for Ishmael, and obtained, in
answer to his prayer, at least temporal promises in his behalf, and
in that of his posterity ; and there is no reason to conclude from
any thing which occurs in the sacred writers, that his Arabian
descendants were shut out, except by their own choice and fault,
at any time, from the hopes of salvation ; at least previous to their
embracing the imposture of Mohammed : for if so, we must give up
Job and his friends as reprobates. The knowledge of the true God
existed long in Arabia ; and " Arabians" were among the fruits of
primitive Christianity, as we learn from the Acts of the Apostles.

Nor have we any ground to conclude that the Edomites, as such,
were excluded from the mercies of God, because of their non-
election as his visible church. Their proximity to the Jewish nation
must have served to preserve among them a considerable degree
of religious knowledge ; and their continuance as a people for many
ages, may argue at least no great enormity of wickedness among
them : which is confirmed by the reasons given for their ultimate
destruction. The final malediction against this people is uttered
by the prophet Malachi. " Whereas Edom saith, We are impover-
ished, but we will return and build the desolate places ; thus saith
the Lord of Hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down ; and
they shall call them, the border of wickedness, and, the people
against whom the Lord hath indignation for ever," i, 4. Thus their
destruction was the result of their " wickedness" in the later periods
of their history ; nor have we any reason to conclude that this was

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 51

more inevitable than that of other ancient nations, whom God, as
in the case of Assyria, called to repentance ; but who, not regard-
ing the call, were finally destroyed. That the Edomites were not,
in more ancient times, the objects of the Divine displeasure, is
manifest from Deut. ii, 5, where it is recorded that God commanded
the Israelites, " Meddle not with them ; for I will not give you of
their land, no, not so much as a foot breadth ; because I have
given Mount Seir unto Esau for a possession." They also outlived,
as a people, the ten tribes of Israel ; they continued to exist when
the two tribes were carried into captivity to Babylon ; and about
the year of the world 3875, or 129 before the Christian era, John
Hircanus entirely subdued them, and obliged them to incorporate
with the Jewish nation and to receive religion. They professed
consequently the same faith, and were thus connected with the
visible church of God. (5)

We come, finally, to the case of the rejected Jews in the very
■age of the apostles. The purpose of God, as we have seen, was to
abolish the former ground on which his visible church had for so
many ages been built, that of natural descent from Abraham by
Isaac and Jacob ; but this was so far from shutting out the Jews
from spiritual blessings, that though, as Jews, they were now denied
to be God's church, yet they were all invited to come in with the
Gentiles, or rather to lead the way into the new church established
on the new principle of faith in Jesus, as the Christ. Hence the
apostles were commanded to " begin at Jerusalem" to preach the
Gospel ; hence they made the Jews the first offer in every place in
Asia Minor, and other parts of the Roman empire, into which they
travelled on the same blessed errand. Many of the Jews accepted
the call, entered into the church state on the new principle on
which the church of Christ was now to be elected, and hence they
are called, by St. Paul, " the remnant according to the election of
grace," Rom. xi, 5, and " the election''' The rest, it is true, are
said to have been " blinded ;" just in the same sense as Pharaoh
was hardened. He hardened his own heart, and was judicially left
to his obduracy ; they blinded themselves by their prejudices and
worldliness and spiritual pride, and were at length judicially given
up to blindness. But then might they not all have had a share in
this new election into this new church of God ? Truly every one of
them ; for thus the apostle argues, Rom. ix, 30-32, " What shall

(5) " Having conquered the Edomites, or Idumeans," says Prideaux, " he re*
duced them to this necessity, either to embrace the Jewish religion, or elso to leave
the country, and seek new dwellings elsewhere ; whereon, choosing rather to-
leave their idolatry than their country, they all became proselytes to the Jewish
r<>Ii<rion," &rc. — Onnex.. vol. iii, pj>. 30>.r>. 36&

53 IDEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

we say then ? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteous-
ness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which
is of faith ; but Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness,
hath not attained to the law of righteousness. Wherefore ? Be-
cause they sought it not by faith, but, as it were, by the
works of the law." And thus we have it plainly declared that they
were excluded from the new spiritual church of God, not by any
act of sovereignty, not by any decree of reprobation, but by an act
of their own : they rejected the doctrine and way of faith ; they
attained not unto righteousness, because they sought it not by faith.

The collective election and rejection taught in this chapter is not
then unconditional, in the sense of the Calvinists ; and neither the
salvation of the people elected, nor the condemnation of the peo-
ple rejected, flows as necessary consequents from these acts of the
Divine sovereignty. They are, indeed, mysterious procedures ;
for doubtless it must be allowed that they place some portions of
men in circumstances more favoured than others ; but even in such
cases God has shut out the charge of " unrighteousness" by requir-
ing from men according " to what they have, and not according to
what they have not," as we learn from many parts of Scripture
wliich reveal the principles of the Divine administration, both as to
this life and another ; for no man is shut out from the mercy of God,
but by his own fault. He has connected these events also with
wise and gracious general plans, as to the human race. They are
not acts of arbitrary will, or of caprice ; they are acts of " wisdom
and knowledge," the mysterious bearings of which are to be in
future times developed. " O the depth, both of the wisdom and
knowledge of God ! how unsearchable are his judgments, and his
ways past finding out !" These are the devout expressions with
which St. Paul concludes this discourse ; but they would ill apply
to the sovereign, arbitrary, and unconditional reprobation of men
from God's mercies in time and eternity, on the principle of taking
some and leaving others without any reason in themselves. There
is no plan in this ; no wisdom ; no mystery ; and it is capable of no
farther development for the instruction and benefit of the world ;
for that which rests originally on no reason but solely on arbitrary
will, is incapable, from its very nature, of becoming the component
part of a deeply laid, and, for a time, mysterious plan, which is to
be brightened into manifest wisdom, and to terminate in the good
of mankind, and the glory of God.

The only argument of any weight which is urged to prove, that
in the election spoken of in this discourse of St. Paul, individuals
are intended, is, that though it should be allowed that the apostle is

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. O.i

speaking of the election of bodies of men to be the visible church
of God ; yet, as none are acknowledged by him to be his true
church, except true believers ; therefore, the election of men to
faith and eternal life, as individuals, must necessarily be included ;
or rather, is the main thing spoken of. For as the spiritual seed of
Abraham were the only persons allowed to be " tYu Israel of God"
under the Old Testament dispensation ; and as, upon the rejection
of the Jews, true believers only, both of Jews and Gentiles, were
allowed to constitute the church of Christ, the spiritual seed of
Abraham, under the law ; and genuine Christians, both of Jews
and Gentiles, under the Gospel, are " the election ;" and " the rem-
nant according to the election of grace," mentioned by the apostle.

In this argument truth is greatly mixed up with error, which a
f^ew observations will disentangle.

1. It is a mere assumption, that the spiritual Israelites, under the
law, in opposition to the Israelites by birth, are any where called
" the election ;" and " the remnant according to the election of
grace ;" or even alluded to under these titles. The first phrase
occurs in Rom. xi, 7, " What then ? Israel hath not obtained that
Avhich he seeketh for ; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest
were blinded." Here it is evident that " the election" means the
Jews of that day, who believed in Christ, in opposition to " the rest,"
who believed not ; in other words, " the election" was that part of
the Jews, who had been chosen into the Christian church, by faith.
The second phrase occurs in ver. 5, of the same chapter, " Even
so, then, at this present time, also, there is a remnant according to
the election of grace ;" where the same class of persons, the believ-
ing Jews, who submitted to the plan of election into the church by
" grace," through faith, are the only persons spoken of. Nor are
these terms used to designate the believing Gentiles ; they belong
exclusively to the Christianized portion of the Jewish nation, and as
the contrary assumption is without any foundation, the inferences
drawn from it are imaginary.

2. It is true that, under the Old Testament dispensation, the
spiritual seed of Abraham, were the only part of the Israelites who
were, with reference to their spiritual and eternal state, accepted
of God ; but it is not true, that the election of which the apostle
speaks, was confined to them. With reference to Esau and Jacob,
the apostle says, Rom. ix, 11, 13, "For the children being not yet
born, neither having done good or evil, that the purpose of God,
according to election, might stand, not of works, but of him that
calleth ; it was said unto her, the elder shall serve the younger ; as
it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." The

54 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

" election" here spoken of, or God's purpose to elect, relates to
Jacob being chosen in preference to Esau ; which election, as we
have seen, respected the descendants of Jacob. Now, if this meant
the election of the pious descendants of Jacob only, and not his
natural descendants ; then the opposition between the election of
the progeny of Jacob, and the non-election of the progeny of Esau,
is destroyed ; and there was no reason to say " Jacob have I loved,
but Esau have I hated," or loved less ; but the pious descendants
of Jacob have I loved and elected ; and the rest I have not loved,
and therefore have not elected. Some of the Calvinistic comment-
ators have felt this difficulty, and therefore say, that these cases
are not given as examples of the election and reprobation of which
the apostle speaks ; but as illustrations of it. If considered as
illustrations, they must be felt to be of a very perplexing kind ; for
how the preference of one nation to another, when, as we have seen,
this did not infallibly secure the salvation of the more favoured
nation, nor the eternal destruction of the less favoured, can illus-
trate the election of individuals to eternal life, and the reprobation
of other individuals to eternal death, is difficult to conceive. But
they are manifestly examples of that one election, of which the apostle
speaks throughout ; and not illustrations of one kind of election by
another. They are the instances which he gives in proof that the
election of the believing Jews of his day to be, along with the believ-
ing Gentiles, the visible church of God, and the rejection of the
Jews after the flesh, was not contrary to the promises of God made
to Abraham ; because God had, in former times, made distinctions
between the natural descendants of Abraham as to church privi-
leges, without any impeachment of his faithfulness to his word.
Again, if the election of which the apostle speaks were that of pious
Jews in all ages, so that they alone stood in a church relation to
God, and were thus the only Jews in covenant with him ; how
could he speak of the rejection of the other portion of the Jews 1 Of
their being cut off? Of the covenants " pertaining" to them 1 They
could not be rejected, who were never received ; nor cut off, who
were never branches in the stock ; nor have covenants pertaining
to them, if in these covenants they had never been included.

3. This notion, that the ancient election of a part of the descend-
ants of Abraham spoken of by the apostle was of the pious Jews
only, and, therefore, a personal election, is, in part, grounded by
these commentators upon a mistaken view of the meaning of the
sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth verses of this chapter ; in which
they have been sometimes incautiously followed by those of very
different sentiments, and who have thus somewhat entangled them-

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 55

selves. " Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect
For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel : neither, because
they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children : but, In Isaac
shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of
the flesh, these are not the children of God : but the children of the
promise are counted for the seed. For this is the word of promise,
At this time will I come, and Sarah shall have a son." In this
passage, the interpreters in question suppose that St. Paul distin-
guishes between the spiritual Israelites, and those of natural descent;
between the spiritual seed of Abraham, and his seed according to
the flesh. Yet the passage not only affords no evidence that this
was his intention ; but implies just the contrary. Our view of its
meaning is given above ; but it may be necessary to support it more
fully.

Let it then be recollected that the apostle is speaking of that
great event, the rejection of the Jews from being any longer the
visible church of God, on account of natural descent ; and that in
this passage he shows that the purpose of God to construct his
church upon a new basis, that of faith in Christ, although it would
exclude the body of the Jewish people from this church, since they
refused " the election of grace" through faith, would not prove that
" the word of God had fallen" to the ground, or as the literal mean-
ing of the original is rendered in our version, "has taken none
effect." The word of God referred to can only be God's original
promise to Abraham, to be " a God to him and to his seed after
him ;" which was often repeated to the Jews in after ages, in the
covenant engagement, " I will be to you a God, and ye shall be to
me a people ;" a mode of expression which signifies, in all the
connexions in which it stands, an engagement to acknowledge them
as his visible church : he being publicly acknowledged on their part
as " their God," or object of worship and trust ; and they, on the
other, being acknowledged by him as his peculiar " people." This,
therefore, we are to take to be the sense of the promise to Abraham
and to his seed. How then does the apostle prove that the " word
of God had not fallen to the ground," although the natural seed of
Abraham, the Jews of that day, had been rejected as his church 1
He proves it by showing that all the children of Abraham by natural
descent had not, in the original intention of the promise, been
" counted," or reckoned, as " the seed" to which these promises
had been made ; and this he establishes by referring to those acts
of God by which he had, in his sovereign pleasure, conferred the
church relation upon the descendants of Abraham only in certaiD
lines, as in those of Isaac and Jacob, and excluded the others. In

56

THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

this view^the argument is cogent to his purpose. By the exercise
of the same sovereignty God had now resolved not to connect the
church relation with natural descent, even in the line of Isaac and
Jacob ; but to establish it on a ground which might comprehend
the Gentile nations also, the common ground of faith in Christ. The
mere children of the flesh were, therefore, in this instance excluded ;
and " the children of the promise," the promise now made to be-
lieving Jews and Gentiles, those begotten by the word of the Gospel,
were " counted for the seed." But though it is a great truth, that
only the children of the Gospel promise are now " counted for the
seed ;" it does not follow that the children of the promise made to
Sarah were all spiritual persons ; and, as such, the only subjects of
that church relation which was connected with that circumstance.
That the Gentiles who believed upon the publication of the Gospel
were always contemplated as a part of that seed to which the pro-
mises were made, the apostle shows in a former part of the same
epistle ; but that " mystery" was not in early times revealed. God
had not then formed, nor did he till the apostle's age form his visible
church solely on the principle of faith, and a moral relation. This
is the character of the new, not of the old dispensation ; and the
different grounds of the church relation were suited to the design
of each. One was to preserve truth from extinction ; the other to
extend it into all nations : in one, therefore, a single people, taken
as a nation into political as well as religious relations with God,
was made the deposite of the truth to be preserved ; in the other, a
national distinction, and lines of natural descent, could not be re-
cognised, because the object was to call all nations to the obedience
of the same faith, and to place all on an equality before God. As
the very ground of the church relation, then, under the Old Testa-
ment, was natural descent from Abraham ; and as it was mixed up
and even identified with a political relation also, the ancient election
of which the apostle speaks, could not be confined to spiritual Jews :
and even if it could be proved, that the church of God, under the
new dispensation, is to be confined to true believers only, yet that
would not prove that the ancient church of God had that basis alone,
since we know it had another, and a more general one. When,
therefore, the apostle says, " for they are not all Israel, which are
of Israel," the distinction is not between the spiritual and the natural
Israelites ; but between that part of the Israelites who continued to
enjoy church privileges, and those who were " of Israel," or de-
scendants of Jacob, surnamed Israel, as the ten tribes and parts of
the two, who, being dispersed among the heathen, for their sins,
^rere no longer a part of God's visible church. This is the first

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 5*

instance which the apostle gives of the rejection of a part of the
natural seed of Abraham from the promise. He strengthens the
argument by going up higher, even to those who had immediately
been born to Abraham, the very children of his body, Ishmael and
Isaac. " The children of the flesh ;" that is, Ishmael and his de-
scendants, (so called, because he was born naturally, not superna-
turally, as Isaac was, according to " the promise" made to Abraham
and Sarah ;) — they, says the apostle, are not the "children of God;"
that is, as the context still shows, not "the seed" to whom the
promise that he would be " a God to Abraham and his seed" was
made : " but the children of the promise," that is, Isaac and his
descendants, were " counted for the seed." And that we might
not mistake this, " the promise" referred to is added by the apostle ;
— " for this is the word of the promise, At this time will I come,
and Sarah shall have a son." Of this promise, the Israelites by
natural descent, were as much " the children," as the spiritual
Israelites ; and, therefore, to confine it to the latter is wholly gra-
tuitous, and contrary to the words of the apostle. It is indeed an
interesting truth, that a deep and spiritual mystery ran through that
part of the history of Abraham here referred to, which the apostle
opens in his Epistle to the Galatians : " The children of the bond
woman and her son," symbolized the Jews who sought justification
by the law ; and " the children of the promise," " the children of
the free woman," those who were justified by faith, and born
supernaturally, that is "born again," and made heirs of the heavenly
inheritance. But these things, says St. Paul, are an " allegory ;"
and therefore could not be the thing allegorized, any more than a
type can be the thing typified ; for a type is always of an inferior
nature to the antitype, and is indeed something earthly, adumbrating
that which is spiritual and heavenly. It follows, therefore, that
although the choosing of Isaac and his descendants, prefigured the
choosing of true believers, (persons born supernaturally under the
Gospel dispensation,) to be "the children of God ;" and that the
rejection of the " children of the flesh" typified the rejection of the
unbelieving Jews from God's church, because they had nothing but
natural descent to plead : nay, though we allow that these events
might be allegorical, on one part, of the truly believing Israelites,
in all ages ; and on the other, of those who were Jews only " out-
\vardly," and therefore, as to the heavenly inheritance, were not
" heirs ;" yet still that which typified, and represented in allegory
these spiritual mysteries, was not the spiritual mystery itself. It
was a comparatively gross and earthly representation of it ; and the
passage is, therefore, to be understood of the election of the natural
Vol. Ill R

08 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

descendants of Isaac, as the children of the promise made to Sarah,
to be " the seed" to which the promises of church privileges and a
church relation were intended to be in force, though still subject
to the election of the line of Jacob in preference to that of Esau ;
and subject again, at a still greater distance of time, to the election
of the tribe of Judah, to continue God's visible church, till the
coming of Messiah, whilst the ten tribes, who were equally " of
Israel," were rejected.

4. That this election of bodies of men to be the visible church of
God, involved the election of individuals into the true church of
God, and consequently their election to eternal life, is readily ac-
knowledged ; but this weakens not in the least the arguments by
which we have shown that the apostle, in this chapter, speaks of
collective, and not of individual election : on the contrary, it esta-
blishes them. Let us, to illustrate this, first take the case of the
ancient Jewish church.

The end of God's election of bodies of men to peculiar religious
advantages is, doubtless as to the individuals of which these bodies
are composed, their recovery from sin, and their eternal salvation.
Hence, to all such individuals, superior means of instruction, and
more efficient means of salvation are afforded along with a deeper
responsibility. The election of an individual into the true church
by writing his name in heaven, is however, an effect dependant upon
the election of the body to which he belongs. It follows only from
his personal repentance, and justifying faith ; or else we must say,
that men are members of the true spiritual church, before they
repent and have justifying faith, for which, assuredly, we have no
warrant in Scripture. Individual election is then another act of
God, subsequent to the former. The former is sovereign and un-
conditional ; the latter rests upon revealed reasons ; and is not, as
we shall just now more fully show, unconditional. These two kinds
of election, therefore, are not to be confounded ; and it is absurd
to argue that collective election has no existence, because there is
an individual election ; since the latter, on the contrary, necessarily
supposes the former. The Jews, as a body, had their visible church
state, and outward privileges, although the pious Jews alone availed
themselves of them to their own personal salvation. As to the
Christian church, there is a great difference in its circumstances ;
but the principle, though modified, is still there.

The basis of this church was to be, not natural descent from a
common head ; marking out, as that church, some distinct family,
tribe, and, as it increased in numbers, some one nation, invested
too, as a nation must be, with a political character and state : but

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 59

iaith in Christ. Yet even this faith supposes a previous sovereign
and unconditional collective election. For, as the apostle argues,
" faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God : but
how shall they hear without a preacher 1 and how shall they preach
except they be sent V1 Now this sending to one Gentile nation be-
fore another Gentile nation, a distinction which continues to be
made in the administration of the Divine Government to this day,
is that sovereign unconditional election of the people constituting
that nation, to the means of becoming God's church by the preach-
ing of the Gospel, through the men "sent" to them for this purpose.
The persons who first believed, were for the most part real Chris-
tians, in the sense of being truly, and in heart turned to God.
They could not generally go so far as to be baptized into the name
of Christ, in the face of persecution, and in opposition to their own
former prejudices, without a considerable previous ripeness of expe-
rience, and decision of character. Under the character of " saints"
in the highest sense, the primitive churches are addressed in the
apostolical epistles : and such we are bound to conclude they were ;
or they would not have been so called by men who had the " dis-
cernment of spirits." Whatever then the number was, whether
small or great, who first received the word of the Gospel in every
place, they openly confessed Christ, assembled for public worship ;
and thus the promise was fulfilled in them : " I will be to them a
God," the object of worship and trust ; " and they shall be to me a
people." They became God's visible church ; and for the most
part entered into that, and into the true and spiritual church at the
same time. But this was not the case with all the members ; and
we have therefore still an election of bodies of men to a visible
church state, independant of their election as " heirs of eternal life."
The children of believers, even as children, and therefore incapa-
ble of faith, did not remain in the same state of alienation from God
as the children of unbelievers ; nay, though but one parent believed,
yet the children are pronounced by St. Paul, to be " holy." " For
the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbeliev-
ing wife, by the husband : else, were your children unclean ; but
now they are holy." When both parents believed, and trained up
their families to believe in Christ, and to worship the true God, the
case was stronger : the family was then " a church in the house ;"
though all the members of it might not have saving faith. Sincere
faith or assent to the Gospel, with desires of instruction and salva-
tion, appear to have uniformly entitled the person to baptism ; and
the use of Christian ordinances followed. The numbers of the
visible church swelled till it comprehended cities, and at last coun-

1*0 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

tries ; whose inhabitants were thus elected to special religious privi-
leges, and, forsaking idols and worshipping God, constituted his
visible church among Gentile nations. And that the apostle Paul
regarded all who " called upon the name of the Lord" as Christian
churches, is evident from his asserting his authority of reproof, and
counsel, and even excision over them, as to their unworthy mem-
bers ; and also from his threatening the Gentile churches with the
fate of the Jewish church ; — unless they stood by faith, they also
should be " cut off;" that is, be unchurched. Of his full meaning,
subsequent history gives the elucidation in the case of those very
churches in Asia Minor which he himself planted ; and which,
departing from the faith of Christ, his true doctrine, have been, in
many instances, " cut off," and swallowed up in the Mohammedan
delusion ; so that Christ is there no longer worshipped. The whole
proves a sovereign unconditional election independent of personal
election ; unconditional as to the people to whom the Gospel was
first sent ; unconditional as to the children bom of believing parents ;
unconditional as to the inhabitants of those countries who, when a
Christian church was first established among them, came, without
seeking it, into the possession of invaluable and efficacious means
and ordinances of Christian instruction and salvation ; and who all
finally, by education, became professors of the true faith ; and, as
far as assent goes, sincere believers. This election too, as in the
Jewish church, was made with reference to a personal election into
the true spiritual church of God ; but personal election was con-
ditional. It rested, as we have seen, upon personal repentance
and justifying faith ; or else we must hold that men could be mem-
bers of the true church without either. This election was then
dependant upon the other ; and, instead of disproving, abundantly
confirms it. The tenor of the apostle's argument sufficiently shows
that the transfer of the church state and relation from one body of
men to others, is that which in this discourse he has in view — in
other words, he speaks of the election of bodies of men to religious
advantages, not of individuals to eternal life ; and however inti-
mately the one may be connected with the other, the latter is not
necessarily involved in the former ; since superior religious privi-
leges, in all ages, have, to many, proved but an aggravation of their
condemnation.

The third kind of election is personal election ; or the election

of individuals to be the children of God, and the heirs of eternal life.

It is not at all disputed between us and those who hold the Cal-

vinistic view of election, whether believers in Christ are called the

elect of God with reference to their individual state and individual

.SECOND. | THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. Gl

relation to God as his " people," in the highest sense of that phrase.
Such passages as " the elect of God ;" " chosen of God ;" " chosen
in Christ ;" " elect according to the foreknowledge of God the
Father ;" and many others, we allow therefore, although borrowed
from that collective election of which we have spoken, to be de-
scriptive of an act of grace in favour of certain persons considered
individually.

The first question then which naturally arises, respects the import,
of that act of grace which is termed choosing, or an election. It
is not a choosing to particular offices and service, which is the first
kind of election we have mentioned ; nor is it that collective elec-
tion to religious privileges and a visible church state, on which we
have more largely dwelt. For although " the elect" have an indi-
vidual interest in such an election as parts of the collective body,
thus placed in possession of the ordinances of Christianity ; yet
many others have the same advantages, who still remain under the
guilt and condemnation of sin and practical unbelief. The indi-
viduals properly called " the elect," are they who have been made
partakers of the grace and saving efficacy of the Gospel. " Many,"
says our Lord, " are called, but few chosen."

What true personal election is, we shall find explained in two
clear passages of Scripture. It is explained negatively by our Lord,
where he says to his disciples, " I have chosen you out of the world :"
it is explained positively by St. Peter, when he addresses his first
epistle to the " elect, according to the foreknowledge of God the
Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus." To be elected, therefore, is to
be separated from " the world," and to be sanctified by the Spirit,
and by the blood of Christ.

It follows, then, that election is not only an act of God done in
time ; but also that it is subsequent to the administration of the
means of salvation. The " calling" goes before the " election ;"
the publication of the doctrine of " the Spirit," and the atonement,
called by Peter " the sprinkling of the blood of Christ," before that
" sanctification" through which they become " the elect" of God.
The doctrine of eternal election is thus brought down to its true
meaning. Actual election cannot be eternal ; for, from eternity,
the elect were not actually chosen out of the world, and from eter-
nity, they could not be " sanctified unto obedience." The phrases,
" eternal election," and " eternal decree of election," so often in the
lips of Calvinists, can, in common sense, therefore, mean only an
eternal purpose to elect ; or a purpose formed in eternity, to elect,
or choose out of the world, and sanctify in time, by "the Spirit and

63 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the blood of Jesus." This is a doctrine which no one will contend
with them ; but when they graft upon it another, that God hath,
from eternity, " chosen in Christ unto salvation," a set number of
men, "certain quorundam hominum multitudinem ;" not upon fore-
sight of faith and the obedience of faith, holiness, or of any other
good quality, or disposition, (as a cause or condition before required
in man to be chosen ;) but unto faith, and the obedience of faith,
holiness, &c, "non ex prcevisa fide, fideique obedientia, sanctitate, aut
alia aliqua bona qua litate et dispositione" <$*c,(6) it presents itself
under a different aspect, and requires an appeal to the Word of God.

This view of election has two parts : it is the choosing of a set or
determinate number of men, who cannot be increased or diminish-
ed ; and it is unconditional. Let us consider each.

With respect to the first, there is no text of Scripture which teaches
that a fixed and determinate number of men are elected to eternal
life ; and the passages which the Synod of Dort adduce in prool,
being such as they only infer the doctrine from, the Synod them-
selves allow that they have no express scriptural evidence for this
tenet. But if there is no explicit scripture in favour of the opinion,
there is much against it ; and to this test it must, therefore, be brought.

The election here spoken of must either be election in eternity,
or election in time. If the former, it can only mean a purpose of
electing in time : if the latter, it is actual election, or choosing out
of the world.

Now as to God's eternal purpose to elect, it is clear, that is a
subject on which we can know nothing but from his own revelation.
We take, then, the matter on this ground. A purpose to elect, is
a purpose to save ; and when it is explicitly declared in this reve-
lation that God " willeth all men to be saved," and that " he willeth
not the death of a sinner," either we must say, that his will is con-
trary to his purpose, which would be to charge God foolishly, and
indeed has no meaning at all ; or it agrees with his purpose : If
then his will agrees with his purpose, that purpose was not confined
to a " certain determinate number of men ;" but extended to all
" whosoever" should believe, that they might be elected and saved.

Again, we have established it as the doctrine of Scripture, that
our Lord Jesus Christ died for all men, that all men through him
might be saved ; but if he died in order to their salvation through
faith, he died in order to their election through faith ; and God
must have purposed this from eternity.

Farther, we have his own message to all to whom his servants
preach the Gospel. They are commanded to preach "to every
(6) Judgment of the Synod of Dort.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. iio

creature," — " He that believeth shall be saved ; and he that believeth.
not shall be damned." This is an unquestionable decree of God
in time ; and, if God be unchangeable, it was his decree, as touch-
ing this matter, from all eternity. But this decree or purpose can
in no way be reconciled to the doctrine of an eternal purpose to
elect only " a set and determinate number." For the Gospel could
not be good news to " every creature" to whom it should be as such
proclaimed, which is the first contradiction to the text. Nor would
those who believe it not, but who are nevertheless commanded to
believe it, have any power to believe it, which is the second con-
tradiction: for since they are to be "damned" for not believing,
they must have had the power to believe, or they could not have
come into condemnation for an act impossible to them to perform,
or else we must admit it as a principle of the Divine government
that God commands his" creatures to do, what under no circumstan-
ces they can do ; and then punishes them for not doing what he
thus commands. Finally, he commands those that believe not, and
who are alleged not to be included in this " fixed number" of elected
persons, to believe the good tidings, as a matter in which they are
interested : they are commanded to believe the Gospel as a truth ;
but if they are not interested in it, they are commanded to believe
a falsehood, which is the third contradiction ; and thus the text and
the doctrine cannot consist together.

As the whole argument on this point is involved in what we have
already established concerning the universal extent of the benefits
of Christ's death, we may leave it to be determined by what has
been advanced on that topic ; observing only, that two of the points
there confirmed bear directly upon the doctrine, that election is
confined to a " fixed number of men." If we have proved from
Scripture, that the reason of the condemnation of men lies in them-
selves, and not in the want of a sufficient and effectual provision
having been made in Christ for their salvation, then the number of
the actually elect might be increased ; and if it has been established
that those for whom Christ died might " perish ;" and that true
believers may " turn back unto perdition," and be " cast away,"
and fall into a state in which it were better for them " never to have
known the way of righteousness," then the number of the elect may
be diminished. To what has already been said on these subjects
the reader is referred ; and we shall now only mention a few of the
difficulties with which the doctrine of an election from eternity of
a determinate number of men to be made heirs of eternal life is
attended.

Whether men will look to the dark and repugnant side of this

64 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

doctrine of the eternal election of a certain number of men unto
salvation, or not, it unavoidably follows from it, that all but the
persons so chosen in Christ, are placed utterly and absolutely, from
their very birth, out of the reach of salvation ; and have no share
at all in the saving mercies of God, who from eternity purposed to
reject them, and that not for their fault as sinners. For all, except
Adam and Eve, have come into the world with a nature which,
left to itself, could not but sin ; and as the determination of God,
never to give the reprobate the means of avoiding sin, could not
rest upon their fault, for what is absolutely inevitable cannot be
charged on man as his fault, so it must rest where all the high
Calvinistic divines place it, — upon the mere will and sovereign
pleasure of God.

The difficulties of reconciling such a scheme as this to the nature
of God, not as it is fancied by man, but as it is revealed in his own
word ; and to many other declarations of Scripture as to the prin-
ciples of the administration both of his law and of his grace ; one
would suppose insuperable by any mind, and indeed are so revolt-
ing, that few of those who cling to the doctrine of election will be
found bold enough to keep them steadily in sight. They even
think it uncandid for us who oppose these views to pursue them to
their legitimate logical consequences. But in discussion this is
inevitable ; and if it be done in fairness, and in the spirit of candour,
without pushing hard arguments into hard words, the cause of truth,
and a right understanding of the Word of God, will thereby be
promoted.

The doctrine of the election to eternal life only of a certain
determinate number of men to salvation, involving, as it necessarily
does, the doctrine of the absolute and unconditional reprobation of
all the rest of mankind, cannot, we may confidently affirm, be
reconciled,

1. To the love of God. "God is Love." " He is loving to every
man : and his tender mercies are over all his works."

2. Nor to the wisdom of God ; for the bringing into being a vast
number of intelligent creatures under a necessity of sinning, and of
being eternally lost, teaches no moral lesson to the world ; and
contradicts all those notions of wisdom in the ends and processes of
government which we are taught to look for, not only from natural
reason, but from the Scriptures.

3. Nor to the grace of God, which is so often magnified in the
Scriptures : "for doth it. argue any sovereign or high strain; any
superabounding richness of grace or mercy in any man, when ten
thousand have equally offended him, only to pardon one or two of

■''

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. (kJ

them ?"(7) And on such a scheme can there be any interpretation
given of the passage, " that where sin had abounded, grace might
much more abound ]" or in what sense has " the grace of God
appeared unto all men ;" or even to one millionth part of them 1

4. Nor can this merciless reprobation be reconciled to any of
those numerous passages in which Almighty God is represented as
tenderly compassionate, and pitiful to the worst and most unworthy
of his creatures, even them who finally perish. " I have no pleasure
in the death of him that dieth :" " Being grieved at the hardness of
their hearts." "How often would I have gathered thy children
together, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye
would not." The. Lord is long suffering to us-ward, not willing
that any should perish." " Or despisest thou the riches of his
goodness, and forbearance, and long suffering ; not knowing that
the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance."

5. It is as manifestly contrary to his justice. Here, indeed, we
would not assume to measure this attribute of God, by unauthorized
human conceptions ; but when God himself has appealed to those
established notions of justice and equity which have been received
among all enlightened persons, in all ages, as the measure and rule
of his own, we cannot be charged with this presumption. " Shall
not the Judge of all the earth do right .?" " Are not my ways equal ?
saith the Lord." We may then be bold to affirm, that justice and
equity in God are what they are taken to be among reasonable
men ; and if all men every where would condemn it, as most con-
trary to justice and right, that a sovereign should condemn to death
one or more of his subjects, for not obeying laws which it is abso-
lutely impossible for them, under any circumstances which they can
possibly avail themselves of, to obey, and much more the greater
part of his subjects ; and to require them, on pain of aggravated
punishment, to do something in order to the pardon and remission
of their offences, which he knows they cannot do, say to stop the
tide or to remove a mountain ; it implies a charge as awfully and
obviously unjust against God, who is so " holy and just in all his
doings," so exactly "just in the judgments which he executeth," as
to silence all his creatures, to suppose him to act precisely in the
same manner as to those whom he has passed by and rejected,
without any avoidable fault of their own ; to destroy them by the
simple rule of his own sovereignty, or, in other words, to show that
he has power to do it. In whatever light the subject be viewed, no
fault, in any right construction, can be chargeable upon the persons
so punished, or, as we may rather say, destroyed, since punishment

(7) Goodwin's Agreement and DifferpnrK

Vol. Til 0

ti$ THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

supposes a judicial proceeding, which this act shuts out. For either
the reprobates are destroyed for a pure reason of sovereignty,
without any reference to their sinfulness, and thus all criminality is
left out of the consideration ; or they are destroyed for the sin of
Adam, to which they were not consenting ; or for personal faults
resulting from a corruption of nature which they brought into the
world with them, and which God wills not to correct, and they have
no power to correct themselves. Every received notion of justice
is thus violated. We grant, indeed, that some proceedings of the
Almighty may appear at first irreconcilable with justice, which are
not so ; as that we should suffer pain and death, and be infected
with a morally corrupt nature, in consequence of the transgression
of our first progenitors ; that children should suffer for their parents'
faults in the ordinary course of providence ; and that, in general
calamities, the comparatively innocent should suffer the same evils
as the guilty. But none of these are parallel cases. For the " free
gift" has come upon all men, " in order to justification of life,"
through " the righteousness" of the second Adam, so that the terms
of our probation are but changed. None are doomed to inevitable
ruin, or the above words of the apostle would have no meaning ;
and pain and death, as to all who avail themselves of the remedy,
are made the instruments of a higher life, and of a superabounding
of grace through Christ. The same observation may be made as
to children who suffer evils for their parents' faults. This circum-
stance alters the terms of their probation ; but if every condition of
probation leaves to men the possibility and the hope of eternal life,
and the circumstances of all are balanced and weighed by him who
administers the affairs of individuals on principles, the end of which
is to turn all the evils of life into spiritual and higher blessings, there
is, obviously, no impeachment of justice in the circumstances of the
probation assigned to any person whatever. As to the innocent
suffering equally with the guilty in general calamities, the persons
so suffering are but comparatively innocent, and their personal
transgressions against God deserve a higher punishment than any
which this life witnesses ; this may also as to them be overruled for
merciful purposes, and a future life presents its manifold compensa-
tions. But as to the non-elect, the whole case, in this scheme of
sovereign reprobation, or sovereign pretention, is supposed to be
before us. Their state is fixed, their afflictions in this life will not
in any instance be overruled for ends of edification and salvation ;
they are left under a necessity of sinning in every condition ; and
a future life presents no compensation, but a fearful looking for of
fiery and quenchless indignation. It is surely not possible for the

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. t>7

ingenuity of man to reconcile this to any notion of just government
which has ever obtained ; and by the established notions of justice
and equity in human affairs, we are taught by the Scriptures them-
selves to judge of the Divine proceedings in all completely stated and
comprehensible cases.

6. Equally impossible is it to reconcile this notion to the sin-
cerity of God in offering salvation by Christ to all who hear the
Gospel, of whom this scheme supposes the majority, or at least
great numbers, to be among the reprobate. The gospel, as we have
seen, is commanded to be preached to " every creature ;" which
publication of " good news to every creature," is an offer of salva-
tion " to every creature," accompanied with earnest invitations to
embrace it, and admonitory comminations lest any should neglect
and despise it. But does it not involve a serious reflection upon
the truth and sincerity of God which men ought to shudder at, to
assume, at the very time the Gospel is thus preached, that no part
of this good news was ever designed to benefit the majority, or any
great part of those to whom it is addressed ? that they to whom this
love of God in Christ is proclaimed were never loved by God 1 that
he has decreed that many to whom he offers salvation, and whom
he invites to receive it, shall never be saved ? and that he will con-
sider their sins aggravated by rejecting that which they never could
receive, and which he never designed them to receive 1 It is no
answer to this to say, that we also admit that the offers of mercy
are made by God to many whom he, by virtue of his prescience,
knows will never receive them. We grant this ; but, not now to
enter upon the question of foreknowledge, it is enough to reply, that
here there is no insincerity. On the Calvinian scheme the offer of
salvation is made to those for whose sins Christ made no atonement ;
on ours, he made atonement for the sins of all. On the former,
the offer is made to those whom God never designed to embrace
it ; on ours, to none but those whom God seriously and in truth
wills that they should avail themselves of it ; on their theory, the
bar to the salvation of the non-elect lies in the want of a provided
sacrifice for sin ; on ours, it rests solely in men themselves ; one
consists, therefore, with a perfect sincerity of offer, the other can-
not be maintained without bringing the sincerity of God into ques-
tion, and fixing a stigma upon his moral truth.

7. Unconditional reprobation cannot be reconciled with that
frequent declaration of Scripture, that God is no respecter op
persons. This phrase, we grant, is not to be interpreted as though
the bounties of the Almighty were dispensed in equal measures to
his creatures. In the administration of favour, there is place for

68 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the exercise of that prerogative which, in a just sense, is called the
sovereignty of God ; but justice knows but of one rule ; it is, in its
nature, settled and fixed, and respects not the person, but the case.
" To have respect of persons" is a phrase, therefore, in Scripture,
which sometimes refers to judicial proceedings, and signifies to judge
from partiality and affection, and not upon the merits of the ques-
tion. It is also used by St. Peter with reference to the acceptance
of Cornelius : " Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of
persons ; but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh
righteousness, is accepted with him." Here it is clear, that to respect
persons, would be to reject or accept them without regard to their
moral qualities, and on some national or other prejudice or partiality
which forms no moral rule of any kind. But if the doctrine of
absolute election and reprobation be true ; if we are to understand
that men like Jacob and Esau, in the Calvinistic construction of the
passage, whilst in the womb of their mother, nay from eternity, are
loved and hated, elected or reprobated, before they have done
" good or evil," then it necessarily follows, that there is precisely
this kind of respect of persons with God ; for his acceptance or
rejection of men stands on some ground of aversion or dislike, which
cannot be resolved into any moral rule, and has no respect to the
merits of the case itself; and if the Scripture affirms that there is no
such respect of persons with God, then the doctrine which implies
it is contradicted by inspired authority.

8. The doctrine of which we are showing the difficulties, brings
with it the repulsive and shocking opinion of the eternal punish-
ment of infants. Some Calvinists have indeed, to get rid of the
difficulty, or rather to put it out of sight, consigned them to annihi-
lation ; but of the annihilation of any human being there is no
intimation in the Word of God. In order, therefore, to avoid the
fearful consequence of admitting the punishment of beings innocent
as to all actual sin, there is no other way than to suppose all children,
dying in infancy, to be an elected portion of mankind, which, how-
ever, would be a mere hypothesis brought in to serve a theory
without any e¥idence. That some of those who, as they suppose,
are under this sentence of reprobation, die in their infancy, is, pro-
bably, what most Calvinists allow ; and if their doctrine be received
cannot be denied ; and it follows, therefore, that all such infants
are eternally lost. Now we know that infants are not lost because
our Lord gave it as a reason why little children ought not to be hin-
dered from coming unto him, that '* of such is the kingdom of hea-
verk" On which Calvin himself remarks, (8) "in this word, 'for
(8) Harm, in Matt, xix, 13.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 69

of such is the kingdom of heaven,' Christ comprehends as well littk
children themselves, as those who in disposition resemble them. Hac
voce, tarn parvulos, quam eorum similes, comprehendit." We are
assured of the salvation of infants, also, because "the free gift has
come upon all men to [in order to] justification of life," and because
children are not capable of rejecting that blessing, and must, there-
fore, derive benefit from it. The point, also, on which we have
just now touched, that " there is no respect of persons with God,"
demonstrates it. For, as it will be acknowledged, that some chil-
dren, dying in infancy, are saved, it must follow, from this principle
and axiom in the Divine government, that all infants are saved : for
the case of all infants, as to innocence or guilt, sin or righteousness,
being the same, and God, as a judge, being " no respecter of per-
sons," but regarding only the merits of the case ; he cannot make
this awful distinction as to them, that one part shall be eternally
saved and the other eternally lost. That doctrine, therefore, which
implies the perdition of infants cannot be congruous to the Scrip-
tures of truth ; but is utterly abhorrent to them. (9)

9. Finally, not to multiply these instances of the difficulties which
accompany the doctrine of absolute reprobation, or of pretention,
(to use the milder term, though the argument is not in the least
changed by it,) it destroys the end of punitive justice. That end
can only be to deter men from offence, and to add strength to the
law of God. But if the whole body of the reprobate are left to the
influence of their fallen nature without remedy, they cannot be
deterred from sin by threats of inevitable punishment ; nor can they
ever submit to the dominion of the law of God : their doom is fixed,
and threats and examples can avail nothing.

We may leave every candid mind to the discussion of these and
many other difficulties, suggested by the doctrine of the Synod of
Dort, as to the election of " a set and determinate number of men"
to eternal life ; and proceed to consider the second branch of this
opinion — that election is unconditional. " It was made," says the
synod, " not upon foresight of faith, and the obedience of faith,
holiness, or any other good quality or disposition, (as a cause or
condition before required in men to be chosen,) but unto faith, and
the obedience of faith, holiness, &c."

Election, we have already said, must be either God's purpose in
eternity to elect actually, or it must be actual election itself in time ;
for as election is choosing men " out of the world," into the true
church of Christ, actual election from eternity is not possible, be-
cause the subjects of election had no existence ; there was no world
W On the case of infants see vol. ii, part 2, page 221.

/O THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to choose them " out of," and no church into which to bring them.
To affirm that any part of mankind were chosen from eternity, in
purpose, (for in no other way- could they be chosen,) to become
members of the church without " foresight of faith, and the obedi-
ence of faith ;" is therefore to say, that God purposed from all
eternity to establish a distinction between the world, "out" of
which the elect are actually chosen, and the church, which has
no foundation in, or respect to, faith and obedience ; in other words,
to constitute his church of persons to whose faith and obedience he
had no respect. For how is this conclusion to be avoided 1 The
subject of this election, it seems, are chosen as men, as Peter, James,
and John, not as believers. God eternally purposed to make Peter,
James, and John members of his church, without respect to their
faith or obedience ; his church is therefore constituted on the sole
principle of this purpose, not upon the basis of faith and obedience ;
and the persons chosen into it in time are chosen because they are
of the number included in this eternal purpose, and with no regard
to their being believers and obedient, or the contrary. How mani-
festly this opposes the Word of God we need scarcely stay to point
out. It contradicts that specific distinction constantly made in
Scripture between the true church and the world, the only marks
of distinction being, as to the former, faith and obedience ; and as
to the latter, unbelief and disobedience — in other words, the church
is composed not merely of men, as Peter, James, and John ; but of
Peter, James, and John believing and obeying : whilst all who be-
lieve not, and obey not, are " the world." The Scriptures make
the essential elements of the church to be believing and obeying
men ; the Synod of Dort makes them to be men in the simple con-
dition of being included in a set and determinate number, chosen
with no respect to faith and obedience. Thus we have laid two
very different foundations upon which to place the superstructure
of the church of Christ ; one of them indeed is to be found in the
Scriptures, but the other only in the theories of men ; and as they
agree not together, one of them must be renounced.

But election, without respect to faith, is contrary also to the history
of the commencement and first constitution of the church of Christ.
Peter, James, and John did not become disciples of Christ in unbe-
lief and disobedience. The very act of their becoming disciples of
Christ, unequivocally implied some degree both of faith and obedi-
ence. They were chosen, not as men, but as believing men. This
is indicated also by the grand rite of baptism, instituted by Christ
when he commissioned his disciples to preach the Gospel, and call
men into his church. That baptism was the gate into this church

■

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 11

cannot be denied ; but faith was required in order to baptism ; and,
where true faith existed, this open confession of Christ would
necessarily follow, without delay. Here, then, we see on what,
grounds men were actually elected into the church of Christ ; it;
was with respect to their faith that they were thus chosen out of the
world, and thus chosen into the church. The rule, too, is universal,
and if so, if it universally holds good that actual election has respect
to faith, then, unless God's eternal purpose to elect be at variance
with his electing, that is, unless he purposes one thing and does
another differing from his purpose ; purposes to elect without re-
spect to faith ; and only actually elects with respect to faith ; his
eternal purpose to elect had respect both to faith and obedience.

It is true, that the Synod of Dort says, that election is " unto faith,
and the obedience of faith," &c, thereby making the end of election
to be faith : in other words their doctrine is, that some men were
personally chosen to believe and obey, even before they existed.
But we have no such doctrine in Scripture as the election of indi-
viduals unto faith ; and it is inconsistent with several passages which
expressly speak of personal election.

" Many are called and few chosen." In this passage we must
understand, that the many who are called, are called to believe and
obey the Gospel, or the calling means nothing ; in other words they
are not called. But if the end of this calling be faith and obedi-
ence, and the end of election also be faith and obedience, then have
we in the text a senseless tautology ; for if the many are called to
believe and obey, then, of course, we need not have been told that
the few are chosen to believe and obey, since the few are included
in the many. But if the " choosing" of the " few" means, as it
must, something different to the " calling" of the " many," then is
the end of election different to the end of calling ; and if the election
be, as is plain from the passage, consequent upon the calling, then
it can mean nothing else than the choosing of those " few" of the
" many," who being obedient to the " calling," had previously be-
lieved and obeyed, into the true church and family of God, which
is the proper and direct object of personal election. This passage,
therefore, which unquestionably speaks of personal election, con-
tradicts the notion of an election unto faith and obedience, and
makes our election consequent upon our obedience to the calling, or
evangelical invitation.

Let this notion of personal election unto faith be tested also by
another passage, in which, like the former, personal election is
spoken of. " I have chosen you out of the world," John xv, 1 9.
According to the notion of the Synod of Dort, the act of election

' (

WS THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

consists in appointing- or ordaining a certain number of the human
race to believe and obey; here the personal electing act is a
choosing out of the world, a choosing, manifestly, into the number
of Christ's disciples, which no man is capable of without a previous
faith ; for the very act of becoming Christ's disciple was a confes-
sion of faith in him.

A third passage, in which election is spoken of as personal, or at
least with more direct reference to individual experience, than to
Christians in their collective capacity as the church of Christ, is
1 Peter i, 2, " Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the
Father, through sanctihcation of the Spirit unto obedience, and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus !" Here obedience is not the end
of election, but of the sanctihcation of the Spirit ; and both are
joined " with the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus," (which, in all
cases, is apprehended by faith,) as the media through which our
election is effected — " elect through sanctihcation of the Spirit," &c.
These cannot, therefore, be the ends of our personal election ; for
if we are elected " through" that sanctihcation of the Spirit which
produces obedience, we are not elected, being unsanctified and
disobedient, in order to be sanctified by the Spirit that we may
obey : it is the work of the Spirit which produces obedient faith,
and through both we are " elected" into the church of God.

Very similar to the passage just explained is 2 Thess. ii, 13, 14,
" But we are bound to give thanks alvvay to God for you, brethren,
because God hath from the beginning chosen you unto salvation,
through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth ; where-
unto he called you by our Gospel to the obtaining of the glory of
our Lord Jesus Christ." As the apostle had been predicting the
future apostasy of persons professing Christianity, he recollects,
with gratitude, that from " the beginning" from the very first recep-
tion of the Gospel in Thessalonic.a, which was preached there by
St. Paul himself with great success, the Thessalonians had mani-
fested no symptoms of this apostasy, but had been honourably
steadfast in the faith. For this he gives thanks to God in the verses
above quoted, and in the 15th exhorts them still "to stand fast."
When, therefore, Calvinistic commentators interpret the clause
"hath chosen you from the beginning," to mean election from
eternity, they make a gratuitous assumption which has nothing in
the scope of the passage to warrant it. Mr. Scott, indeed,(l) rather
depends upon the " calling" of the Thessalonians being, as he states,
subsequent to their election, then, upon an arbitrary interpretation
of the clause " from the beginning" and says, " if the calling of the

(1) Notes in lor

SECOMJ.J I I1KOLOG1CAL INSTITUTES. *«

Thessalonians was the effect of any preceding choice ot them, it
comes to the same thing whether the choice was made the preceding
day, or from the foundation of the world." But the calling of the
members of this church is not represented by the apostle as the effect
of their having been chosen, but on the contrary, their election is
spoken of as the effect of " the sanctification of the Spirit, and
belief of the truth ;" and these, as the effects of the calling of the
Thessalonians by the Gospel, — " whereunto," to which sanctifica-
tion and faith, " he called you by ou~ Gospel." Or the whole may
be considered as the antecedent to the next clause "to which"
election from the beginning, through sanctification of the Spirit, and
belief of the truth, " he called you by our Gospel." Certain it is,
that sanctification and belief of the truth cannot be the ends of
election if they are the means of it, as they are here said to be ; and
we may therefore conclude from this, as well as from the other
passages we have quoted as speaking of the personal election of
believers, that this kind of election is not " unto faith and obedience,"
as stated in " the Judgment of the Synod of Dort," that is, a choice
of individuals to be made believers and obedient persons ; but an
election, as it is expressed both by St. Peter and St. Paul, through
faith and obedience ; or, in other words, a choice of persons
already believing and obedient into the family of God.

There are scarcely any other passages in the New Testament,
which speak expressly of personal election ; but there is another
class of texts in which the term election occurs, which refer to
believers, not distributively, but collectively ; not personally, but as
a body, either existing as particular churches, or as the universal
church ; and, by entirely overlooking, or ingeniously confounding
this obvious distinction, the advocates of unconditional personal
election bring forward such passages with confidence, as proofs of
the doctrine of election unto faith furnished by the word of God.
Thus the Synod of Dort quotes, as the leading proof of its doctrine
of personal election, Eph. i, 4, 5, 6, " According as he hath chosen
us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be
holy and without blame before him in love : having predestinated
us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ, to himself, accord-
ing to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his
grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved." This,
indeed, is the only passage quoted by the Synod of Dort, in winch
the terms chosen and election occur ; and, we may ask, why none
of those on which we have above offered some remarks, were
quoted also, since the subject of personal election is much more
obviously contained in them than in that which they have adduced ?

Vol. in. in

74 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

The only answer is, that the others were perceived not to accord
with the doctrine of " election unto faith and obedience ;" whilst
this, in which the personal election of individual believers is not
referred to, but the collective election of the whole body of Chris-
tians, was better suited to give a colour to their doctrine, because
it speaks, of course, and as the subject required, of election as the
means of faith, and of faith as the end of election, an order which is
reversed when the election of individuals, or the election of any body
of believers, considered distributively and personally, is the subject of
the apostle's discourse. If, indeed, the election spoken of in this
passage were personal election, the Calvinistic doctrine would not
follow from it ; because it would admit of being questioned, whether
the choosing in Christ before the foundation of the world, here
mentioned, was a choice of certain persons, as men merely, or as
believing men, which is surely the most rational. For all choice
necessarily supposes some reason ; but, as men, all things were equal
between those who, according to this scheme, were chosen, and
those who were passed by. But, according to the Calvinists, this
election was made arbitrarily, that is, without any reason, but that
God would have it so ; and to this sense they bend the clause in the
passage under consideration, " according to the good pleasure of his
will." This phrase has, however, no such arbitrary sense. " The
good pleasure of his will" means the benevolent and full acqui-
escence of the will of God with a wise and gracious act ; and,
accordingly, in verse 11, the phrase is varied "according to the
counsel of his own will," an expression which is at utter variance
with the repulsive notion that mere will is in any case the rule of
the Divine conduct, or, in other words, that he does any thing
merely because he will do it, which excludes all " counsel." To
choose men to salvation considered as believers, gives a reason for
election which not only manifests the wisdom and goodness of God,
but has the advantage of being entirely consistent with his own
published and express decree : " he that believeth shall be saved ;
and he that believeth not shall be damned." This revealed and
promulgated decree, we must believe, was according to his eternal
purpose ; and if from eternity he determined that believers, and
only believers in Christ, among the fallen race, should be saved, the
conclusion is inevitable that those whom he chose in Christ " before
the foundation of the world," were considered, not as men merely,
which gives no reason of choice worthy of any rational being, much
less of the ever blessed God ; but as believing men, which harmo-
nizes the doctrine of election with the other doctrines of Scripture,
instead of placing it, as in the Calvinistic seheme, in opposition to

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 75

them. For the choice not being of certain men, as such ; but of
all persons believing ; and all men to whom the Gospel is preached,
being called to believe, every one may place himself in the number
of the persons so elected. Thus we get rid of the doctrine of the
election of a set and determinate number of men ; and with that,
of the fearful consequence, the absolute reprobation of all the rest,
which so few Calvinists themselves have the courage to avow and
maintain.

But though this argument might be very successfully urged
against those who interpret the passage above quoted of personal
election, the context bears unequivocal proofs that it is not of an
election or predestination of this kind of which the apostle speaks ;
but of the election of believing Jews and Gentiles into the church
of God ; in other words, of the eternal purpose of God, upon the
publication of the Gospel, to constitute his visible church no longer
upon the ground of natural descent from Abraham, but upon the
foundation of faith in Christ. For upon no other hypothesis can
that distinction which the apostle makes between the Jews who first
believed, and the Gentile Ephesians, who afterwards believed, be
at all explained. He speaks first of the election of Christians in
general, whether Jews or Gentiles ; using the pronouns " us" and
" we" as comprehending himself and all others. He then proceeds
to the " predestination" of those " who first trusted in Christ :"
plainly meaning himself and other believing Jews. He goes on to
say, that the Ephesians were made partakers of the same faith, and
therefore were the subjects of the same election and predestina-
tion : " in whom ye also trusted after that ye heard the word of
truth :" the preaching of which truth to them as Gentiles, by the
apostle and his coadjutors, was, in consequence of God " having
made known unto them the mystery of his will, that in the dispen-
sation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all
things in Christ ;" which, in the next chapter, a manifest continu-
ance of the same head of discourse, is explained to mean the calling
in of the Gentiles with the believing Jews, reconciling " both unto
God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby."
The same subject he pursues in the third chapter, representing this
union of believing Jews and Gentiles in one church as the revela-
tion of the mystery which had been hid " from the beginning of the
world ;" but was now manifested " according to the eternal pur-
pose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord," verses 8-11.
Here then we have the true meaning of the election and predesti-
nation of the Ephesians spoken of in the opening of the epistle : it
was their election, as Gentiles, to be, along with the believing Jews,

1U UIEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE*. [PARI

the church of God, his acknowledged people on earth ; which
election was according to God's " eternal purpose," to change the
constitution of his church ; to establish it on the ground of faith in
Christ : and thus to extend it into all nations. So far as this re-
spected the Ephesians in general, their election to hear the Gospel
sooner than many other Gentiles was unconditional and sovereign,
and was an election " unto faith and obedience of faith ;" that is to
say, these were the ends of that election ; but so far as the Ephe-
sians were concerned, as individuals, they were actually chosen
into the church of Christ as its vital members, on their believing ;
and so the election to the saving benefits of the Gospel was a conse-
quence of their faith, and not the end of it, and was therefore condi-
tional— " in whom also ye trusted, after that ye heard the Word
of Truth, the Gospel of your salvation ; in whom also, after that ye
believed, ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise."

The Calvinistic doctrine of election unto faith has no stronger-
passage than this to lean upon for support ; and this manifestly
fails them : whilst other passages in which the terms election, ov
chosen occur, all favour a very different view of the Scripture doc-
trine. When we are commanded to be diligent "to make our
calling and election sure," or firm, this supposes that it may be
rendered nugatory by want of diligence ; a doctrine which cannot
comport with the absolute certainty of our salvation as founded
upon a decree determining, infallibly, our personal election to
eternal life, and our faith and obedience in order to it. When
believers are called a " chosen generation," they are also called " a
royal priesthood, a holy people ;" and if the latter characteristics
depend upon, and are consequences of faith, so the former depends
upon a previous faith, and is the consequence of it. Finally, although
these terms themselves occur in but few passages, and in all of
them which respect the personal experience of individuals express,
or necessarily imply, the previous condition of faith, there are many
others, which, in different terms, embody the same doctrine. The
phrases to be " in Christ," and to be " Christ's," are, doubtless,
equivalent to the personal election of believers : and these, and
similar modes of expression, are constantly occurring in the New
Testament ; but no man is ever represented as " Christ's," or as
" in Christ," by an eternal election unto faith ; but, on the contrary*
as entering into that relation which is termed being " in Christ ;
or being " Christ's," through personal faith alone. The Scripture
"knows no such distinctions as elect unbelievers, and elect believers ;
but all unbelievers are represented as " of the world ;" under
c< condemnation," so that " the wrath of God abideth upon them :'*

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 77

and as liable to eternal ruin. But if Calvinistic election be true,
then there are elect unbelievers ; and. with respect to these, the
doctrine of Scripture is contradicted : for they are not " of the
world," though in a state of unbelief, since God from eternity
" chose them out of the world ;" they are not under condemnation,
"but were justified from eternity;" "the wrath of God does not
abide upon them," for (hey are objects of an unchangeable love
which has decreed their salvation : subject to no conditions what-
ever ; and therefore no state of unbelief can make them objects of
wrath, as no condition of faith can make them objects of a love
which was moved by no such consideration. Nor are they liable
to ruin. They never were, nor can be liable to it : the very threats
of God are without meaning as to them, and their consciousness of
guilt and danger under the awakenings of the Spirit are deceptious,
and unreal ; contradicting the work of the Spirit in the- heart of
man. as the Spirit of Truth. For if he "convinces them of
sin," he convinces them of danger ; but they are, in fact, in no
danger ; and the monstrous conclusion follows inevitably, that the
Spirit is employed in exciting fears which have no foundation.

We have thus considered the scriptural doctrine of election ; ant!
as we find nothing in it which can warrant any one to limit the
meaning of the texts we have adduced to prove that Christ made
an actual atonement for the sins of all mankind, we may proceed
to examine another class of Scripture proofs quoted by Calvinists
to strengthen their argument : — those which speak of the " calling"
and "predestination" of believers.

The terms "to call," "called," and "calling," very frequently
occur in the New Testament, and especially in the Epistles. Some-
times " to call" signifies to invite to the blessings of the Gospel, to
offer salvation through Christ, either by God himself, or under his
appointment, by his servants ; and in the parable of the marriage
of the king's son, Matt, xxii, 1-14, which appears to have given
rise to many instances of the use of this term in the Epistles, we
have three descriptions of " called," or invited persons. First, the
disobedient who would not come in at the call ; but made light of
it. Second, the class of persons represented by the man who, when
the king came in to see his guests, had not on the wedding gar-
ment ; and with respect to whom our Lord makes the general
remark, " for many are called, but few are chosen." The persons
thus represented by this individual culprit, were not only " called,"
but actually came into the company. Third, the approved guests ;
those who were both called and chosen. As far as the simple
calling, or invitation is concerned, all these three classes stand upon

78 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

equal ground ; all were invited ; and it depended upon their choice
and conduct whether they. embraced the invitation, and were ad-
mitted as guests. We have nothing here to countenance the Cal-
vinistic fiction, which is termed "effectual calling." This implies
an irresistible influence exerted upon all the approved guests, but
withheld from the disobedient, who could not, therefore, be other-
wise than disobedient ; or at most could only come in without that
wedding garment, which it was never put into their power to take
out of the king's wardrobe ; the want of which, would necessarily
exclude them, if not from the church on earth, yet from the church
in heaven. The doctrine of the parable is in entire contradiction
to this ; for they who refused, and they who complied but partially
with the calling, are represented, not merely as being left without
the benefit of the feast ; but as incurring additional guilt and con-
demnation for refusing the invitation. It is to this offer of salvation
by the Gospel, this invitation to spiritual and eternal benefits, that
St. Peter appears to refer, when he says, Acts ii, 39, " For the pro-
mise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off,
even as many as the Lord our God shall call :" a passage which,
we may observe, in passing, declares " the promise" to be as exten-
sive as the " calling ;" in other words, as the offer or invitation. To
this also, St. Paul refers, Rom. i, 5, 6. " By whom we have receiv-
ed grace and apostleship for obedience to the faith among all nations,
for his name :" that is, to publish his Gospel, in order to bring all
nations to the obedience of faith ; " among whom are ye also the
called of Jesus Christ ;" you at Rome have heard the Gospel,
and have been invited to salvation in consequence of this design.
This promulgation of the Gospel, by the ministry of the apostle,
personally, under the name of calling, is also referred to in Gala-
tians, i, 6, "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that
called you into the grace of Christ," (obviously meaning that it was
the apostle himself who had called them by his preaching to the
grace of Christ,) "unto another Gospel." So also in chap, v, 13,
" For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty." Again, 1 Thess.
ii, 12, " That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you
[invited you] to his kingdom and glory."

In our Lord's parable it will also be observed, that the persons
called are not invited as separate individuals to partake of solitary
blessings; but they are called to "a feast," into a company, or
society, before whom the banquet is spread. The full revelation of
the transfer of the visible church of Christ from Jews by birth, to
believers of all nations, was not, however, then made. When this
branch of the evangelic system was fully revealed to the apostles.,

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 7ff

and taught by them to others, that part of our Lord's parable which
was not at first developed, was more particularly inculcated by his
inspired followers. The calling of guests to the evangelical feast,
we now more fully learn, was not the mere calling of men to par-
take of spiritual benefits ; but calling them also to form a spiritual
society composed of Jews and Gentiles, the believing men of all
nations ; to have a common fellowship in these blessings, and to be
formed into this fellowship for the purpose of increasing their num-
ber, and diffusing the benefits of salvation among the people or
nation to which they respectively belonged. The invitation, " the
calling" of the first preachers, was to all who heard them in Rome,
in Ephesus, in Corinth, in all other places ; and those who em-
braced it, and joined themselves to the church by faith, baptism,
and continued public profession, were named especially and emi-
nently " the called ;" because of their obedience to the invitation.
They not only put in their claim to the blessings of Christianity
individually ; but became members of the new church, that spirit-
ual society of believers which God now visibly owned as his people.
As they were thus called into a common fellowship by the Gospel,
this is sometimes termed their " vocation :" as the object of this
church state was to promote " holiness," it is termed a " holy voca-
tion :" as sanctity was required of the members, they are said to
have been " called to be saints :" as the final result was, through
the mercy of God, to be eternal life, we hear of " the hope of their
calling ;" and of their being " called to his eternal glory by Christ
Jesus."

These views will abundantly explain the various passages in
which the term " calling" occurs in the Epistles, Rom. ix, 24,
"Even us whom he hath called, not of the Jews only ; but also
of the Gentiles :" that is, whom he hath made members of his
church through faith. 1 Cor. i, 24, " But unto them which arc
called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the
wisdom of God ;" the wisdom and efficacy of the Gospel being, of
course, acknowledged in their very profession of Christ, in opposi-
tion to those to whom the preaching of " Christ crucified," was " a
stumbling block," and "foolishness." 1 Cor. vii, 18, " Is any man
called :" (brought to acknowledge Christ, and to become a mem-
ber of his church) " being circumcised, let him not become uncir-
cumcised : is any called in uncircumcision, let him not be circum-
cised." Eph. iv, 1-4, "That ye walk worthy of the vocation,
wherewith ye are called. There is one body, and one spirit, even
as ye are called in one hope of your calling." 1 Thess. ii, 12,
"That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called yon to his

SO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. frART

kingdom and glory." 2 Thess. ii, 13, 14, " Through sanctification
of the Spirit and belief of the truth, whereunto he called you by
our Gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ."
2 Tim. i, 9, 10, "Who hath saved us and called us with a holy
calling ; not according to our works, but according to his own pur-
pose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus, before the- world
began ; but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour
Jesus Christ :" on which passage we may remark, that the object
of the " calling," and the " purpose," mentioned in it, must of ne-
cessity be interpreted to mean the establishment of the church on
the principle of faith ; and not, as formerly, on natural descent.
For personal election, and a purpose of effectual personal calling,
could not have been hidden till manifested by the appearing of
Christ ; since every instance of true conversion to God in any age
prior to the appealing of Christ, would be as much a manifestation
of eternal election, and an instance of personal effectual calling",
according to the Calvinistic scheme, as it was after the appearance
of Christ. The apostle is speaking of a purpose of God, which was
kept secret till revealed by the Christian system ; and, from various
other parallel passages, we learn that this secret, this " mystery,"
as he often calls it, was the union of the Jews and Gentiles in "one
body," or church, by faith. . .

In none of these passages is the doctrine of the exclusive calling
of any set number of men contained ; and the Synod of Dort, as
though they felt this, only attempt to reason the doctrine from a
text not yet quoted ; but which we will now examine. It is Rom.
viii, 30 : " Whom he did predestinate, them he also called ; and
whom he called, them he also justified ; and whom he justified, them
he also glorified." This is the text on which Calvinists chiefly rest
their doctrine of effectual calling ; and tracing it, as they say,
through its steps and links, they conclude, that a set and determi-
nate number of persons having been predestinated unto salvation,
this set number only are called effectually, then justified, and finally
glorified. The words of the Synod of Dort are, "he hath chosen
a set number of certain men, neither better, nor more worthy than
others ; but lying in the common misery with others, to salvation
in Christ, whom he had also appointed the Mediator and Head of
the elect ; and the foundation of salvation from all eternity ; and so
he decreed to give them to him to be saved ; and eifectually to
call, and draw them to a communion with him, by his word and
Spirit ; or to give them a true faith in him : to justify, sanctify, and
finally glorify them ; having been kept in the communion of his

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 81

Son, to the demonstration of his mercy, and the praise of the riches
of his glorious grace." (2)

The text under consideration is added by the Synod, in proof of
the doctrine of this article ; but it was evidently nothing to the
purpose, unless it had spoken of a set and determinate number of
men as predestinated and called, independent of any consideration
of their faith and obedience ; which number, as being determinate,
would, by consequence, exclude the rest. As these are points on
which the text is at least silent, there is nothing in it unfriendly to
those arguments founded on explicit texts of Holy Writ which have
been already urged against this view of election ; and with this
notion of election is refuted, also, the cognate doctrine of effectual
calling, considered as a work of God in the heart of which the elect
only can be the subjects. But the passage, having been pressed
into so alien a service, deserves consideration ; and it will be found
that it indeed speaks of the privileges and hopes of true believers ;
but not of those privileges and hopes as secured to them by any
such decree of election as the Synod has advocated. To prove
this, we remark, 1. That the chapter in which the text is found, is
the lofty and animating conclusion of St. Paul's argument on justifi-
cation by faith : it is a discourse of that present state of pardon and
sanctity, and of that future hope of felicity, into which justification
introduces believers, notwithstanding those sufferings and persecu-
tions of the present life to which those to whom he wrote were
exposed, and under which they had need of encouragement. It
was, obviously, not in his design here to speak of the doctrines of
election and non-election, however these doctrines may be under-
stood. There is nothing in the course of his argument which leads
to them ; and those who make use of the text in question for this
purpose are obliged, therefore, to press it, by circuitous inference,,
into their service.

2. As the passage stands in intimate connexion with an important
and elucidatory context, it ought not to be considered as insulated
and complete in itself; which has been the great source of errone-
ous interpretations. Under the sufferings of the present time, the
apostle encourages those who had believed with the hope of glori-
ous resurrection : this forms the subject of his consolatory remarks
from verse 1 7 to 25. The assistance and " intercession" of the
Spirit ; and the working of "all things together for good to them
that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose :"
Hearly meaning those who, according to the Divine design, had

(2) Sentcntia de Divina Procdcst. Art. 7. Est autem Elcctio irrrtrratabilo Dei
propositum, &c.

Vol. Ill 1 1

82 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

received and embraced the Gospel in truth, form two additional
topics of consolatory suggestion. The passage under consideration
immediately follows, and is in full, for the Synod has quoted it short :
" And we know that all things work together for good to them that
love God, to them who are the called (who are called) according
to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predesti-
nate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the
first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predes-
tinate, them he also called ; and whom he called, them he also
justified ; and whom he justified, them he also glorified." The
connexion is here manifest. " The sufferings of the present time
could only work together for the good" of them that " love God,w
by being connected with, and compensated in a future state by, a
glorious resurrection from the dead ; and therefore the apostle
shows that this was the design of God, the ultimate and triumphant
result of the administration of his grace, that they who love God
here, should be conformed to the image of his Son, in his glorified
state, that he might be " the first-born among brethren :" the head
and chief of the redeemed, who shall be acknowledged as his
" brethren," and co-heirs of his glory. Thus the whole of the 29th
verse, is a reason given to show why " all things, however painful
in the present life, work together for good to them that love God ;"
and it is therefore introduced by the connective particle, 'on, which
has here, obviously, a causal signification, "for (because) whom he
did foreknow, he also did predestinate."

3. The apostle is here speaking, we grant, not of the foreknow-
ledge or predestination of bodies of men to church privileges ; but
of the experience of believers, taken distributively and personally.
This will, however, be found to strengthen our argument against
the use made of the latter part of the passage by the Synod of Dort.

It is affirmed of believers, that they were "foreknown." This
term may be taken in the sense of fore-approved. For not only is
it common with the sacred writers to express approval by the phrase
" to knoio ;" of which Hebraism the instances are many in the New
Testament ; but in Rom. xi, 2, " to foreknow," is best interpreted
into this meaning. " God hath not cast away his people which he
foreknew." It is not of the whole people of Israel of which the
apostle here speaks, as the context shows ; but of the believing
part of them, called subsequently " the remnant according to the
election of grace :" a clause which has been before explained. The
question put by the apostle into the mouth of an objecting Jew, is,
" Hath God cast away his people ?" This is denied ; but the illus-
tration taken from the reservation of seven thousand men, in the

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 83

time of Elijah, who had not bowed the knee to Baal, proves that
St Paul meant to say, that God had cast off, from being members
of his church, all but the remnant ; all but his people whom he
"foreknew ;" those who had laid aside the inveterate prejudices of
their nation, and had entered into the new Christian church by
faith. These he foreknew, that is approved ; and so received them
into his church. In this sense of the term foreknew, the text in
question harmonizes well with the context. " All things work to-
gether for good to them that love God," &c. " For, whom he did
foreknow," (approve as lovers of him,) " he predestinated to be
conformed to the image of his Son," in mind and temper here, and
especially in glory hereafter.

The second sense of foreknowing is that of simple prescience ;
and if any prefer this we shall not dispute with him, since it will
come to the same issue. The foreknowledge of men must have
respect either simply to their existence as persons, or as existing
under some particular circumstances and characters. If persons
only be the objects of this foreknowledge, then has God's prescience
no more to do with the salvation of the elect, than of the non-elect,
since all are equally foreknown as persons in a state of existence :
and we might as well argue the glorification of the reprobate from
God's foreknowing them, in this sense, as that of the elect. The
objects of this foreknowledge, then, must be men under certain
circumstances and characters; not in their simple existence as
rational beings. If, therefore, the term " foreknow," in the passage
above cited, "God hath not cast away his people whom he fore-
knew," be taken in the sense of prescience, those of the general
mass of Jews, who were not " cast away," were foreknown under
some circumstance and character which distinguished them from
the others ; and what this was, is made sufficiently plain from the
context, — the persons foreknown, were the then believing part of
the Jews, " even so then, at this present time also, there is a remnant,
according to the election of grace." Equally clear are the circum-
stances and character under which, more generally, the apostle
represents believers as having been foreknown in the text more
immediately under examination. Those " whom he did foreknow,"
are manifestly the believers of whom he speaks in the discourse ;
and who are called in chap, viii, 28, " them that love God." Under
some character he must have foreknown them, or his foreknowledge
of them would not be special and distinctive ; it would afford no
ground from which to argue any thing respecting them ; it could
make no difference between them and others. This specific charac-
ter is given by the apostle ; but it is not that which is gratuitously

84 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

assumed by the Synod of Dort a selection of them from the mass ;
without respect to their faith. It is their faith itself: for of be-
lievers only is St. Paul speaking as the subjects of this foreknow-
ledge ; and such believers too as " love God," and who, having
actually embraced the heavenly invitation, are emphatically said to
be, as before explained, " called according to his purpose."

To predestinate, or to determine before hand, is the next term
in the text ; but here it is also to be remarked, that the persons
predestinated, or before determined to be glorified with Christ, are
the same persons, under the same circumstances and character, as
those who are said to have been foreknown of God ; and what has
been said under the former term, applies therefore, in part, to this.
The subjects of predestination are the persons foreknown, and the
persons foreknown, are true believers : foreknown as such, or they
could not have been specially, or distinctively foreknown, accord-
ing to the doctrine of the apostle. This predestination, then, is not
of persons " unto faith and obedience," but of believing and obe-
dient persons unto eternal glory. Nor are faith and obedience
mentioned any where as the end of predestination, except in Eph.
chap, i, where we have already proved, when treating of election,
that the predestination spoken of in that chapter, is the eternal pur-
pose of God to choose the Gentile Ephesians into his church, along
with the believing Jews ; and that what is there said, is not intended
of personal, but of collective election and predestination, and that
to the means and ordinances of salvation. For the argument, by
which this is established, let the reader, to prevent repetition, turn
back.

The passage before us, then, declares, that true believers were
foreknown, and predestinated to eternal glory ; and when the apos-
tle adds, " moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called ;
and whom he called, them he also justified ; and whom he justified,
them he also glorified :" he shows in particular how the Divine
purpose to glorify believers is carried into effect, through all its
stages. The great instrument of bringing men to " love God" is
the Gospel ; they are therefore called, invited by it, to this state
and benefit: the calling being obeyed, they are justified; and
being justified, and continuing in that state of grace, they are glo-
rified. This is the plain and obvious course of the amplification
pursued by the apostle ; but let us remark how many unscriptural
notions the Synod of Dort engrafts upon it. First, a "certain
number" of persons, not as believers, but as men, are foreknown ;
then a decree of predestination to eternal life goes forth in their
favour ; but still without respect to them as believing men as the

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 85

subjects of that decree ; — then we suppose, by another decree, (for
the first cannot look at qualities at all,) and by a second predestina-
tion they are to be made believers ; — then they are exclusively
"called :" then infallibly justified ; and being justified, are infallibly
glorified. In opposition to these notions, we have already shown,
that the persons spoken of are foreknown and predestinated as
believers, not as men, or persons ; and we may also oppose scrip-
tural objections to every other part of the interpretation.

As to calling, we allow that all of whom the apostle speaks are
necessarily " called ;" for since he is discoursing of the predestina-
tion of believers in Christ to eternal glory, and does not touch the
question of the salvation, or otherwise, of those who have not the
means of becoming such, the calling of the Gospel is necessarily
supposed, as it is only upon that Divine system being proposed to
their faith, that they could become believers in Christ. But though
all such as the apostle speaks of, are " called ;" they, are not the
only persons called : on the contrary, our Lord declares, that
"many are called, but/eio chosen." To confine the calling here
spoken of to those who are actually saved, it was necessary to invent
the fiction of " effectual calling," which is made peculiar to the
elect ; but calling is the invitation, and offer, and publication of the
Gospel : a bringing men into a state of Christian privilege to be
improved unto salvation, and not an operation in them. Effectual
invitation, effectual offer, and effectual publication, are turns of the
phrase which sufficiently expose the delusiveness of their comment.
By effectual calling, they mean an inward compelling of the mind to
embrace the outward invitation of theVxospel, and to yield to the
inward solicitations of the Spirit which accompanies it ; but this,
whether true or false, is a totally different thing from all that the
New Testament terms "calling" It is true, that some embrace
the call, and others reject it, yet is there in the " calling" of the
Scripture nothing exclusively appropriate to those who are finally
saved ; and though the apostle supposes those whom he speaks of
in the text as " called," to have been obedient, he confines not the
calling itself to them so as to exclude others, — still " many are
called." Nor is the Synod more sound in assuming that all nho
are called are "justified." If "many are called, and few chosen,*"
this assumption is unfounded : nay, all compliances with the call,
do not issue in justification ; for the man who not only heard the
call, but came in to the feast, put not on the wedding garment, and
was therefore finally cast out. Equally contradictory to the Scrip-
ture is it so to explain St. Paul here, as to make him say, that all
who are justified, are also elorified. The justified are glorified ;

8& THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

but not, as we have seen from various texts of Scriptures already,
all who are justified. For if we have established it, that the per-
sons who " turn back to perdition ;" " make shipwreck of faith, and
of a good conscience ;" who turn out of the " way of righteousness ;"
who forget that they were "purged from their old sins ;" who have
" tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to
come ; and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost," and were
" sanctified" with the blood, they afterwards " counted an unholy
thing ;" are represented by the apostles to have been in a state of
grace and acceptance with God, through Christ ; then all persons
justified, are not infallibly glorified ; but only such are saved as
" endure to the end ;" and they only receive that " crown of life,"
who are " faithful unto death."

The clear reason why the apostle, having stated that true be-
lievers were foreknown and predestinated, introduces also the order
and method of their salvation, was, to connect that salvation with
the Gospel, and the work of Christ ; and to secure to him the glory
of it. The Gospel reveals it, that those who " love God," shall find
that " all things work together for their good," because (o<n) they
are " predestinated to be conformed to the image of the Son of
God, in his glory ; yet the Gospel did not find them lovers of God,
but made them so. Since, therefore, none but such persons were
so foreknown and predestinated to be heirs of glory, the Gospel
calling was issued according to " his purpose," or plan of bringing
them that love him to glory, in order to produce this love in them.
" Whom" he thus called, assuming them to be obedient to the call,
he justified ; "and whom he justified," assuming them to be faithful
unto death, he "glorified." But since the persons predestinated
were contemplated as believers, not as a certain number of persons ;
then all to whom the invitation was issued might obey that call, and
all might be justified, and all glorified. In other words, all who
heard the Gospel, might, through it, be brought to love God ; and
might take their places among those who were " predestinated to
be conformed to the image of his Son." For since the predestina-
tion, as we have seen, was not of a certain number of persons, but
of all believers who love God ; then, either it must be allowed, that
all who were called by the Gospel, might take the character and
circumstances which, would bring them under the predestination
mentioned by the apostle ; or else those who deny this, are bound
to the conclusion, that God calls (invites) many, whom he never
intends to admit to the celestial feast ; and not only so, but punishes
them, with the severity of a relentless displeasure, for not obeying
an invitation which he never designed them to accept, and which

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 87

they never had the power to accept. In other words, the inteq3ret-
ation of this passage by the Synod of Dort obliges all who follow
it to admit all the consequences connected with the doctrine of
reprobation, as before stated.

CHAPTER XXVII.

An Examination of certain Passages of Scripture, sup-
posed to limit the Extent of Christ's Redemption.

Having now shown, that those passages of Holy Writ, in which
the terms election, calling, predestination, and foreknow-
ledge occur, do not warrant those inferences, by which Calvinists
attempt to restrain the signification of those declarations with
respect to the extent of the benefit of Christ's death which are
expressed in terms so universal in the New Testament, w» may
conclude our investigation of the sense of Scripture on this point,
by adverting to some of those insulated texts which are most fre-
quently adduced to support the same conclusion.

John vi, 37, " All that the Father giveth me shall come to me ;
and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out."

It is inferred from this, and some similar passages in the Gospels,
that by a transaction between the Father and the Son, a certain
number of persons called " the elect," were given to Christ, and in
process of time " drawn" to him by the Father ; and that as none
can be saved but those thus " given" to him, and " drawn" by the
Father, the doctrine of " distinguishing grace" is established ; and
the rest of mankind, not having been given by the Father to the
Son, can have no saving participation in the benefits of a redemp-
tion, which did not extend to them. This fiction has often been
defended with much ingenuity ; but it remains a fiction still unsup-
ported by any good interpretation of the texts which have been
assumed as its foundation.

1. The first objection to the view usually taken by Calvinists of
this text, is, that in the case of the perverse Jews, with whom the
discourse of Christ was held, it places the reason of their not
" coming" to Christ, in their not having been "given" to him by the
Father; whereas our Lord, on the contrary, places it in them-
selves, and shows that he considered their case to be in their own
hands by his inviting them to come to him, and reproving them
because they would not come. " Ye have not his word (the word
of the Father) .abiding in you ; for whom he hath sent, him ye be*

88 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

lieve not," John v, 38. " And ye will not come to me that ye may
have life," verse 40. " How can ye believe, which receive honour
one of another," verse 44. " For had ye believed Moses, ye would
have believed me, for he wrote of me," verse 46. Now these
statements cannot stand together ; for if the true reason why the
perverse Jews did not believe in our Lord was, that they had not
been given to him of the Father, then it lay not in themselves ; but
if the reason was that "his word did not abide in them," that they
" would not come to him ;" that they sought worldly " honour ;"
finally, that they believed not Moses's writings ; then it is altogether
contradictory to these declarations, to place it in an act of God ; to
which it is not attributed in any part of the discourse.

2. To be " given" by the Father to Christ, is a phrase abundantly
explained in the context which this class of interpreters generally
overlook.

It had a special application to those pious Jews, who " waited
for redemption at Jerusalem :" those who read and believed the
writings of Moses, (a general term it would seem for the Old Testa-
ment Scriptures,) and who were thus prepared, by more spiritual
views than the rest, though they were not unmixed with obscurity,
to receive Christ as the Messiah. Of this description were Peter,
Andrew, Philip, Nathanael, Lazarus and his sisters, and many
others. Philip says to Nathanael, " We have found him of whom
Moses in the law and the prophets, did write ;" and Nathanael was
manifestly a pious Jew ; for our Lord said of him, " Behold an
Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." The light which such honest
inquirers into the meaning of the Scriptures obtained as to the
import of their testimony concerning the Messiah, and the character
and claims of Jesus, is expressly attributed to the teaching and
revelation of " the Father." So, after Peter's confession, our
Lord exclaimed, " Blessed art thou Simon Bar Jonah, for flesh and
blood hath not revealed it unto thee ; but my Father which is in
heaven." This teaching, and its influence upon the mind is, in
John vi, 44, called the " drawing" of the Father, " No man can
come to me, except the Father draw him ;" for, that " to draw"
and " to teach" mean the same thing, is evident, since our Lord
immediately adds, fc it is written in the prophets, and they shall be
all taught of God ;" and then subjoins this exegetical observation :
— " every man, therefore, that hath heard, and hath learned of the.
Father, cometh to me." Those who truly " believed" Moses's
words, then, were under the Father's illuminating influence, " heard
and learned of the Father ;" were " drawn" of the Father ; and so,
bv the Father, were " given to Christ," as his disciples, to be more

SECOND. J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE^. ^0

fully taught the mysteries of his religion, and to be made the saving
partakers of its benefits ; — for " this is the Father's will which sent
me, that of all which he hath given me (thus to perfect in know-
ledge, and to exalt into holiness) I should lose nothing ; but should
raise it up again at the last day." Thus we have exhibited that
beautiful process in the work of God in the hearts of sincere Jews,
which took place in their transit from one dispensation to another,
from Moses to Christ. Taught of the Father ; led into the sincere
belief, and general spiritual understanding of the Scriptures as to
the Messiah ; when Christ appeared, they were " drawn" and
" given" to him, as the now visible and accredited Head, Teacher,
Lord, and Saviour of the church. All in this view is natural,
explicit, and supported by the context ; all in the Calvinistic inter-
pretation appears forced, obscure, and inapplicable to the whole
tenor of the discourse. For to what end of edification of any kind,
were the Jews told that none but a certain number, elected from
eternity, and given to him before the world was by the Father,
should come to him ; and that they to whom he was then speaking
were not of that number 1 But the coherence of the discourse is
manifest, when, in these sermons of our Lord, they were told that
their not coming to Christ was the proof of their unbelief in Moses's
writings ; that they were not " taught of God ;" that they had
neither " heard nor learned of the Father," whom they yet professed
to worship, and seek ; and that, as the hinderance to their coming
to Christ was in the state of their hearts, it was remediable by a
diligent and honest search of the Scriptures ; and by listening to
the teachings of God. To this very class of Jews our Lord, in this
same discourse, says, " Search the Scriptures ;" but to what end
were they to do this, if, in the Calvinistic sense, they were not given
to him of the Father ? The text in question, then, thus opened by
a reference to the whole discourse, is of obvious meaning. " All
that the Father giveth me after this preparing teaching, shall or icill
come to me ; (for it is simply the future tense of the indicative mood
which is used ; and no notion of irresistible influence is conveyed ;)
and him that cometh to me, I will in no wise cast out." The latter
clause is added to show the perfect harmony of design between
Christ and the Father, a point often adverted to in this discourse :
for " I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the
Avill of him that sent me." Whom, therefore, the Father so gives, 1
receive : I enter upon my assigned office, and shall be faithful to it.
In reference also to the work of God in the hearts of men in gene*-
ral, as well as to the honest and inquiring Jews of our Lord's da) ,
these passages have a clear and intercstina; application. The work
Vol. Ill 12

90 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

of the Father is carried on by his convincing and teaching Spirit ;
but that Spirit " testifies" of Christ, " leads" to Christ, and " gives"
to Christ, that we may receive the full benefit of his sacrifice and
salvation, and be placed in the church of which he is the Head.
But in this there is no exclusion. That which hinders others from
coming to Christ, is that which hinders them from being " draAvn"
of the Father ; from " hearing and learning" of the Father, in his
holy word, and by his Spirit ; which hindrance is the moral state
of the heart, not any exclusive decree ; not the want of teaching,
or drawing ; but, as it is compendiously expressed in Scripture, a
"resisting of the Holy Ghost."

Matt, xx, .15, 16, " Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with
my own ] Is thine eye evil because I am good ? So the last shall be
iirst, and the first last ; for many are called but few chosen."

This passage has been often urged in proof of the doctrine of
unconditional election ; and the argument raised upon it is, that.
God has a right to dispense grace and glory to whom he will, on a
principle of pure sovereignty ; and to leave others to perish in their
sins. That the passage has no relation to this doctrine, needs no
other wproof than that it is the conclusion of the parable of the
labourers in the vineyard. The householder givesto them that
" wrought but one hour" an equal reward to that bestowed upon
those who had laboured through the twelve. The latter received
the full price of the day's labour agreed upon ; and the former were
made subjects of a special and sovereign dispensation of grace.
The exercise of the Divine sovereignty, in bestowing degrees of
grace, or reward, is the subject of the parable, and no one disputes
it ; but, according to the Calvinistic interpretation, no grace at all,
no reward, is bestowed upon the non-elect, who are, moreover,
punished for rejecting a grace never offered. The absurdity of
such a use of the parable is obvious. It relates to no such subject ;
for its moral manifestly relates to the reception of great offenders,
and especially of the Gentiles, into the favour of Christ, and the-
abundant rewards of Heaven.

2 Timothy ii, 19, "Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth
sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his ; and,
Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity."
The apostle, in this chapter, is speaking of those ancient heretics
who affirmed " that the resurrection is past already, and overthrew
the faith of some." What then 1 the truth itself is not overthrown ;
the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, or inscription,
" The Lord knoweth," or appro veth, or, if it please better, distin-
e^vishes and acknowledges " them that are his ;" and, " Let every

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. t)l

one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity ;'* which
is as much as to say that none are truly " the Lord's" who do not
depart from iniquity ; and that those whose faith is " overthrown"
by the influence of corrupt principles and manners, are no longer
accounted " his :" all which is perfectly congruous with the opin-
ions of those who hold the unrestricted extent of the death of Christ.
Towards the Calvinistic doctrine, this text certainly bears no friendly
aspect ; for surely it was of little consequence to any, to have their
" faith overthrown," if that faith never was, nor could be, connected
with salvation.

John x, 26, " But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep,
as I said unto you."

The argument here is, that the cause of the unbelief of the per-
sons addressed was, that they were not of the number given to
Christ by the Father, from eternity, to the exclusion of all Others. (30)
Let it, however, be observed, that in direct opposition to this, men
are called the sheep of Christ by our Lord himself, not with refer-
ence to any supposed transaction between the Father and the Son
in eternity, which is never even hinted at, but because of their
qualities and acts. " My sheep hear my voice, and I know them ;
and they follow me." " A stranger will they not follow." Why
then did not the Jews believe 1 Because they had not the qualities
of Christ's sheep : they were neither discriminating as to the voice
of the shepherd, nor obedient to it. The usual Calvinistic interpret-
ation brings in our Lord, in this instance, as teaching the Jews thai;
the reason why they did not believe on him, was, that they could
not believe ! for, as Mr. Scott says in the note below, " not being
of that chosen remnant, they were left to the pride and enmity ol
their carnal hearts." This was not likely to be very edifying to
them. But the words of our Lord are manifestly words of reproof,
grounded, not upon acts of God, but upon acts of their own ; and
they are parallel to the passages — " If God were your Father, ye
would love me," chap, viii, 42. " Every one that is of the truth
heareth my voice," xviii, 37. " How can ye believe, which receive
honour one of another," v, 44.

John xiii, 18, "I speak not of you all: I know whom I have
chosen : but that the Scripture may be fulfilled, He that cateth
bread with me hath lifted up his heel against inc."

" He perfectly knew," says Mr. Scott on the passage, " what

(3) " The true reason why they did not believe was, the want of that eimplc,
teachable, and inoffensive temper, which characterized his sheep, fok not being
of that chosen remnant, they were left, to the prido and enmity of their c'aTn?T
".•■r>rt>- "-,-SeoTT's Com-

92 THEOLOGICAL flNSTTT U'fES. [PART

persons he had chosen, as well as which of them were chosen unto
salvation." This is surely making our Lord utter a very unmean-
ing truism ; for as he chose the apostles, so he must have " knowrC
that he chose them. Dr. Whitby's interpretation is, therefore, to
"be taken in preference. " I know the temper and disposition of
those whom I have chosen, and what I may expect from every one
of them ; for which case I said, ' Ye are not all clean ;' but God in
his wisdom hath permitted this, that as Ahithophel betrayed David,
though he was his familiar friend, so Judas, my familiar at my table,
might betray the Son of God ; and so the words recorded, Psalms
xli, 9, might be fulfilled in him also of whom king David was the
type."(4) Certainly Judas was "chosen" as well as the rest
" Have not I chosen you ticelve, and one of you is a devil 1" nor have
we any reason to conclude that Christ uses the term chosen differ-
ently in the two passages. When, therefore, our Lord says, " I
know whom I have chosen," the term know must be taken in the
sense of discriminating character.

John xv, 1 6, " Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you,
and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit." Mr.
Scott, whom, as being a modern Calvinistic commentator, we rather
choose again to quote, interprets — " chosen them unto salvation."
In its proper sense, we make no objection to this phrase : it is a
scriptural one ; but it must be taken in its own connexion. Here,
however, either the term " chosen" is to be understood with refer-
ence to the apostolic office, which is very agreeable to the context ;
or if it relate to the salvation of the disciples, it can have no respect
to the doctrine of eternal election. For if the election spoken of
were not an act done in time, it would have been unnecessary for
our Lord, to say " Ye have not chosen me ;" because it is obvious
they could not choose him before they came into being. Another
passage also, in the same discourse, farther proves, that the election
mentioned was an act done in time. " I have chosen you out of the
world," ver. 1 9. But if they were " chosen out of the world," they
Were chosen subsequently to their being " in the world ;" and,
therefore, the election spoken of is not eternal. The last observa-
tion will also deprive these interpreters of another favourite pas-
sage, " Those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them
is lost, but the son of perdition." The " giving" here mentioned,
was no more an act of God in eternity, as they pretend, than the
" choosing" to which we have already referred ; for in the same
discourse the apostles are called " the men thou gavest me out oftlie
irorld" and were therefore given to Christ in time. The exception

(4) Notes in loc -

SECOND. j THEOLOGICAL iNgfirUTESj !'-'

as to Judas, also, proves that this " giving" expresses actual disci-
pleship. Judas had been " given" as well as the rest, or he could
not have been mentioned as an exception ; that is, he had been
once "found" or he could not have been " lost." 2 Tim. i, 9,
"Who hath saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not accord-
ing to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace,
which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began.""

Mr. Scott here contends for the doctrine of the personal election
of the persons spoken of, " from the beginning, or before eternal
ages," which is the most literal translation ; and argues that this
cannot be denied, without supposing "that all who live and die
impenitent, may be said to be saved, and called with a holy calling ;
because a Saviour was promised from the beginning of the world.'-'
" Indeed," he adds, " the purpose of God is mentioned as the rea-
son why they, rather than others, were saved and called." We shall
see the passage in a very different light, if we attend to the follow-
ing considerations.

"The purpose and grace," or gracious purpose, "which was
given us in Christ Jesus before the world began," is represented as
having been " hid in past ages ;" for the apostle immediately adds,
" but is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus
Christ." It cannot be the personal election of believers, therefore,
of which the apostle here speaks ; because it was saying nothing to
declare that the Divine purpose to elect them was not manifest in
former ages ; but was reserved to the appearing of Christ. What-
ever degree of manifestation God's purpose of personal election as
to individuals receives, even the Calvinists acknowledge that it is
made obvious only by the personal moral changes which take place
in them through their " effectual calling," faith, and regeneration.
Till the individual, therefore, comes into being, God's purpose to elect
him cannot be manifested ; and those who were so selected, but did
not live till Christ appeared, could not have their election manifested
before he appeared. Again, if personal election be intended in the
text, and calling and conversion are the proofs of personal election.,
then it is not true that the election of individuals to eternal life, was
kept hid until the appearing of Christ ; for every true conversion,
in any former age, was as much a manifestation of personal elec-
tion, that is of the peculiar favour and " distinguishing grace" of
God, as it is under the Gospel. A parallel passage in the Epistle.
to the Ephesians, chap, iii, 4-6, will, however, explain that before
us. "Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge
in the mystery of Christ, which in other ages was not made known
unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto the holy apostles

94 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and prophets by the Spirit; that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs,
and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the
Gospel :" and in ver. 11, this is called, in exact conformity to the
phrase used in the Epistle to Timothy, " the eternal purpose which
he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." The " purpose," or " gra-
cious purpose," mentioned in both places, as formerly hidden, but
" now manifested," was therefore the purpose to form one universal
church of believing Jews and Gentiles ; and in the text before us,
the apostle, speaking in the name of all his fellow Christians,
whether Jews or Gentiles, says that they were saved and called
according to that previous purpose and plan — " who hath saved us
and called us," &c. The reason why the apostle Paul so often refers
to " this eternal purpose" of God, is to justify and confirm his own
ministry as a teacher of the Gentiles, and an assertor of their equal
spiritual rights with the Jews ; and that this subject was present to
his mind when he wrote this passage, and not an eternal personal
election, is manifest from verse 11, which is a part of the same
paragraph, (i whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle,
and a teacher of the Gentiles."

But, says Mr. Scott, " all who live and die impenitent, may then
be said to be 'saved, and called with a holy calling,' because a
Saviour was promised from the. beginning of the world." But we
do not say that any are saved only because a Saviour was promised
from the beginning of the world ; but that the apostle simply affirms-
that the salvation of believers, whether Gentiles or Jews, and the
means of that salvation, were the consequences of God's previous
purpose, before the world began. All who are actually saved,
may say, " We are saved" according to this purpose ; but if then-
actual salvation shut out the salvation of all others, then no more
have been saved than those included by the apostle in the pronoun
" us," which would prove too much. But Mr. Scott tells us that
" ' the purpose of God' is mentioned as the reason why they, rather
than others, were thus saved and called." It is mentioned with no
such view. The purpose of God is introduced by the apostle as his
authority for making to " the Gentiles" the offer of salvation ; and
. . as a motive to induce Timothy to prosecute the same glorious work,,
after his decease. This is obviously the scope of the whole chapter.
Acts xiii, 48, " And as many as were ordained to eternal life
believed." Mr, Scott is somewhat less confident than some others
as to the support which the Calvinistic system is thought to derive,
from the word rendered ordained. He, however, attempts to leave
the impression upon the minds of his readers, that it means. " ap-
pointed to eternal lifi ■-"

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. !,-'»

We may, however, observe,

1. That the persons here spoken of were the Gentiles to whom the
apostles preached the Gospel, upon the Jews of the same piace
"putting it from iiem," and "judging" or proving "themselves
unworthy of eternal life." But if the only reason why the Gentiles
believed was, that they were " ordained," in the sense of personal
predestination, to eternal life ;" then the reason why the Jews
believed not was the want of such a predestinating act of God, and
not, as it is affirmed, an act of their own — the putting it away
from them.

2. This interpretation supposes that all the elect Gentiles at
Antioch believed at that time ; and that no more, at least of full
age, remained to believe. This is rather difficult to admit; and there-
fore Mr. Scott says, " though it is probable that all who were thus
affected at first, did not at that time believe unto salvation ; yet
many did." But this is not according to the text, which says
expressly, " as many as were ordained to eternal life believed :" so
that such commentators must take this inconvenient circumstance
along with their interpretation, that all the elect at Antioch were,
at that moment, brought into Christ's church.

3. Even some Calvinists, not thinking that it is the practice of
the apostles and evangelists to lift up the veil of the decrees so high
as this interpretation supposes, choose to render the words — " as
many as were determined" or " ordered" for eternal life.

4. But we may finally observe, that, in no place in the New
Testament, in which the same word occurs, is it. ever employed to
convey the meaning of destiny, or predestination : a consideration
which is fatal to the argument which has been drawn from it. The
following are the only instances of its occurrence : Matt, xxviii, 1 6,
" Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain
where Jesus had appointed them." Here the word means com-
manded, or at most agreed upon beforehand, and certainly conveys
no idea of destiny. Luke vii, 8, " For I also am a man set under
authority." Here the word means "placed, or disposed." Acts
xv, 2, " They determined that Paul and Barnabas should go up to
Jerusalem." Here it signifies mutual agreement and decision.
Acts xxii, 10, "Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall
be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do."
Here it means committed to, or appointed in the way of injunction ;
but no idea of destiny is conveyed. Acts xxviii, 23, " And when
they had appointed him a day," when they had fixed upon a day by
mutual agreement ; for St. Paul was not under the command or
control of the visiters who came to him to hear his doctrine. Rom.

96 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAET

xiii, 1, "The powers that be are ordained of God:" clearly signi-
fying constituted and ordered. 1 Cor. xvi, 15, "They have addicted
themselves to the ministry of the saints :" here it can mean nothing
else than applied, devoted themselves to. Thus the word never
takes the sense of predestination ; but, on the contrary, when St.
Luke wishes to convey that notion, he combines it with a preposi-
tion, and uses a compound verb — " and hath determined the times
before appointed." This was pre-ordination, and he therefore so
terms it ; but in the text in question he speaks not of pre-ordina-
tion, but of ordination simply. The word employed signifies, " to
place, order, appoint, dispose, determine," and is very variously
applied. The prevalent idea is that of settlings ordering, and re-
solving ; and the meaning of the text is, that as many as were
fixed and resolved upon eternal life, as many as were careful about,
and determined on salvation, believed. For that the historian is-
speaking of the candid and serious part of the hearers of the apostles,
in opposition to the blaspheming Jews ; that is, of those Gentiles-
" who, when they heard this, were glad, and glorified the word of
the Lord," is evident from the context. The persons who then
believed, appear to have been under a previous preparation for
receiving the Gospel ; and were probably religious proselytes
associating with the Jews.

Luke x, 20, " But rather rejoice, because your names are written
in heaven." The inference from this text is, that there is a register
of all the elect in the " book of life," and that their number, ac-
cording to the doctrine of the Synod of Dort, is fixed and determi-
nate. Our Calvinistic friends forget, however, that names may be
" blotted out of the book of life :" and so the theory falls. — " And
if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this
prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life."

Prov. xvi, 4, "The Lord hath made all things for himself; yea,
even the wicked for the day of evil." If there be any relevance in
this passage to the Calvinistic theory, it must be taken in the
supralapsarian sense, that the final cause of the creation of the
wicked is their eternal punishment. It follows from this, that sin
Is not the cause of punishment ; but that this flows from the mere
will of God ; which is a sufficient refutation. The persons spoken
of are " wicked." Either they were made wicked by themselves,
or by God. If not by God, then to make the wicked for the day
of evil, can only mean that he renders them who have made them-
selves wicked, and remain incorrigibly so, the instruments of glori-
fying his justice, "in the day of evil," that is, in the day of punishment.
The Hebrew phrase, rendered literally, is, "the Lord doth work all

SECOND.'] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. JH

things for himself;" which applies as well to acts of government as
to acts of creation. Thus, then, we are taught by the passage, not
that God created the wicked to punish them, but so governs, con-
trols, and subjects all things to himself ; and so orders them for the
accomplishment of his purpose, that the wicked shall not escape
his just displeasure ; since upon such men the day of evil will
ultimately come. It is therefore added in the next verse, " Though
hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished," (5)

John xii, 37-40, " But though he had done so many miracles
before them, yet they believed not on him ; that the saying of Esaias
the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath
believed our report 1 and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been
revealed] Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias
said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart ;
that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with then-
heart, and be converted, and I should heal them."

Mr. Scott's interpretation is, in its first aspect, more moderate
than that of many divines of the same school. It is — " they had
long shut their own eyes, and hardened their own hearts ; and so
God would give up many of them to such judicial blindness, as
rendered their conversion and salvation impossible. The prophecy
was not the motive or cause of their wickedness ; but it was the
declaration of God's purpose which could not be defeated : therefore
whilst this prophecy stood in Scripture against them, and others of
like character, who hated the truth from the love of sin, the event
became certain ; in which sense it is said, that they could not believe."

That, in some special and aggravated cases, and especially in
that which consisted in ascribing the miracles of Christ to Satan,
and thus blaspheming the Holy Ghost; (cases, however, which
probably affected but a few individuals, and those principally the
chief Pharisees and Rabbis of our Lord's time ;) there was such a
judicial dereliction as Mr. Scott speaks of, is allowed ; but that it
extended to the body of the Jews, who at that time did not believe
in the mission and miracles of Christ, may be denied. The contrary
must appear from the earnest manner in which their salvation was
sought by Christ and his apostles, subsequently to this declaration ;
and also from the fact of great numbers of this same people being
afterwards brought to acknowledge and embrace Christ and his
religion. This is our objection to the former part of this interpreta-

(5) Holden translates the verse, " Jehovah hath made all things for himself,
yea, even the wicked he daily sustains;" and observes, "should the received
translation be deemed correct, ' the day of evil' would be considered, by a Jew of
the age of Solomon, to mean, the day of trouble and affliction."

Vol. ITT. 13

98 THEOLOGICAL l.\STITUTES. [PART

tion. Not every one who is lost finally, is given up previously to
judicial blindness. To be thus abandoned before death is a special
procedure, which our Lord himself confines to the special case of
blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. To the latter part of the
comment, the objection is still stronger. Mr. Scott acknowledges
the wicked and wilful blindness of these Jews to be the cause of the
judicial dereliction supposed. From this it would naturally follow,
that this wilful blinding, and hardening of their hearts, was the true
reason why they "could not believe," as provoking God to take
away his Holy Spirit from them. But Mr. Scott cannot stop here.
He will have another cause for their incapacity to believe : not,
indeed, the prophecy quoted from Isaiah by the evangelist ; but
" God's purpose," of which that prediction, he says, was the
"declaration." It follows, then, that "they could not believe,"
because it was " God's purpose which could not be defeated." Agreea-
bly to this Mr. Scott understands the prediction as asserting, that
the agent in blinding the eyes of the people reproved, that is the
obstinate Jews, was God himself.

Let us now, therefore, more particularly examine this passage,
and we shall find,

1 . That it affirms, not that their eyes should be blinded, or their
ears closed by a Divine agency, as assumed by Mr. Scott and other
Calvinists. This notion is not found in Isaiah vi, from which the
quotation is made. There the agent is represented to be the pro-
phet himself. " Make the heart of this people fat, and make their
ears heavy, and shut their eyes ; lest they see with their eyes," &c.
Now as the prophet could exert no secret direct influence over the
minds of the disobedient Jews, he must have fulfilled this commis-
sion, if it be taken literally, by preaching to them a fallacious and
obdurating doctrine, like that of the false prophets ; but if, as we
know, he preached no such doctrine, then are the words to be un-
derstood according to the genius of the Hebrew language, which
often represents him as an agent, who is the occasion, however
innocent and undesigned, of any thing being done by another.
Thus the prophet, in consequence of the unbelief of the Jews of his
day in those promises of Messiah he was appointed to deliver, and
which led him to complain, " Who hath believed our report !" be-
came an occasion to the Jews of " making their own hearts fat, and
their ears heavy, and of shutting their eyes" against his testimony.
The true agents were, however, the Jews themselves ; and by all
who knew the genius of the Hebrew language, they would be
understood as so charged by the prophet. Thus the Septuagint,
the Arabic, and the Syriac versions all agree in rendering the text.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 99

so that the people themselves, to whom the prophet wrote, are made
the agents of doing- that which, in the style of the Hebrews, is
ascribed to the prophet himself. So also, it is manifest, that St.
Paul, who quotes the same Scripture, Acts xxviii, 25-27, under-
stood the prophet ; " Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the
prophet unto our fathers, saying, Go unto this people, and say,
Hearing ye shall hear, and not understand ; and seeing ye shall see,
and not perceive : for the heart of this people is waxed gross, and
their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest
they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and under-
stand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal
them." Nor in the passage as it is given by St. John, is the blind-
ing of the eyes of the Jews attributed to God. It stands, it is true,
in our version, " He hath blinded thpir eyes," &c. But the Greek
verbs have no nominative case expressed, and it is left to be sup-
plied by the reader. Nor does the context mention the agent ; and
farther, if we supply the pronoun He, we cannot refer it to God,
since the passage closes with a change of person, " and / should
heal them." The agent blinding and hardening, and the agent
attempting to " heal," cannot, therefore, be the same, because they
are opposed to each other, not only grammatically, but in design
and operation. That agent, then, may be " the God of this world,"
to whom the work of blinding them that believe not, is expressly
attributed by the apostle Paul ; or St. John, familiar with the
Hebrew style, might refer it to the prophet, who consequentially,
and through the wilful perverseness of the Jews, was the occasion
of their making their own " hearts gross, and closing their ears ;"
or, finally, the personal verb may be used impersonally, and the act-
ive form for the passive, of which critics furnish parallel instances. (6)
But in all these views the true responsible agent and criminal doer
is " this people," — this perverse and obstinate people themselves;
a point to which every part of their Scriptures gives abundant
testimony.

2. It may be denied that the prophecy of Isaiah here quoted is,
as Mr. Scott represents it, " a declaration of God's purpose, which
could not be defeated." A simple prophecy is not a declaration
of purpose at all ; but the declaration of a future event. If a
purpose of Goo, to be hereafter accomplished, be declared, this
declaration becomes more than a simple prophecy ; it connects the
act with an agent ; and in the case before us, that agent is assumed
to be God. But we have shown, that the agent in blinding the
eyes, and closing the ears of these perverse Jews, is no where said

(CA See Whitby'? Paraphrase and Annot. and hi" Dis. on the Five Points, eh i.

100 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to be God ; and therefore the prophecy is not a declaration of his
purpose. Again, if it were a declaration of God's purpose, it would
not follow that it could not be defeated : for prophetic threatenings
are not absolute ; but imply conditions. This is so far from being
a mere assumption, that it is established by the authority of Almighty
God himself, who declares, Jer. xviii, 7, 8, " At what instant I shall
speak concerning a nation, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to
destroy it ; if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn
from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto
them." Here we have a prophetic commination uttered; " at what
instant I speak'''' — " that nation against whom I have pronounced."
We have also the purpose in the mind of God — "the evil that I
thought ;" and yet this prediction might fail, and this purpose be
defeated. So in the case of repentant Nineveh, the predicted
destruction failed, and the wrathful purpose was defeated, without
any impeachment of the Divine attributes : on the contrary, they
were illustrated by this manifestation of the mingled justice and
grace of his administration. Mr. Scott, like many others, argues
as though the prediction of an event gave certainty to it. But the
certainty or uncertainty of events is not created by prophecy.
Prophecy results from prescience ; and prescience has respect to
what will be, but not necessarily to what must be. Of this, however,
more in its proper place.

3. If this prophecy could be made to bear all that the Calvinists
impose upon it, it would not serve their purpose. It would, even
then, afford no proof of general election and reprobation, since it
has an exclusive application to the unbelieving part of the Jewish
people only ; and is never adduced, either by St. John or by St.
Paul, as the ground of any general doctrine whatever.

Jude 4, " For there are certain men crept in unawares, who
were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men," &c.

The word which is here rendered ordained, is XitcvuWy fore-written ;
and the word rendered condemnation, signifies legal punishment, or
judgment. The passage means, therefore, either that the class of
men spoken of had been foretold in the Scriptures, or that their
punishment had been there formerly typified, in those examples of
ancient times of which several are cited in the following verses ; as
Cain, Balaam, Korah, and the cities of the plain. Mr. Scott, there-
fore, very well interprets the text, when he says, " the Lord had
foreseen them, for they were of old, registered to this condemnation :
many predictions had, from the beginning, been delivered to this
effect." But when he adds, "Nay, these predictions had been
extracts, as it were, from the registers of Heaven ; even the secret

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- 101

and eternal decrees of God, in which he had determined to leave
them to their pride and lusts, till they merited and received this
condemnation," we may well ask for the proof. All this is mani-
festly gratuitous ; brought to the text, and not deduced from it ;
and is, therefore, very unworthy of a commentator. The " extracts"
from the register of God's decrees, as they are found in the Scrip-
tures, contain no such sentiment as that these abusers of the grace
of God, only did that which they could not but do, in consequence
of having been " left to their pride and lusts ;" and excluded before
they were born from the mercies of Christ. If this sentiment then
is not in the " extracts," it is not in the original register ; or else
something is there which God, in his own revealed word, has not
extracted, and respecting which the commentator must either have
had some independent revelation, or have been guilty of speaking
very rashly. On the contrary, in the parallel passage in 2 Peter
ii, 1-3, where the same class of persons is certainly spoken of, so
far are they from being represented as excluded from the benefits
of Christ's redemption, that they are charged with a specific crime,
which necessarily implies their participation in it, widi the crime of
" denying the Lord that bought them."

1 Cor. iv, 7, " For who maketh thee to differ from another V
The context shows that the apostle was here endeavouring to
repress that ostentation which had arisen among many persons in
the church of Corinth, on account of their spiritual gifts and
endowments. This he does by referring those gifts to God, as the
sole giver, — " for who maketh thee to differ ?" or who confers
superiority upon thee 1 as the sense obviously is ; " and what hast
thou that thou didst not receive V Mr. Scott acknowledges that
" the apostle is here speaking more immediately of natural abilities,
and spiritual gifts ; and not of special and efficacious grace." If
so, then the passage has nothing to do with this controversy. The
argument he however affirms, concludes equally in one case, as in
the other ; and in his sermon on election, he thus applies it : " Let
the blessings of the Gospel be fairly proposed, with solemn warnings
and pressing invitations, to two men of exactly the same character
and disposition : if they are left to themselves in entirely similar
circumstances, the effect must be precisely the same. But, behold,
while one proudly scorns and resents the gracious offer, the other
trembles, weeps, prays, repents, believes ! Who maketh this man
to differ from the other 1 or what hath he that he hath not received ?
The scriptural answer to this question, when properly understood,,
decides the whole controversy."(?)

(7) Calvin puts the matter in much tiic same way Inst. Lib. iii; C. 24

Iw2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

As this is a favourite argument, and a popular dilemma in the
hands of the Calvinists, and so much is supposed to depend upon
its solution, we may somewhat particularly examine it.

Instead of supposing the case of two men " of exactly the same
character and disposition," why not suppose the same man in two
moral states 1 for one man who " proudly scorns the Gospel" does
not more differ from another who penitently receives it, than the
same man who has once scoffingly rejected, and afterwards meekly
submitted to it, differs from himself; as for instance, Saul the
Pharisee from Paul the Apostle. Now to account for the case of
two men, one receiving the Gospel, and the other rejecting it, the
theory of election is brought in ; but in the case of the one man in
two different states, this theory cannot be resorted to. The man
was elect from eternity ; he is no outcast from the mercy of his
God, and the redemption of his Saviour, and yet, in one period of
his life, he proudly scorns the offered mercy of Christ, at another
he accepts it. It is clear, then, that the doctrine of election, simply
considered in itself, will not solve the latter case ; and by conse-
quence it will not solve the former : for the mere fact, that one man
rejects the Gospel whilst another receives it, is no more a proof of
the non-election of the non-recipient, than the fact of a man now
rejecting it, who shall afterwards receive it, is a proof of his non-
election. The solution, then, must be sought for in some commu-
nication of the grace of God, in some inward operation upon the
heart, which is supposed to be a consequence of election ; but this
leads to another and distinct question. This question is not, how-
ever, the vincibility or invincibility of the grace of God, at least not
in the first instance. It is, in truth, whether there is any operation
of the grace of God in man at all tending to salvation, in cases
where we see the Gospel rejected. Is the man who rejects perse-
veringly, and he who rejects but for a lime, perhaps a long period
of his life, left without any good motions or assisting influence from
the grace of God, or not 1 This question seems to admit of but one
of three answers. Either he has no gracious assistance at all, to
dispose him to receive the Gospel ; or he has a sufficient influence
of grace so to dispose him ; or that gracious influence is dispensed
in an insufficient measure. If the first answer be given, then not
only are the non-elect left without any visitations of grace through-
out life : but the elect also are left without them, until the moment
of their effectual calling. If the second be offered as the answer,
then both in the case of the non-elect man who finally rejects
Christ, and that of the elect man, who rejects him for a great part
of his life, the saving srrace of God must be allowed so to work as

SECOmj.J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 103

to be capable of counteraction, and effectual resistance. It' this be
denied, then the third answer must be adopted, and the grace of
God must be allowed so to influence as to be designedly insufficient
for the ends for which it is given ; that is, it is given for no saving
end at all, either as to the non-elect, or as to the elect all the time
they remain in a state of actual alienation from Christ. For if an
insufficient degree of grace is bestowed, when a sufficient degree
might have been imparted, then there must have been a reason for
restraining the degree of grace to an insufficient measure ; which
reason could only be, that it might be insufficient, and therefore not
saving. Now, two of the three of these positions are manifestly
contrary to the word of God. To say that no gracious influence
of the Holy Spirit operates upon the unconverted, is to take away
their guilt ; since they cannot be guilty of rejecting the Gospel if
they have no power to embrace it, either from themselves, or by
impartation, whilst yet the Scripture represents this as the highest
guilt of men. All the exhortations, and reproofs, and invitations
of Scripture, are, also, by this doctrine, turned into mockery and
delusion ; and, finally, there can be no such thing in this case, as
*' resisting the Holy Ghost ;" as " grieving and quenching the
Spirit ;" as " doing despite to the Spirit of grace," either in the case
of the non-elect, who are never converted, or of the elect, before
conversion : so that the latter have never been guilty of stubborn-
ness, and obstinacy, and rebellion, and resistance of grace ; though
these are, by them, afterwards, always acknowledged among their
sins. Nor did they ever feel any good motion, or drawing from the
Spirit of God, before what they term their effectual calling ; though,
it is presumed, that few, if any of them, will deny this in fact.

If the doctrine that no grace is imparted before conversion is
then contradicted both by Scripture and experience, how will the
case stand, as to the intentional restriction of that grace to a degree
which is insufficient to dispose the subject to the acceptance of the
Gospel ] If this view be held, it must be maintained equally as to
the elect before their conversion, and as to the non-elect. In that
case, then, we have equal difficulty in accounting for the guilt of
man, as when it is supposed that no grace at all is imparted ; and
for the reproofs, calls, and invitations, and threatenings of the word
of God. For where lies the difference between the absolute non-
impartation of grace, and grace so imparted as to be designedly
insufficient for salvation 1 Plainly there is none, except that we can
see no end at all for giving insufficient grace ; a circumstance which
would only serve to render still more perplexing the principles and
practice of the Divine administration. It has no end of mercy, and

M4 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

none of justice ; nor, as far as can be perceived, of wisdcm. Not
of mercy, for it effects nothing merciful, and designs not to effect it ;
not of justice, for it places no man under equitable responsibility ;
not of wisdom, for it has no assignable end. The Scripture treats
all men to whom the Gospel is preached as endowed with power,
not indeed from themselves, but from the grace of God, to " turn
at his reproof;" to come at his " call ;" to embrace his "grace ;"
but they have no capacity for any of these acts, if either of these
opinions be true : and thus the word of God is contradicted. So
also is experience, in both cases ; for there could be no sense of
guilt for having rejected Christ, and grieved the Holy Spirit, either
in the non-elect never converted, or in the elect before conversion,
if either they had no visitations of grace at all ; or if these were
designedly granted in an insufficient degree.

It follows, then, that the doctrine of the impartation of grace to
the unconverted, in a sufficient degree to enable them to embrace
the Gospel, must be admitted ; and with this doctrine comes in that
of a power in man to use, or to spurn this heavenly gift and gracious
assistance : in other words, a power of willing to come to Christ,
even when men do not come ; a power of considering their ways,
and turning to the Lord, when they do not consider them and turn
to him ; a power of praying, when they do not pray ; and a power
of believing, when they do not believe : powers all of grace ; all the
. results of the work of the Spirit in the heart ; but powers to be
exerted by man, since it is man, and not God, who wills, and turns,
and prays, and believes, whilst the influence under which this is
done is from the grace of God alone. This is the doctrine which
is clearly contained in the words of St. Paul, " Work out your own
salvation with fear and trembling ; for it is God that worketh in you
both to will and to do, of his own good pleasure ;" where, not only
the operation of God, but the co-operation of man, are distinctly
marked ; and are both held up as necessary to the production of
the grand result — " salvation."

It will appear, then, from these observations, that the question,
" Who maketh thee to differ ?" as urged by Mr. Scott and others
from the time of Calvin, is a very inapposite one to their purpose, for,

First, it is a question which the apostle asks with no reference
to a difference in religious state, but only with respect to gifts and
endowments. Secondly, the Holy Ghost gives no authority for
such an application of his words as is thus made, in any other part
of Scripture. Thirdly, it cannot be employed for the purpose for
which it is dragged forth so often from its context and meaning ;
for, in the use thus made of it, it is falselv assumed, that the two

•

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 105

men instanced, the one who rejects, and the other who embraces
the Gospel, are not each endowed with sufficient grace to enable
them to receive God's gracious offer. Now this, we may again
say, must either be denied or affirmed. If it be affirmed, then the
difference between the two men consists, not where they place it,
in the destitution or deficiency on the one hand, or in the plenitude
on the other, of the grace of God : but in the use of grace : and
when they say, " it is God which maketh them to differ," they say
in fact, that it is God that not only gives sufficient grace to each ;
but uses that grace for them. For if it be allowed that a sufficient
grace for repentance and faith is given to each, then the true differ-
ence between them is, that one repents, and the other does not
repent ; the one believes, and the other does not believe : if, there-
fore, this difference is to be attributed to God directly, then the act
of repenting, and the act of believing, are both the acts of God. If
they hesitate to avow this, for it is an absurdity, then either they
must give up the question as totally useless to them, or else take the
other side of the alternative, that to all who reject the Gospel,
sufficient grace to receive it is not given. How then will that serve
them? They may say, it is true, when they take the man who
embraces the Gospel, " Who maketh him to differ but God, who
gives this sufficient grace to him 1" but then we have an equal right
to take the man who rejects the Gospel, and ask, " Who maketh
him to differ" from the man that embraces it 1 To this they cannot
reply that he maketh himself to differ ; for that which they here lay
down is, that he has either no grace at all imparted to him to enable
him to act as the other ; or, what amounts to the same thing, no
sufficient degree of it to produce a true faith ; that he never had
that grace ; that he is, and always must remain, as destitute of it
as when he was born. He does not, therefore, make himself to
differ from the man who embraces the Gospel ; for he has no power
to imitate his example, and to make himself equal with him ; and
the only answer to our question is, " that it is God who maketh him
to differ from the other," by withholding that grace by which alone
he could be prevented from rejecting the Gospel ; and this, so far
from " settling the whole controversy," is the very point in debate.

This dilemma, then, will prove, when examined, but inconvenient
to themselves ; for if sufficiency of grace be allowed to the un-
converted, then the Calvinists make the acts of grace, as well as the
gift of grace itself, to be the work of God in the elect : if sufficiency
of grace is denied, then the unbelief and condemnation of the
wicked are not from themselves, but from God. (8) The fact is,

(8) This Calvin scruples not to sav, " The supreme Lord, therefore, by dr
Vnh. LIT U

1(M> THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PaRT

that this supposed puzzle has been always used ad captandum ; and
is unworthy so grave a controversy ; and as to the pretence, that
the admission of a power in man to use or to abuse the grace of
God involves some merit or ground of glorying in man himself, this
is equally fallacious. The power " to will and to do," is the sole
result of the working of God in man. All is of grace : " By the
grace of God," must every one say, " I am what I am." Here is
no dispute ; every good thought, desire, and tendency of the heart,
and all its power to turn these to practical account by prayer, by
faith, by the use of the means of grace, through which new power
" to will and to do," new power to use grace, as well as new grace,
is communicated, is of God. Every good act, therefore, is the use
of a communicated power which is given of grace, as the stretching
out of the withered hand of the healed man was the use of the
power communicated to his imbecility, and still ivorking with the
act, though not the act itself; and to attempt to lay a ground of
boasting and self-sufficiency in the assisted acceptance of the grace
of God by us ; and the empowered submission of our hearts to it, is
as manifestly absurd as it would be to say, that the man, whose
arm was withered, had great reason to congratulate himself on his
share in the glory of the miracle, because he himself stretched out
the invigorated member at the command of Christ ; and because it
was not, in fact, lifted up by the hand of him who, in that act of
faith and obedience, had healed him.

The question of the invincibility of Divine grace, is a point to be
in another place considered.

Acts xviii, 9, 10, "Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy
peace ; for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt
thee ; for I have much people in this city."

Mr. Scott, to whom the doctrine of election is always present,
says, "in this Christ evidently spake of those who were his by election,
the gift of the Father, and his own purchase ; though, at that time,
in an unconverted state." (9) It would have been more "evident"
had this been said by the writer of the Acts as well as by Mr.
Scott, or any thing approaching to it. The " evidence," we fear,
was all in Mr. Scott's predisposition of mind ; for it no where else
appears. The expression is, at least, capable of two very satisfac-
tory interpretations, independent of the theory of Calvinistic election.
It may mean, that there were many well disposed and serious
inquirers among the " Greeks" in Corinth ; for when Paul turned
priving of the communication of his light, and leaving in darkness those whom
he has reprobated, makes way for the accomplishment of his own predestination."
Inst. Lib. iii, c. 24.

(9) Notes in lor.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE.-. 10?

from the Jews, he " entered into the house of Justus, one that
worshipped God. This man was a Greek proselyte ; and, from
various parts of the Acts of the Apostles it is plain, that this class ol
people were not only numerous, but generally received the Gospel
with joy, and were among the first who joined the primitive churches.
They manifested their readiness to receive the Gospel in Corinth
itself when the Jews " opposed and blasphemed ;" and it is not
improbable, that to such proselytes, who were in many places, " a
people prepared of the Lord," reference is made, when our Saviour,
speaking to Paul in this vision, says " I have much people in this
city." Suppose, however, he speaks prospectively and prophetic-
ally, making his foreknowledge of an event the means of encou-
raging the labours of his devoted apostle, the doctrine of election
follows neither from the fact of the foreknowledge of God, nor from
prophetic declarations grounded upon it. Even Calvin founds not
election upon God's foreknowledge ; but upon his decree.

A few other passages might be added, which are sometimes
adduced as proofs of the Calvinistic theory of "election" and
" distinguishing grace ;" but they are all either explained by that
view of scriptural election which has been at large adduced, or are
of very obvious interpretation. I believe that I have omitted none,
on which any great stress is laid in the controversy ; and the reader
will judge how far those which have been examined serve to support
those inferences which tend to limit the universal import of those
declarations which prove, in the literal sense of the terms, that our
Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, "by the grace of God, tasted death
for every man."

CHAPTER XXVIII.

Theories which limit the Extent of the Death of Christ.

We have, in the foregoing attempt to establish the doctrine of
the redemption of all mankind against our Calvinistic brethren,
taken their scheme in the sense in which it is usually understood.,
without noticing those minuter shades with which the system has
been varied. In this discussion, it is hoped, that no expression has
hitherto escaped inconsistent with candour. Doctrinal truth would
be as little served by this as Christian charity ; nor ought it ever to
be forgotten by the theological inquirer, that the system which we
have brought under review has, in some of its branches, always

108 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- [PART

embodied, and often preserved in various parts of Christendom, that
truth which is vital to the church, and salutary to the souls of men.
It has numbered, too, among its votaries, many venerable names ;
and many devoted and holy men, whose writings often rank among
the brightest lights of scriptural criticism and practical divinity. We
think the peculiarities of their creed clearly opposed to the sense of
Scripture, and fairly chargeable in argument with all those conse-
quences we have deduced from them ; and which, were it necessary
to the discussion, might be characterized in still stronger language.
Those consequences, however, let it be observed, we only exhibit
as logical ones. By many of this class of divines they are denied ;
by others modified ; and by a third party explained away to their
own satisfaction by means of metaphysical and subtle distinctions.
As logical consequences only they are, therefore, in such cases,
iairly to be charged upon our opponents, in any disputes which may
arise. By keeping this distinction in view, the discussion of these
points may be preserved unfettered; and candour and charity
sustain no wound.

We shall now proceed to justify the general view we have taken
of the Calvinistic doctrine of election, predestination, and partial
redemption, by adducing the sentiments of Calvin himself, and of
Calvinistic theologians and churches; after which, our attention
may be directed, briefly, to some of those more modern modifica-
tions of the system, which, though they differ not, as we think, so
materially from the original model as some of their advocates sup-
pose, yet make concessions not unimportant to the more liberal,
and, as we believe, the only scriptural theory.

Calvin has at large opened his sentiments on election, in the
third book of his Institutes. (1)" Predestination we call the eter-
nal decree of God ; by which he hath determined in himself what
he would have to become of every individual of mankind. For
they are not all created with similar destiny ; but eternal life is
foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Every
man, therefore, being created for one or other of these ends, we say,
he is predestinated, either to life, or to death." After having spoken
of the election of the race of Abraham, and then of particular
branches of that race, he proceeds, " Though it is sufficiently clear,
that God, in his secret counsel, freely chooses whom he will, and
rejects others, his gratuitous election is but half displayed till we
come to particular individuals, to whom God not only offers salva-
tion, but assigns it in such a manner, that the certainty of the effect
is liable to no suspense or doubt." He sums up the chapter, in
(1) The following quotations are made from Aixfn's translation. Lond. 1823

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 101)

which he thus generally states the doctrine, in these words : (2)
" In conformity, therefore, to the clear doctrine of the Scripture,
we assert, that by an eternal and immutable counsel, God hath
once for all determined both whom he would admit to salvation,
and whom he would condemn to destruction. We affirm that this
counsel, as far as concerns the elect, is founded on his gratuitous
mercy, totally irrespective of human merit ; but that to those whom
he devotes to condemnation, the gate of life is closed by a just and
irreprehensible, but incomprehensible judgment. In the elect, we
consider calling as an evidence of election ; and justification as
another token of its manifestation, till they arrive in glory, which
constitutes its completion. As God seals his elect by vocation and
justification, so by excluding the reprobate from the knowledge of
his name, and sanctification of his Spirit, he affords another indica-
tion of the judgment that awaits them."

In the commencement of the following chapter(3) he thus rejects
the notion that predestination is to be understood as resulting from
God's foreknowledge of what would be the conduct of either the
elect or the reprobate. " It is a notion commonly entertained, that
God, foreseeing what would be the respective merits of every indi-
vidual, makes a correspondent distinction between different persons ;
that he adopts as his children such as he foreknows will be deserv-
ing of his grace ; and devotes to the damnation of death others,
whose dispositions he sees will be inclined to wickedness and impiety.
Thus they not only obscure election by covering it with the veil of
foreknowledge, but pretend that it originates in another cause."
Consistently with this, he a little farther on asserts, that election
does not flow from holiness ; but holiness from election. " For
when it is said, that the faithful are elected that they should be holy,
it is fully implied, that the holiness they were in future to possess,
had its origin in election." He proceeds to quote the example of
Jacob and Esau, as loved and hated before they had done good or
evil, to show that the only reason of election and reprobation is to
be placed in God's " secret counsel." He will not allow the future
wickedness of the reprobate to have been considered in the decree
of their rejection, any more than the righteousness of the elect, as
influencing their better fate. " God hath mercy on whom he will
have mercy ; and whom he will he hardeneth. You see how he
(the apostle) attributes both to the mere will of God. If, therefore,
we can assign no reason why he grants mercy to his people but
because such is his pleasure, neither shall we find any other cause
but his will for the reprobation of others. For when God is said
(2) Chap. 21, book iii. (3) Book iii. chap. 22.

HO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to harden, or show mercy to whom he pleases, men are taught by
this declaration, to seek no cause beside his ?e?7/."(4) " Many, in-
deed, as if they wished to avert odium from God, admit election in
such a way as to deny that any one is reprobated. But this is
puerile and absurd ; because election itself could not exist, without
being opposed to reprobation : — whom God passes by, he therefore
reprobates ; and from no other cause than his determination to exclude
them from the inheritance which he predestines for his children." (5)
This is the scheme of predestination as exhibited by Calvin ; and
it is remarkable, that the answers which he is compelled to give to
objections did not unfold to this great and acute man its utter con-
trariety to the testimony of God, and to all established notions of
equity among men. To the objection taken from justice, he replies,
" They (the objectors) inquire by what right the Lord is angry with
his creatures who had not provoked him by any previous offence ;
for that to devote to destruction whom he pleases, is more like the
caprice of a tyrant, than the lawful sentence of a judge. If such
thoughts ever enter into the minds of pious men, they will be suffi-
ciently enabled to break their violence by this one consideration,
how exceedingly presumptuous it is, only to inquire into the causes
of the Divine will; which is, in fact, and is justly entitled to be, the
cause of every thing that exists. For if it has any cause, then there
must be something antecedent on which it depends, which it is
impious to suppose. For the will of God is the highest rule of
justice ; so that what he wills must be considered just, for this very
reason, because he wills it." The evasions are here curious.
1. He assumes the very thing in dispute, that God has willed the
destruction of any part of the human race, " for no other cause
than because he wills it ;" of which assumption there is not only
not a word of proof in Scripture ; but, on the contrary, all Scrip-
ture ascribes the death of him that dieth to his own will, and not to
the will of God ; and therefore contradicts his statement. 2. He
pretends that to assign any cause to the Divine will is to suppose
something antecedent to, something above God, and therefore
" impious ;" as if we might not suppose something in God to be the
rule of his will, not only without any impiety, but with truth and
piety ; as, for instance, his perfect wisdom, holiness, justice, and
goodness : or, in other words, to believe the exercise of his will to
flow from the perfection of his whole nature ; a much more hon-
ourable and scriptural view of the will of God than that which sub-
jects it to no rule, even in the nature of God himself. 3. When he
calls the will of God, "the highest rule of justice," beyond which we
(4) Ibid. chap. 22. (5) Ibid. chap. 23

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. Ill

cannot push our inquiries, he confounds the will of God, as a rule
of justice to us, and as a rule to himself. This will is our rule ; yet
even then, because we know that it is the will of a perfect being ;
but when Calvin represents mere will as constituting God's own rule
of justice, he shuts out knowledge, discrimination of the nature of
things, and holiness ; which is saying something very different to
that great truth, that God cannot will any thing but what is perfectly
just. It is to say that blind will ; will which has no respect to any-
thing but itself; is God's highest rule of justice ; a position which,
if presented abstractedly, many of the most ultra Calvinists would
spurn. 4. He determines the question by the authority of his own
metaphysics, and totally forgets, that one dictum of inspiration over-
turns his whole theory, — God " willeth all men to be saved :" a de-
claration, which, in no part of the sacred volume, is opposed or
limited by any contrary declaration.

" Calvin, is not, however, content thus to leave the matter ; but
resorts to an argument in which he has been generally followed by
those who have adopted his system with some mitigations. " As
we are all corrupted by sin, we must necessarily be odious to God,
and that not from tyrannical cruelty ; but in the most equitable esti-
mation of justice. If all whom the Lord predestinates to death are,
in their natural condition, liable to the sentence of death, what
injustice do they complain of receiving from him ]" To this Calvin
very fairly states the obvious rejoinder made in his day ; and which
the common sense of mankind will always make, — " They object,
were they not by the decree of God antecedently predestinated to
that corruption which is now stated as the cause of their condemn-
ation 1 When they perish in their corruption, therefore, they only
suffer the punishment of that misery into which, in consequence of
his predestination, Adam fell, and precipitated his posterity with
him." The manner in which Calvin attempts to refute this objec-
tion, shows how truly unanswerable it is upon his system. " I con-
fess," says he, " indeed, that all the descendants of Adam fell, by
the Divine will, into that miserable condition in which they are now
involved ; and this is what I asserted from the beginning, that we
must always return at last to the sovereign determination of God's
will ; the cause of which, is hidden in himself. But it follows not,
therefore, that God is liable to this reproach ; for we will answer
them in the language of Paul, ' O man, who art thou that repliest
against God 1 shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why
hast thou made me thus V " That is, in order to escape the pinch of
the objection, he assumes, that St. Paul atlirms that God has " form-
ed" a part of the human race for eternal misery ; and that by

H2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

imposing silence upon them, he intended to declare that this pro-
ceeding in God was just. Now the passage may be proved from
the context to mean no such thing ; but, if that failed, and it were
more obscure in its meaning than it really is, such an interpretation
would be contradicted by many other plain texts of holy writ, of
which Calvin takes no notice. Even if this text would serve the
purpose better, it gives no answer to the objection ; for we are
brought round again, as indeed Calvin confesses, to his former, and
indeed only argument, that the whole matter, as he states it, is to
be referred back to the Divine will ; which will, though perfectly
arbitrary, is, as he contends, the highest rule of justice. " I say,
with Augustine, that the Lord created those whom he certainly
foreknew would fall into destruction ; and that this was actually so,
because he ivilled it ; but of his will, it belongs not to us to demand
the reason, which we are incapable of comprehending ; nor is it
reasonable, that the Divine will should be made the subject of con-
troversy with us, which is only another name for the highest rule of
justice." Thus he shuts us out from pursuing the argument. When
God places fences against our approach, we grant, that we are
bound not " to break through and gaze ;" but not so, when man,
without authority, usurps this authority, and warns us off from his
own inclosures, as though we were trespassing upon the peculiar
domains of God himself. Calvin's evasion proves the objection
unanswerable. For if all is to be resolved into the mere will of God
as to the destruction of the reprobate ; if they were created for this
purpose, as Calvin expressly affirms ; if they fell into their corrup-
tion in pursuance of God's determination ; if, as he had said before,
" God passes them by, and reprobates them, from no other cause
than his determination to exclude them from the inheritance of his
children," why refer to their natural corruption at all, and their
being odious to God in that state, since the same reason is given
for their corruption as for their reprobation 1 — not any fault of
theirs ; but the mere will of God, " the reprobation hidden in his
secret counsel," and not grounded on the visible and tangible fact
of their demerit. Thus the election taught by Calvin is not a choice
of some persons to peculiar grace from the whole mass, equally
deserving of punishment ; (though this is a sophism ;) for, in that
case, the decree of reprobation would rest upon God's foreknow-
ledge of those passed by as corrupt and guilty, which notion he
rejects. " For since God foresees future events only in conse-
quence of his decree that they shall happen, it is useless to contend
about foreknowledge, while it is evident that all things come to pass
rather by ordination and decree" It is a horrible decree I con-

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 118

fess ; but no one can deny that God foreknew the future fate of
man before he created him ; and that he did foreknow it, because
it was appointed by his own decree. Agreeably to this, he repu-
diates the distinction between will and permission. "For what
reason shall we assign for his permitting it, but because it is his
will? It is not probable, however, that man procured his own
destruction by the mere permission, and without any appointment of
God."

With this doctrine he again makes a singular attempt to reconcile
the demerit of men : " Their perdition depends on the Divine pre-
destination in such a manner, that the cause and matter of it are
found in themselves. For the first man fell because the Lord had
determined it should so happen. The reason of this determination
is unknown to us. — Man, therefore, falls according to the appoint-
ment of Divine Providence ; but he falls by his own fault. The Lord
had a little before pronounced every thing that he had made to be
■ very good.' Whence, then, comes the depravity of man to revolt
from his God 1 Lest it should be thought to come from creation,
God approved and commended what had proceeded from himself.
By his own wickedness, therefore, man corrupted the nature he
had received pure from the Lord, and by his fall he drew all his
posterity with him to destruction." It is in this way that Calvin
attempts to avoid the charge of making God the author of sin. But
how God should not merely permit the defection of the first man,
but appoint it, and will it, and that his will should be the " necessity
of things," all which he had before asserted, and yet that Deity
should not pe the author of that which he appointed, icilled, and
imposed a necessity upon, would be rather a delicate inquiry. It is
enough that Calvin rejects the impious doctrine, and even though
his principles directly lead to it, since he has put in his disclaimer,
he is entitled to be exempted from the charge ; — but the logical
conclusion is inevitable.

In much the same manner he contends that the necessity of
sinning is laid upon the reprobate by the ordination of God, and
yet denies God to be the author of their sin, since the corruption of
men was derived from Adam, by his own fault, and not from God.
Here, also, although the difficulty still remains of conceiving how a
necessity of sinning should be laid on the descendants of Adam, and
that without any counteraction of grace in the case of the repro-
bate, and that this should be attributable to the will of God as its
cause, whilst yet God, in no sense injurious to his perfections, is to
be regarded as the author of sin, we still admit Calvin's disclaimer ;
but. then he cannot have the advantage on both sides, and must
Vol. III. 15

114 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

renounce this or some of his former positions. He exhorts us "rather
to contemplate the evident cause of condemnation, which is nearer
to us, in the corrupt nature of mankind, than search after a hidden,
and altogether incomprehensible one, in the predestination of God."
" For though, by the eternal providence of God, man was created
to that misery to which he is subject, yet the ground of it he has
derived from himself, not God ; since he is thus ruined, solely in
consequence of his having degenerated from the pure creation of
God to vicious and impure depravity." Thus, almost in the same
breath, he affirms that men became reprobate from no other cause
than " the will of God," and his " sovereign determination ;" — that
men have no reason " to expostulate with God, if they are predesti-
nated to eternal death, without any demerit of their own, merely by
his sovereign will ;" — and then, that the corrupt nature of mankind
is the evident and nearer cause of condemnation ; (which cause,
however, was still a matter of " appointment," and " ordination,"
not " permission ;") and that man is " ruined solely in consequence
of his having degenerated from the pure state in which God created
him." Now these propositions manifestly fight with each other ;
for if the reason of reprobation be laid in man's corruption, it cannot
be laid in the mere will and sovereign determination of God, unless
we suppose him to be the author of sin. It is this offensive doctrine
only, which can reconcile them. For if God so wills, and appoints,
and necessitates the depravity of man, as to be the author of it, then
there is no inconsistency in saying that the ruin of the reprobate is
both from the mere will of God, and from the corruption of their
nature, which is but the result of that will. The one is then, as
Calvin states, the " evident and nearer cause," the other the more
remote and hidden one ; yet they have the same source, and are
substantially acts of the same will. But if it be denied that God is,
in any sense, the author of evil, and if sin is from man alone, then
is the " corruption of nature" the effect of an independent will ; and
if this be the " real source," as he says, of men's condemnation, then
the decree of reprobation rests not upon the sovereign will of God,
as its sole cause, which he affirms ; but upon a cause dependant
on the will of the first man. But as this is denied, then the other
must follow. Calvin himself indeed contends for the perfect con-
currence of these proximate and remote causes, although, in point
of fact, to have been perfectly consistent with himself, he ought
rather to have called the mere loill o/God the cause of the decree
of reprobation, and the corruption of man the means by which it
is carried into effect : language which he sanctions, and which
many of his followers have not scrupled to adopt.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 115

So tearfully does this opinion involve in it the consequences that
in sin man is the instrument, and God the actor, that it cannot be
maintained, as stated by Calvin, without this conclusion. For as
two causes of reprobation are expressly laid down, they must be
either opposed to each other, or be consenting. If they are op-
posed, the scheme is given up ; if consenting, then are both repro-
bation and human corruption the results of the same will, the same
decree, and necessity. It would be trilling to say, that the decree
does not influence ; for if so, it is no decree in Calvin's sense, who
understands the decree of God, as the foregoing extracts and the
whole third book of his Institutes plainly show, as appointing what
shall be, and by that appointment making it necessary. Otherwise,
he could not reject the distinction between will and permission,
and avow the sentiment of St. Augustine, " that the will of God is
the necessity of things ; and that what he has willed, will necessarily
come to pass." (6) So, in writing to Castalio, he makes the sin of
Adam the result of an act of God. " You say Adam fell by his
free will. I except against it. That he might not fall, he stood in
need of that strength and constancy with which God armeth all the
elect, as long as he will keep them blameless. Whom God has
elected, he props up with an invincible power unto perseverance.
Why did he not afford this to Adam, if he would have had him
stand in his integrity ?"(7) And with this view of necessity, as
resulting from the decree of God, the immediate followers of Calvin
coincide ; the end and the means, as to the elect, and as to the
reprobate, are equally fixed by the decree ; and are both to be
traced to the appointing and ordaining will of God. On such a
scheme it is therefore worse than trifling to attempt to make out a
case of justice in favour of this assumed Divine procedure, by
alleging the corruption and guilt of man : a point which, indeed,
Calvin himself, in fact, gives up when he says, " that the reprobate
obey not the word of God, when made known to them, is justly
imputed to the wickedness and depravity of their nearts, provided it
be at the same time staled, that they are abandoned to this depravity,
because they have been raised up by a just, but inscrutable judgment,
of God, to display his glory in their condemnation." (8)

It is by availing themselves of these ineffectual druggies of Cal-
vin to give some colour of justice to his reprobating decree, by
fixing upon the corruption of man as a cause of reprobation, that
some of his followers have endeavoured, in the very teeth of his

(6) Book iii, chap. 23, sec. 8. (7) Quoted in Bishop Womack's Calvinist
Cabinet Unlocked, p. 34. (81 Inst. Book iii, chap. 24, sec. 14.

Uti THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

own express words, to reduce his system to supralapsai ianisrn. This
was attempted by Amyraldus ; who was answered by Curcelloeus,
in his tract " De Jure Dei in Creaturas." This last writer, partly
by several of the same passages we have given above from Calvin's
Institutes, and by extracts from his other writings, proves that Cal-
vin did by no means consider man, as fallen, to be the object of
reprobation ; but man not yet created ; man as to be created, and
so reprobated, under no consideration in the Divine mind of his
fall or actual guilt, except as consequences of an eternal pretention
of the persons of the reprobate, resolvable only into the sovereign
pleasure of God. The references he makes to men as corrupt, and
to their corrupt state as the proximate cause of their rejection, are
all manifestly used to parry off rather than to answer objections,
and somewhat to soften, as Curcelloeus observes, the harsher parts
of his system. And, indeed, for what reason are we so often brought
back to that unfailing refuge of Calvin and his followers, " the pre-
sumption and wickedness of replying against God V For if repro-
bation be a matter of human desert, it cannot be a mystery ; if it be
adequate punishment for an adequate fault, there is no need to urge
it upon us to bow with submission to an unexplained sovereignty.
We may add, there is no need to speak of a remote or first cause
of reprobation, if the proximate cause will explain the whole case ;
and that Calvin's continual reference to God's secret counsel, and
ivill, and inscrutable judgment, could have no aptness to his argu-
ment. (9) Among English divines, Dr. Twiss has sufficiently de-
fended Calvin from the charge, as he esteems it, of sublapsarianism ;
and, whatever merit Twiss's own supralapsarian creed may have,
his argument on this point is unanswerable.

This then is the doctrine of Calvin, which was followed by several
of the churches of the Reformation, who in this respect distinguished
themselves from the Lutherans. ( 1 ) It was a doctrine, however,

(9) Amyraldus tamen, ut eum infra lapsum substitisse probet, in constituendo
reprobationis objecto, profert quaedam loca in quibus ille corruptee massa: meminit,
et Wjus decreti aequitatem ab originali peccato arcessit. Sed facilis est responsio.
Nam Calvinus ipse, qua ratione ista cum iis quae attuli sint concilianda nos docet :
nimirum aoAubita distinctione inter propinquam reprobationis causam. quam resi-
dentem in nobis corruptionem esse vult, et remotam. quae sit unicutn Dei bene-
placitum. Et quan^uam variis in locis causam propinquam, veluti ad sententie
susb duritiem emolliendcm aptiorem, magis videatur urgcre ; ita tamen id facitut
non rard consilii arcani, voluntatis occulta, judicii inscrutabilis, et similium, qui-
bus primam rejectionis causam solet designare, ibidem simul meminerit. — De Jure
Dei, &c, cap. x.

(1) " The Reformed Church, in the largest import of tho word, comprises all
the religious communities which have separated themselves from the Church of
Rome. In this sense the words are often used by English writers; but having

.SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 117

unknown in the primitive churches ; and may be ranked among
those errors which the pagan philosophy subsequently engrafted
upon the faith of Christ. (2)

Bishop Tomline's "Refutation of Calvinism," although very
erroneous in some of its doctrinal views, has some valuable and
conclusive quotations from the ancient Fathers, proving " that the
peculiar tenets of Calvinism are in direct opposition to the doc-
trines maintained in the first ages." They also show that there is
a great similarity between some points in that system and several
of the most prevalent of the early heresies. " The Manicheans
denied the freedom of the human will ; and spoke of the elect as
persons who could not sin, or fail of salvation." The fruitful
source of these notions was the Gnosticism of early times, which
was the worst part of the speculative pagan pliilosophy, engrafted
on a corrupted Christianity ; and was vigorously opposed by the
Fathers, from the earliest date. In this system of affected and
dreaming wisdom it was assumed, that some souls were created
bad, and others good ; and that they sprung, therefore, from differ-
ent principles, or creators. Origen contended, in opposition to
these speculations, that all souls were by nature of the same quality ;
that the use of the freedom of will made the differences we see in
practice ; and that this liberty rendered them liable to reward and
to punishment ; ascribing, however, this recovered freedom of the
will, which had been lost in Adam, to the grace of Christ. The
Platonism which he mixed up with his system was justly resisted in
the church ; but his doctrine of the freedom of the will prevailed
generally in the east. It was afterwards carried to a dangerous
extent by Pelagius, whose doctrine was modified by Cassian. These
discussions called Augustine into a controversy which carried him

been adopted by the French Calvinists to describe their Church, this term is most
commonly used on the Continent as a general appellation of all the churches who
profess the doctrines of Calvin. About the year 1541, the church of Geneva was
placed by the magistrates of that city under the direction of Calvin, where his
learning, eloquence, and talents for business, soon attracted general notice. By
degrees his fame reached to every part of Europe. Having prevailed upon the
senate of Geneva to found an academy, and place it under his superintendence ;
and having filled it with men, eminent throughout Europe for their learning and
talent, it became the favourite resort of all persons who leaned to the new princi-
ples, and sought religious and literary instruction. From Germany, France, Italy,
England, and Scotland, numbers crowded to the new academy, and returned from
it to their native countries, satnrated with the doctrine of Geneva ; and burning
with zeal to propagate its creed." — Butler's Life of Grotius.

(2) This wastheviewof MELANCTHON,who in writing to Peucer, says, "Lcclius
writes to me and says, that the controversy respecting the Stoical Fate, is
agitated with such uncommon fervour at Geneva, that one individual is cast into
prison because he happened to differ from Zeno."

tl8 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to the opposite extreme ; and appears to have revived the Manichean
notions of his youth in such a degree as greatly to tinge many parts
of his system with that heresy. He was a powerful, but unsteady
writer ; and has expressed himself so inconsistently as to have
divided the opinions of the Latin church, where his authority has
always been greatest. He held, although his writings afford many
passages contradictory of the statement, that "God, from the founda-
tion of the world, decreed to save some men, and to consign others
to eternal punishment." Notwithstanding his authority, his views
on predestination and grace appear to have made no great impres-
sion upon even the western church, where the Collations of Cassian,
a disciple of Chrysostom, a work which has been called semi-
Pelagian, was held in extensive estimation ; so that substantially no
great difference of opinion appeared between the western and the
Greek churches, on these points, for several centuries. In the
ninth century St. Austin's doctrines were revived and asserted by
Goteschale, who was as absurdly as wickedly persecuted on that
account. His doctrines were condemned in two councils ; and the
controversy was laid to rest, until the subtle questions contained in
it were revived by the schoolmen. Thomas Aquinas and the
Dominicans adopted the strongest views of Augustine on predesti-
nation and necessity, and improved upon them ; Scotus and the
Franciscans took the opposite side ; and the infallibility of the
Pope has not yet been employed to settle this point. By condemn-
ing Jansenius, however, whilst it has honoured Augustine, that
church, as Bayle observes, (3) has involved itself in great perplex-
ities. The authority of this Father with the church of Rome was
indeed an advantage which the first Reformers did not fail to make
use of. From him they supported their views on justification by
faith ; and finding so much of evangelical truth on this and some
other subjects in his writings, they were insensibly biassed to the
worst parts of his system. Luther recovered from this error in the
latter part of his life ; and the Lutheran churches settled in the
doctrine of universal redemption. (4) Augustinism, as perfected

(3) Dictionary, Art. Augustine.

(4) " It is pleasing," says Dr. Copleston, "and satisfactory, to trace the pro-
gress of Melancthon's opinions upon the subject. In the first dawning of the
Reformation, he, as well as Luther, had been led into those metaphysical discus-
sions which Calvin afterwards moulded into a system, and incorporated with his
exposition of the Christian doctrine. But so early as the year 1529 he renounced
this error, and expunged the passages that contained it from the later editions of
his Loci Theologici. Luther, who had in his early life maintained the same opin-
ions, after the controversy with Eiasmus about free-will, never taught them ; and
although he did not, with the candour of Melancthon, openly retract what he had
once written, yet he bestowed the highest commendations on thfi last editions of

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 119

and systematised by the able hand of Calvin, was received by
several of the Reformed churches ; and gave rise to a controversy
which has remained to this day, though happily it has of late been
conducted with less asperity. The system, as issued by Calvin,
has, however, undergone various modifications : some theologians
and their followers, having carried out his principles to their full
length, so as to advocate or sanction the Antinomian heresy ;
whilst others, either to avoid this fearful result, or perceiving the
discrepancy of the harsher parts of the theory with the word of God,
have impressed upon it a more mitigated aspect.

The three leading schemes of predestination, prevalent among
the Reformed churches previous to the Synod of Dort, are thus
stated in the celebrated Declaration of Arminius before the states
of Holland. They comprehend the theories generally known by
the names of supralapsarian and sublapsarian.

"The first, or Creabilitarian, or supralapsarian opinion is,

1. That God has absolutely and precisely decreed to save certain
particular men by his mercy or grace ; but to condemn others by
his justice ; and to do all this, without having any regard in such
decree to righteousness or sin, obedience or disobedience, which
could possibly exist on the part of one class of men, or the other.

2. That for the execution of the preceding degree, God determined
to create Adam, and all men in him, in an upright state of original
righteousness ; besides which, he also ordained them to commit sin,
that they might thus become guilty of eternal condemnation, and
be deprived of original righteousness 3. That those persons whom
God has thus positively wished to save, he has decreed, not only to
salvation, but also to the means which pertain to it ; that is, to con-
duct and bring them to faith in Christ Jesus, and to perseverance
in that faith ; and that he also leads them to these results by a grace
and power that are irresistible ; so that it is not possible for them
to do otherwise than believe, persevere in faith, and be saved.
4. That to those, whom, by his absolute will, God has foreordained
to perdition, he has also decreed to deny that grace which is neces-

Melancthon's work, containing this correction. (g) He also scrupled not to assert
publicly, that at the beginning of the Reformation, his creed was not completely
settled :(li) and in his last work of any importance, he is anxious to point out the
qualifications, with which all he had ever said, on the doctrine of absolute neces-
sity, ought to be received." " Vos ergo, qui nunc mc audistis, memineritis me
hoc docuisse, non esse inquirendum de Praedestinatione Dei absconditi, sed in
illis acquiescendum, quas revelantur per vocationem et per ministorium vcrbi . .
. . Hsec eadem alibi quoque in meis libris protestatus sum, et nunc etiam viva
voce trado: Idco sum excusatus.(i)

(g) Pref. to the first vol. of Luther's works, A. D. 154G.

(A) Laur. Bampt. Lcct. note Z\ to Serm. ii. (»') On. vol. vi, p. 325

120 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

sary and sufficient for salvation ; and does not, in reality, confer it
upon them ; so that they are neither placed in a possible condition,
nor in any capacity of believing, or of being saved." (5)

The second opinion differs from the former ; but is still supra-
lapsarian. It is,

" 1. That God determined within himself, by an eternal immu-
table decree, to make, according to his good pleasure, the smaller
portion out of the general mass of mankind partakers of his grace
and glory. But, according to his pleasure, he passed by the greater
portion of men, and left them in their own nature, which is incapable
of any thing supernatural ; and did not communicate to them that
saving and supernatural grace by which their nature, if it still
retained its integrity, might be strengthened ; or by which, if it were
corrupted, it might be restored, for a demonstration of his own
liberty : yet after God had made these men sinners, and guilty of
death, he punished them with death eternal, for a demonstration of
his justice." — " As far as we are capable of comprehending their
scheme of reprobation it consists of two acts, that of preterition,
and that of predamnation. Preterition is antecedent to all
things, and to all causes which are either in the things themselves,
or which arise out of them ; that is, it has no regard whatever to
any sin, and only views man under an absolute and general aspect.
Two means are foreordained for the execution of the act of pre-
terition : dereliction in a state of nature which, by itself, is
incapable of every thing supernatural ; and the non-communication of
supernatural grace, by which their nature, if in a state of integrity,
might be strengthened, and if in a state of corruption, might be
restored. Predamnation is antecedent to all things ; yet it does
by no means exist without a foreknowledge of the cause of damna-
tion. It views man as a sinner obnoxious to damnation in Adam,
and as, on this account, perishing through the necessity of Divine
justice."

This opinion differs from the first in this, that it does not lay down
the creation or the fall as a mediate cause, foreordained of God for
the execution of the decree of reprobation ; yet this second kind of
predestination places election, with regard to the end, before the
fall, as also preterition, or passing by, which is the first part of
reprobation. "But though the inventors of this scheme," says
Arminius, " have been desirous of using the greatest precaution,

(5) This statement of the supralapsarian and sublapsarian theories, as given by
Arminius, might be illustrated and verified by quotations from the elder Calvin-
istic divines : the reader will, however, find what is amply sufficient in those given
in Bishop Womack's Calvinistic Cabinet Unlocked.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 121

lest it might be concluded from their doctrine, that God is the
author of sin with as much show of probability as it is deducible
from the first scheme ; yet we shall discover, that the fall. of Adam
cannot possibly, according to their views, be considered in any
other manner than as a necessary means for the execution of the
preceding decree of predestination. For, first, it states that God
determined by the decree of reprobation to deny to man that grace
which was necessary for the confirmation and strengthening of his
nature, that it might not be corrupted by sin ; which amounts to
this, that God decreed not to bestow that grace which was neces-
sary to avoid sin ; and from this must necessarily follow the trans-
gression of man, as proceeding from a law imposed upon him. The
fall of man is, therefore, a means ordained for the execution of the
decree of reprobation."

" 2. It states the two parts of reprobation to be pretention and
predomination. Those two parts, (although the latter views man as
a sinner, and obnoxious to justice,) are, according to that decree,
connected together by a necessary and mutual bond, and are equally
extensive ; for those whom God passed by in conferring grace, are
likewise damned. Indeed, no others are damned except those who
are the subjects of this act of pretention. From this, therefore, it
must be concluded, that sin necessarily follows from the decree of
reprobation or pretention ; because, if it were otherwise, it might
possibly happen, that a person who had been passed by might not
commit sin, and from that circumstance might' not become liable
to damnation. This second opinion on predestination, therefore,
falls into the same inconvenience as the first, — the making God the
author of sin." (G)

The third opinion is sublapsarian ; in which man, as the object
of predestination, is considered as fallen, (7) It is thus epitomised
by Arminius :

(G) Declaration.

(7) The question as to the olject of the decrees, has gone out, as Goodwin says,
among our Calvinistic brethren into " endless digladiations and irreconcilable
divisions : — some of them hold, that men simply and indefinitely considered, are
tho object of these decrees. Others contend, that men considered as yet to be
created, are this object. A third sort stands up against both the former with tins
notion, that men considered as already created and made, are this object. A fourth
disparageth the conjectures of the three former with this conceit, that men consi-
dered as fallen, are this object. Another findeth a defect in the singleness or
simplicity of all the former opinions, and compoundeth this in opposition to them,
that men considered both as to be created, and as being created and as fallen,
together3 are the proper object of these troublesome decrees. A sixth sortformelh
us yet another object, and this is, man considered as salvable, or capable of being
saved. A seventh, not liking the faint complexion of any of tho former opinions,
delivereth this to us as strong and healthful, that men considered^ damnable-, are
Voj, III. 16

122 1HEOLOU1CAL INSTITUTES [PARI

" Because God willed within himself from all eternity to make a
decree by which he might elect certain men and reprobate the rest,
he viewed and considered the human race not only as created, but
likewise as fallen, or corrupt ; and, on that account, obnoxious to
malediction. Out of this lapsed and accursed state God determi-
mined to liberate certain individuals, and freely to save them by his
grace, for a declaration of his mercy ; but he resolved, in his own
just judgment, to leave the rest under malediction, for a declaration
of his justice. In both these cases God acts without the least con-
sideration of repentance and faith in those whom he elects, or of
impenitence and unbelief in those whom he reprobates. This opinion
places the fall of man, not as a means foreordained for the execution
of the decree of predestination, as before explained ; but as some-
thing that might furnish a proceresis, or occasion for this decree of
predestination. (8)

With this opinion, however, the necessity of the fall is so generally
connected, that it escapes the difficulties which environ the pre-
ceding scheme in words only ; for whether, in the decree of pre-
destination, man is considered as creatible, or created and fallen,
if a necessity be laid upon any part of the race to sin, and to be
made miserable, whether from that which rendered the fall inevita-
ble, or that which rendered the fall the inevitable means of cor-
rupting their nature, and producing entire moral disability without
relief, the condition of the reprobate remains substantially the same ;
and the administration under which they are placed, is equally
opposed to justice as to grace. For let us shut out all these fine
distinctions between acts of sovereignty and acts of justice, prete-
ntion and predamnation, and fully allow the principle, that all are
fallen in Adam, in what way can even the sublapsarian doctrine
be supported 1 It has two objects ; to avoid the imputation of
making God the author of sin, and to repel the charge of his dealing
with his creatures unjustly. We need only take the latter as neces-
sary to the argument, and show how utterly they fail to turn aside
this most fatal objection drawn from the justice of the Divine nature
and administration.

this object. Others yet again, superfancying all the former, conceit men, consi-
dered as creabh, or possible to be created, to be the object so highly contested
about. A ninth party disciple the world with this doctrine, that men considered
as labiles, or capable of falling, are the object ; and whether all the scattered and
conflicting opinions about the objects of our brethren's decrees of election and
reprobation are bound up in this bundle or not, we cannot say." — Agreement of
Brethren, &c.

In modern times these subtile distinctions have rather fallen into desuetude
among Calvinists, and are reducible to a much smaller number,

(8) lb.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 123

It is an easy and plausible thing to say, in the usual loose and
general manner of stating the sublapsarian doctrine, that the whole-
race having fallen in Adam, and become justly liable to eternal
death, God might, without any impeachment of his justice, in the
exercise of his sovereign grace, appoint some to life and salvation
by Christ, and leave the others to their deserved punishment. But
this is a false view of the case, built upon the false assumption that
the whole race were personally and individually, in consequence
of Adam's fall, absolutely liable to eternal death. That very fact
which is the foundation of the whole scheme, is easy to be refuted
on the clearest authority of Scripture ; whilst not a passage can be
adduced, we may boldly affirm, which sanctions any such doctrine.

" The wages of sin is death." That the death which is the wages
or penalty of sin extends to eternal death, we have before proved.
But " sin is the transgression of the law ;" and in no other light is
it represented in Scripture, when eternal death is threatened as its
penalty, than as the act of a rational being sinning against a law
known or knowable ; and as an act avoidable, and not forced or
necessary.

Taking these principles, let them be applied to the case before us.

The scheme of predestination in question contemplates the human
race as fallen in Adam. It must, therefore, contemplate them
either as seminally in Adam, not being yet born; or as to be
actually born into the world.

In the former case, the only actual beings to be charged with
sin, " the transgression of the law," were Adam and Eve ; for the
rest of the human race not being actually existent, were not capable
of transgressing ; or if they were, in a vague sense, capable of it by
virtue of the federal character of Adam ; yet then only as potential,
and not as actual beings, beings, as the logicians say, in posse, not
in esse. Our first parents rendered themselves liable to eternal
death. This is granted ; and had they died " in the day" they
sinned, which, but for the introduction of a system of mercy and
long suffering, and the appointment of a new kind of probation, for
any thing that appears, they must have done, the human race would
have perished with them, and the only conscious sinners would have
been the only conscious sufferers But then this lays no foundation
for election and reprobation ; — the whole race would thus have
perished without the vouchsafement of mercy to any.

This predestination must, therefore, respect the human race
fallen in Adam, as to be born actually, and to have a real as well
as a potential existence ; and the doctrine will be, that the race so
contemplated were made unconditionally liable to eternal death.

-j

'-! I HEULOGIt'AL INSTITUTES. [PART

In this case the decree takes effect immediately upon the fall, and
determines the condition of every individual, in respect to his being-
elected from this common misery, or his being left in it ; and it rests
its plea of justice upon the assumed fact, that every man is absolutely
liable to eternal death wholly and entirely for the sin of Adam, a
sin to which he was not a consenting party, because he was not in
actual existence. But if eternal death be the " wages of sin ;" and
the sin which receives such wages be the transgression of a law by
a voluntary agent, (and this is the rule as laid down by God him-
self,) then on no scriptural principle is the human race to be con-
sidered absolutely liable to personal and conscious eternal death for
the sin of Adam ; and so the very ground assumed by the advocates
of this theory is unfounded.

But perhaps they will bring into consideration the foreknowledge
of actual transgression as contemplated by the decree, though this
notion is repudiated by Calvin, and the rigid divines of his school ;
but we reply to this, that either the sin of Adam was a sufficient
reason for the actual infliction of a sentence of eternal death upon
his descendants, or it was not. If not, then no man will be punished
with eternal death, as the consequence of Adam's sin, and that
sentence will rest upon actual transgressions alone. If, then, this
be allowed, there comes in an important inquiry : Are the actual
transgressions of the non-elect evitable, or necessary 1 If the former,
then even the reprobate, without the grace of Christ, which they
cannot have, because he died not for them, may avoid all sin, and
consequently keep the whole law of God, and claim, though still
reprobates, to be justified by their works. But if sin be unavoidable
and necessary as to them, in consequence both of the corrupt
nature they have derived from Adam, and the withholding of that
sanctifying influence which can be imparted only to the elect, for
whom alone Christ died, how are they to be proved justhj liable, on
that account, to eternal death ] This is the penalty of sin, of sin as
the transgression of the law ; but then law is given only to creatures
in a state of trial, either to those who, from their unimpaired poAvers,
are able to keep it ; or to those to whom is made the promise of
gracious assistance, upon their asking it, in order that they may be
enabled to obey the will of God ; and in no case are those to whom
God issues his commands supposed in Scripture to be absolutely
incapable of obedience, much less liable to be punished, without
remedy, for not obeying, if so incapacitated. This would, indeed,
make the Divine Being a hard master, " reaping where he has not
sown ;" which is the language only of the "wicked servant ;" and
therefore to be abhorred by all good men. But if a point so

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 125

obviously at variance with truth and equity be maintained, the
doctrine comes to this, that men are considered, in the Divine
decree, as justly liable to eternal death, (their actual sins being
foreseen,) because they have been placed by some previous decree,
or higher branch of the same decree, in circumstances which
necessitate them to sin : a doctrine which raises sublapsarianism
into supralapsarianism itself. This is not the view which God gives
us of his own justice ; and it is contradicted by every notion of
justice which has ever obtained among men : nor is it at all relieved
by the subtilty of Zanchius and others, who distinguish between
being necessitated to sin, and being forced to sin ; and argue, that:
because in sinning the reprobate follow the motions of their own
will, they are justly punishable ; though in this they fulfil the pre-
destination of God. The true question is, and it is not at all
affected by such merely verbal distinctions, Can the reprobate do
otherwise than sin, and could they ever do otherwise 1 They sin
willingly, it is said. This is granted; but could they ever will
otherwise 1 The will is but one of many diseased powers of the soul.
Is there, as to them, any cure for this disease of the will 1 According
to this scheme, there is not ; and they will from necessity, as well
as act from necessity ; so that the difficulty, though thrown a step
backward, remains in full force.

In support of their notion, that the penalty attached to original
sin is eternal death, they allege, it is true, that the apostle Paul
represents all men under condemnation in consequence of their
connexion with the first Adam ; and attributes the salvation of those
who are rescued from the ruin, only to the obedience of the second
Adam. This is granted ; but it will not avail to establish their
position that, the human race being all under an absolute sentence
of condemnation to eternal death, Almighty God, in the exercise of
his sovereign grace, elected a part of them to salvation, and left the
remainder to the justice of their previous sentence.

For, 1. Supposing that the whole human race wrere under con-
demnation in their sense, this will not account for the punishment
of those who reject the Gospel. Their rejecting the Gospel is
represented in Scripture as the sole cause of their condemnation^
and never merely as an aggravating cause, as though they were
under an irreversible previous sentence of death, and that this refusal
of the Gospel only heightened a previously certain and inevitable
punishment. An aggravated cause of condemnation it is ; but for
this reason, that it is the rejection of a remedy, and an abuse of
mercy, neither of which could have any place in a previously fixed
condition of reprobation. If, therefore, it is true, that " this is the

126 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men love
darkness rather than light," we must conclude, that the previous
state of condemnation was not irremediable and unalterable, or this
circumstance, the rejection " of the light," or revelation of mercy
in the Gospel, could not be their condemnation.

2. Leaving the meaning of the apostle in Rom. v, out of our
consideration for a moment, the Scriptures never place the final
condemnation of men upon the ground of Adam's offence, and
their connexion with him. Actual sin forms the ground of every
reproving charge ; of every commination ; and, beyond all doubt,
of the condemnatory sentence at the day of judgment. To what
ought we to refer, as explaining the true cause of the eternal pun-
ishment of any portion of our race, but to the proceedings of that
day, when that eternal punishment is to be awarded 1 Of the reason
of this proceeding, of the facts to be charged, and of the sins to be
punished, we have very copious information in the Scriptures ; but
these are evil works, and disbelief of the Gospel. Nowhere is it said,
or even hinted in the most distant manner, that men will be sen-
tenced to eternal death, at that day, either because of Adam's sin,
or because their connexion with Adam made them inevitably cor-
rupt in nature, and unholy in conduct ; from which effects they
could not escape, because God had from eternity resolved to deny
them the grace necessary to this end.

3. The true view of the apostle's doctrine in Rom. v, is to be
ascertained, not by making partial extracts from his discourse ; but
by taking the argument entire, and in all its parts.

The Calvinists assume, that the apostle represents what the penal
condition of the human race would have been had not Christ in-
terposed as our Redeemer. Here is one of their great and leading
mistakes ; for St. Paul does not touch this point. The Calvinist
assumes, that the whole race of men, but for the decree of election,
would not only have come into actual being, but have been actually
and individually punished for ever ; and, on this assumption, endea-
vours to justify his doctrine of the arbitrary selection of a part of
mankind to grace and salvation, the other being left in the state in
which they were found. Even this is contrary to other parts of
their own system ; for the reprobate are placed in an infinitely
worse condition than had they been merely thus left without a share
in Christ's redemption ; because, even according to Calvinistic
interpreters their condemnation is fearfully aggravated ; and by
that which they have no means of avoiding, by actual sin and un-
belief. But the assumption itself is wholly imaginary. For the
apostle speaks not of what the human race would have been, that,

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 127

is, he affirms nothing as to their penal condition, in case Christ had
not undertaken the office of Redeemer ; but he looks at their moral
state and penal condition, as the case actually stands : in other
words, he takes the state of man as it was actually established after
the fall, as recorded in the book of Genesis. No child of Adam was
actually born into the world until the promise of a Redeemer had
been given, and the virtue of his anticipated redemption had begun
to apply itself to the case of the fallen pair ; consequently, all man-
kind are born under a constitution of mercy, which actually existed
before their birth. What the race v/ould have been, had not the
redeeming plan been brought in, the Scriptures nowhere tell us,
except that a sentence of death to be executed " in the day" in
which the first pair sinned, was the sanction of the law under which
they were placed ; and it is great presumption to assume it as a
truth, that they would have multiplied their species only for eternal
destruction. That the race would have been propagated under an
absolute necessity of sinning, and of being made eternally miserable,
Ave may boldly affirm to be impossible ; because it supposes an
administration contradicted by every attribute which the Scriptures
ascribe to God. What the actual state of the human race is, in
consequence both of the fall of Adam and of the interposition of
Christ ; of the imputation of the effects of the offence of the one,
and of the obedience of the other ; is the only point to which our
inquiries can go, and to which, indeed, the argument of the apostle
is confined.

There is, it is true, an imputation of the consequences of Adam's
sin to his posterity, independent of their personal offences ; but we
can only ascertain what these consequences are by referring to the
apostle himself. One of these consequences is asserted explicitly,
and others are necessarily implied in this chapter and in other parts
of his writings. That which is here explicitly asserted is, that
death passed upon all men, though they have not sinned after the
similitude of Adam's transgression, that is, not personally ; and
therefore this death is to be regarded as the result of Adam's trans-
gression alone, and of our having been so far " constituted sinners"
in him, as to be liable to it. But then the death of which he here
speaks, is the death of the body ; for his argument, that " death
reigned from Adam to Moses," obliges us to understand him as
speaking of the visible and known fact, that men in those ages died
as to the body, since he could not intend to say that all the genera-
tions of men, from Adam to Moses, died eternally. The death of
the body, then, is the first effect of the imputation of Adam's sin to
his descendants, as stated in this chapter. A second is necessarily

1®8 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

implied ; a state of spiritual death, — the being born into the world
with a corrupt nature, always tending to actual offence. This is
known to be the apostle's opinion, from other parts of his writings ;
but that passage in this chapter in which it is necessarily implied,
is verse 16 : "The free gift is of many offences unto justification."
If men need justification of " many offences ;" if all men need this,
and that under a dispensation of help and spiritual healing ; then
the nature which universally leads to offences so numerous must be
inherently and universally corrupt. A third consequence is a con-
ditional liability to eternal death ; for that state which makes us
liable to actual sin, makes us also liable to actual punishment. But
this is conditional, not absolute ; for since the apostle makes the
obedience of Christ available to the forgiveness of the " many
offences" we may commit in consequence of the corrupt nature we
have derived from Adam, and extends this to all men, they can only
perish by their own fault. Now beyond these three effects we do
not find that the apostle carries the consequence of Adam's sin.
Of unpardoned " offences" eternal death is the consequence ; but
these are personal. Of the sin of Adam, imputed, these are the
consequences, — the death of the body, — and our introduction into
the world with a nature tending to actual offences, and a condi-
tional liability to punishment. But both are connected with a
remedy as extensive as the disease. For the first, the resurrection
from the dead ; for the other, the healing of grace and the promise
of pardon, and thus though " condemnation" has passed upon " all
men" yet the free gift unto justification of life passes upon " all men"
also, — the same general terms being used by the apostle in each
case. The effects of " the free gift" are not immediate, the reign
of death remains till the resurrection ; but " in Christ shall all be
made alive," and it is every man's own fault, not his fate, if his
resurrection be not a happy one. The corrupt nature remains till
the healing is applied by the Spirit of God ; but it is provided, and
is actually applied in the case of all those dying in infancy, as we
have already showed; (9) whilst justification and regeneration are
offered, through specified means and conditions, to all who are of
the age of reason and choice, and thus the sentence of eternal death
may be reversed. What then becomes of the premises in the sub-
lapsarian theory which we have been examining, that in Adam all
men are absolutely condemned to eternal death 1 Had Christ not
undertaken human redemption, we have no proof, no indication in
Scripture, that for Adam's sin any but the actually guilty pair would
have been doomed to this condemnation ; and though now the race
(9) See vol. ii, chap. 18.

SECOND, j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE'S. 129

having become actually existent, is for this sin, and for the demon-
stration of God's hatred of sin in general, involved, through a federal
relation and by an imputation of Adam's sin, in the effects above
mentioned ; yet a universal remedy is provided.

But we are not to be confined even to this view of the grace of
God, when we speak of actual offences. Here the case is even
strengthened. The redemption of Christ extends not merely to the
removal of the evils laid upon us by the imputation of Adam's trans-
gression ; but to those which are the effects of our own personal
choice — to the forgiveness of " many offences," upon our repent-
ance and faith, however numerous and aggravated they may be ; —
to the bestowing of " abundance of grace and of the gift of right-
eousness ;" — and not merely to the reversal of the sentence of death,
but to our " reigning in life by Jesus Christ :" so that " where sin
abounded grace did much more abound ; that as sin hath reigned
unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness, unto
eternal life .-" — which phrase, in the New Testament, does never
mean less than the glorification of the bodies and souls of believers
in the kingdom of God, and in the presence and enjoyment of the
eternal glory of Christ.

So utterly without foundation is the leading assumption in the
sublapsarian scheme, that the decree of election and reprobation
finds the human race in a state of common and absolute liability to
personal eternal punishment ; and that by making a sovereign
selection of a part of mankind, God does no injustice to the rest by
passing them by. The word of God asserts no such doctrine as
the absolute condemnation of the race to eternal death, merely for
Adam's offence ; and if it did, the merciful result of the obedience
of Christ is declared to be not only as extensive as the evil, in re-
spect of the number of persons so involved ; but in " grace" to be
more abounding. Finally, this assumption falls short of the purpose
for which it is made ; because the mere " passing by" of a part of
the race, already, according to them, under eternal condemnation,
and which they contend inflicts no injustice upon them, does not.
account for their additional and aggravated punishment for doing
what they had never the natural or dispensed power of avoiding, —
breaking God's holy laws, and rejecting his Gospel. Upon a close
examination of the sublapsarian scheme, it will be found, therefore,
to involve all the leading difficulties of the Calvinistic theory as it is
broadly exhibited by Calvin himself. In both cases reprobation is
grounded on an act of mere will, resting on no reason : it respects
not in either, as its primary cause, the demerit of the creature ; and
it punishes eternally without personal guilt, arising either from actual

vor(. J II 17

130 TREGLoGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

sin, or from the rejection of the Gospel. Both unite in making
sin a necessary result of the circumstances in which God has placed
a great part of mankind, which, by no effort of theirs, can be avoid-
ed ; or what is the same thing-, which they shall never be disposed
to avoid ; and how either of these schemes, in strict consequence,
can escape the charge of making God the author of sin, which the
Synod of Dort acknowledges to be " blasphemy," is inconceivable.
For how does it alter the case of the reprobate, whether the fall of
Adam himself was necessitated, or whether he acted freely % They,
at least, are necessitated to sin ; they come into the world under a
necessitating constitution, which is the result of an act to which
they gave no consent ; and their case differs nothing, except in
circumstances which do not alter its essential character, from that
of beings immediately created by God with a nature necessarily pro-
ducing sinful acts, and to counteract which there is no remedy: — ■
a case which few have been bold enough to suppose.

The different views of the doctrine of predestination, as stated
above, greatly agitated the Protestant world, from the time of Cal-
vin to the sitting of the celebrated Synod of Dort, whose decisions
on this point, having been received as a standard by several churches
and by many theologians, may next be properly introduced ; al-
though, after what has been said, they call only for brief remark.

" The Judgment of the Synod of the Reformed Belgic churches,"
to which many divines of note of other reformed churches were
admitted, " on the articles controverted in the Belgic churches,"
was drawn up in Latin, and read in the great church at Dort, in
the year 1619 ; and a translation into English of this " Judgment,"
with the Synod's " Rejection of Errors," was published in the same
year.(l) This translation having become scarce, or not being
known to Mr. Scott, he published a new translation in 1818, from
which, as being in more modern English, and, as far as I have
compared it, unexceptionably faithful, I shall take the extracts
necessary to exhibit the Synod's decision on the point before us.

Art. 1. "As all men have sinned in Adam, and have become
exposed to the curse and eternal death, God would have done no
injustice to any one, if he had determined to leave the whole human
race under sin and the curse, and to condemn them on account of
sin ; according to the words of the apostle, ' all the world is become
guilty before God,' Rom. iii, 1 9. ' All have sinned, and come short of
the glory of God,' 23 ; and ' the wages of sin is death,' Rom. vi, 23."

The Synod here assumes that all men, in consequence of Adam's
sin. have become exposed to the curse of " eternal death ;" and they
(1) London, printed by John Bill

SECOND, j "IIIEOLOGlcAL INSTITUTES. i-il

quote passages to prove it, which manifestly prove nothing to the
point. The two first speak of actual sin ; the third, of the wages,
or penalty of actual sin, as the context of each will show. The
very texts adduced, show how totally at a loss the Synod was for
any thing like scriptural evidence of this strange doctrine ; which,
however, as we have seen, would not, if true, help them through
their difficulties, seeing it leaves the punishment of the reprobate
for actual sin and for disbelief of the Gospel, still unaccounted for
on every principle of justice.

Art. 4. " They who believe not the Gospel, on them the wrath
of God remaineth ; but those who receive it, and embrace the
Saviour Jesus with a true and living faith ; are, through him, de-
livered from the wrath of God, and receive the gift of everlasting life."

To this there is nothing to object ; only it is to be observed, that
those who are not elected to eternal life out of the common mass,
are not, according to this article, merely left and passed by ; but
are brought under an obligation of believing the Gospel, which,
nevertheless, is no " good news" to them, and in which they have
no interest at all ; and yet, in default of believing, " the wrath of
God abideth upon them." Thus there is, in fact, no alternative
lor them. They cannot believe, or else it would follow that those
reprobated might be saved ; and, therefore, the wrath of God
" abideth upon them," for no fault of their own. This, however,
the next article denies.

Art. 5. "The cause or fault of this unbelief, as also of all other
sins, is, by no means in God ; but in man. But faith in Jesus
Christ and salvation by him, is the free gift of God. \ By grace are
ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of
God,' Eph. ii, 8. In like manner, ' it is given to you to believe in
Christ,' Phil, i, 29."

These passages would be singular proofs that the fault of unbe-
lief is in men themselves, did not the next article explain the con-
nexion between them and the premises in the minds of the Synodists.
A much more appropriate text, but a rather difficult one on their
theory, would have been, " ye have not, because ye ask not."

Art. 6. " That some, in time, have faith given them by God, and
others have it not given, proceeds from his eternal decree ; for '■ known
unto God are all his ivorfys from the beginning of the world? Acts
xv, 18. According to which decree, he gradually softens the hearts
of the elect, however hard, and he bends them to believe ; but the
non-elect he leaves, in just judgment, to their own perversity and
hardness. And here especially, a deep discrimination, at the same
time both merciful and just, a discrimination of men equally lost.

ioii THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

opens itself to us ; or that decree of election and reprobation which
is revealed in the word of God ; which as perverse, impure, and
unstable persons do wrest to their own destruction, so it affords
ineffable consolation to holy and pious souls."

To this article the Synod appends no Scripture proofs ; which
if the doctrines it contains were, as the Synodists say, " revealed in
the word of God," would not have been wanting. The passage
which stands in the middle of the article could scarcely be intended
as a proof, since it would equally apply to any other doctrine which
does not shut out the prescience of God. The doctrine of the two
articles just quoted, will be seen by taking them together. The
position laid down is, that " the fault" of not believing the Gospel
is " in man." The alleged proof of this is, that faith is the gift of
God. But this only proves that the fault of not believing is in man,
just as it allows that God, the giver of faith, is willing to give faith
to those who have it not, and that they will not receive it. In no
other way can it prove the faultiness of man ; for to what end are
we taught that faith is the gift of God in order to prove the fault of
not believing to be in man, if God will not bestow the gift, and if
man cannot believe without such bestowment 1 This, however, is
precisely what the Synod teaches. It argues, that faith is the gift
of God ; that it is only given to " some ;" and that this proceeds
from God's " eternal decree." So that, by virtue of this decree,
he gives faith to some, and withholds it from others, who are,
thereupon, left without the power of believing ; and for this act of
God, therefore, and not for a fault of their own, they are punished
eternally. And yet the Synod calls this a "just judgment ; affording
ineffable consolation to holy souls," and a " doctrine only rejected
by the perverse and impure !"

As we have already quoted and commented on the 7th and 8th
articles on election, we proceed to

Art. 10. " Now the cause of this gratuitous election is the sole
good pleasure of God ; not consisting in this, that he elected into
the condition of salvation certain qualities or human actions, from
all that were possible ; but in that, out of the common multitude of
sinners, he took to himself certain persons as his peculiar property,
according to the Scripture, ' for the children being not born, neither
having done any good or evil, &c, it is said (that is to Rebecca) the
elder shall serve the younger ; even as it is written, Jacob have I
loved; but Esau have I hated,' Rom. ix, 11-13. 'And as many
as were ordained to eternal life believed,' Acts xiii, 48."

Thus the ground of this election is resolved wholly into the
" good pleasure of God," (est solum Dei beneplacitum) " having no

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 1&»

respect, as to its reason, or condition, though it may have as to
its end, to any foreseen faith, obedience of faith, or any other good
quality and disposition," as it is expressed in the preceding article.
Let us, then, see how the case stands with the reprobate.

Art. 15. "Moreover, Holy Scripture doth illustrate and com-
mend to us this eternal and free grace of our election, in this more
especially, that it doth also testify all men not to be elected ; but
that some are non-elect, or passed by in the eternal election of God :
whom, truly, God, from most free, just, irreprehensible, and im-
mutable good pleasure, decreed to leave in the common misery into
which they had, by their oim fault, cast themselves, and not to bestow
on them living faith, and the grace of conversion ; but having left
them in their own ways, and under just judgment, at length, not
only on account of their unbelief, but also of all their other sins, to
condemn, and eternally punish them for the manifestation of his
own justice. And this is the decree of reprobation which deter-
mines that God is in no wise the author of sin ; (which, to be
thought of, is blasphemy ;) but a tremendous, irreprehensible, just
judge and avenger."

Thus we hear the Synodists confessing, in the same breath in
which they plausibly represent reprobation as a mere passing by and
leaving men " in the common misery," that the reprobate are pun-
ishable for their "unbelief and other sins," and so this decree
imports, therefore, much more than leaving men in the " common
misery." For this " common misery" can mean no more than the
misery common to all mankind by the sin of Adam, into which his
fall plunged the elect, as well as the reprobate ; and to be " left"
in it, must be understood of being left to the sole consequences of
that offence. Now, were it even to be conceded that these conse-
quences extend to personal and conscious eternal punishment, which
has been disproved ; yet, even then, their decree has a much more
formidable aspect, terrible and repulsive as this alone would be.
For we are expressly told, that God not only " decreed to leave
them in this misery," but " not to bestow on them living faith, and
the grace of conversion;" and then to condemn, and eternally
punish them, " on account of their unbelief," which, by their own
showing, these reprobates could not avoid ; and for " all their other
sins," which they could not but commit, since it was " decreed" to
deny to them " the grace of conversion." Thus the case of the
reprobate is deeply aggravated, beyond what it could have been if
they had been merely " left in the common misery ;" and the Synod
and its followers have, therefore, the task of showing, how the
punishing of men for what they never could avoid, and which, if.

134 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

was expressly decreed they never should avoid, " is a manifestation
of the justice," of Almighty God.

From the above extracts it will be seen how little reason Mr.
Scott had to reprove Dr. Heylin with "bearing false witness
against his neighbour, (2) on account of having given a summary
of the eighteen articles of the Synod, on predestination, in the fol-
lowing words : — " That God, by an absolute decree, hath elected
to salvation, a very small number of men, without any regard to
their faith and obedience whatsoever ; and secluded from saving
grace, all the rest of mankind, and appointed them by the same
decree to eternal damnation, without any regard to their infidelity
and impenitency." Whether Mr. Scott understood this controversy
or not, Dr. Heylin shows, by this summary, that he neither misap-
prehended it, nor bore " false witness against his neighbour," in so
stating it ; for as to the stir made about his rendering " mult kudo"
a very small number, this verbal inaccuracy affects not the merits
of the doctrine ; and neither the Synodists, nor any of their fol-
lowers, ever allowed the elect to be a very great number. The
number, less or more, alters not the doctrine. With respect to the
elect, the Synod confesses, that the decree of election has no regard,
as a cause, to faith and obedience foreseen in the persons so elect-
ed ; and with respect to the reprobate, although it is not so explicit
in asserting that the decree of reprobation has no regard to their
infidelity and impenitency, the foregoing extracts cannot possibly
be interpreted into any other meaning. For it is manifestly in vain
for the Synodists to attempt, in the 1 5th article, to gloss over the
doctrine, by saying that men "cast themselves into the common
misery by their oivn fault" when they only mean, that they were
cast into it by Adam and by Ms fault. If they intended to ground
their decree of reprobation on foresight of the personal offences of
the reprobate, they would have said this in so many words ; but
the materials of which the Synod was composed forbade such a
declaration ; and they themselves, in the " Rejection of Errors,"
appended to their chapter " De divina Prcedestinatione" place in
this list " the errors of those who teach that God has not decreed,
from his own mere just ivill, to leave any in the fall of Mam, and in
the common state of sin and damnation, or to pass them by in the
communication of grace necessary to faith and conversion ;" quoting,
as a proof of this dogma, " He hath mercy on whom he will have
mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth," and giving no intimation
that they understand this passage in any other sense than Calvin
and his immediate followers have uniformly affixed to it. What

(S) groTT's Translation of the Articles of the Synod of Dort. pae;e 120.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. *&>

Dr. Heylin has said is here, then, abundantly established ; for if the
decree of reprobation is to be referred to God's " mere will," and it
its operation is to leave the reprobate " in the fall of Adam" and
"to pass them by in that communication of grace which is neces-
sary to faith and conversion," the decree itself is that which prevents
both penitence and faith, and stands upon some other ground than
the personal infidelity and impenitency of the reprobate, and cannot
have " any regard" to either, except as a part of its own dread
consequences : a view of the matter which the supralapsarians
would readily admit. How their doctrine, so stated by themselves,
could give the Synod any reason to complain, as they do in their
conclusion, that they were slandered by their enemies when they
were charged with teaching, "that God, by the bare and mere
determination of his will, without any respect of the sin of any man,
predestinated and created the greatest part of the world to eternal
damnation," will not be very obvious ; or why they should startle
at the same doctrine in one dress which they themselves have but
clothed in another. The fact is, that the divisions in the Synod
obliged the leading members, who were chiefly stout supralapsa-
rians, to qualify their doctrine somewhat in words, whilst substan-
tially it remained the same ; but what they lost by giving up a few
words in one place, they secured by retaining them in another, or
by resorting to subtilties not obvious to the commonalty. Of this
subtilty, the apparent disclaimer just quoted is in proof. When
they seem to deny that God reprobates without any respect to the
sin of any man, they may mean that he had respect to the sin of
Adam, or to sin in Adam ; for they do not deny that they reject
personal sin as a ground of reprobation. Even when they appea*
to allow that God had, in reprobation, respect to the corruption of
human nature, or even to personal transgression, they never confess
that God had respect to sin, in either sense, as the impulsive or
meritorious cause of reprobation. But the greatest subtilty remains
behind ; for the Synod says nothing, in this complaint and apparent
rejection of the doctrine charged upon them by their adversaries.
but what all the supralapsarian divines would say. These, as we.
have seen, make a distinction between the two parts of the decree
of reprobation, — preterition and predamnation, the latter of
which, must always have respect to actual sin ; and hence arises
their distinction between " destruction" and " damnation" For they
say, it is one thing to predestinate and create to damnation, and
another to predestinate and create to destruction. Damnation, being
the sentence of a judge, must be passed in consideration of sin ;
but destruction may be the act of a sovereign, and so inflicted by

136 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

right of dominion. (3) The Synod would have disallowed something
substantial, had they denied that God created any man to destruc-
tion, without respect to sin, and were safe enough in allowing that
he has created none, without respect to sin, unto damnation. But
among the errors on predestination, which they formally " reject,'*
and which they place under nine distinct heads, thus attempting to
guard the pure and orthodox doctrine as to this point on the right
hand and on the left, they are careful not to condemn the supra-
lapsarian doctrine, or to place even its highest branches among the
doctrines disavowed.

The doctrine of the church of Scotland, on these topics, is ex-
pressed in the answers to the 12th and 13th questions of its large
catechism : " God's decrees are the wise, free, and holy acts of the
counsel of his will ; whereby, from all eternity, he hath, for his own
glory, unchangeably foreordained whatsoever comes to pass in time,
especially concerning angels and men" — " God, by an eternal and
immutable decree, out of his mere love, for the praise of his glorious
grace to be manifested in due time, hath elected some angels to
glory ; and, in Christ, hath chosen some men to eternal life and the
means thereof; and also, according to his sovereign power and the
unsearchable counsel of his own will, (whereby he extendeth or
withholdeth favour as he pleaseth,) hath passed by and foreordained
the rest to dishonour and wrath, to be for their sin inflicted, to the
praise of the glory of his justice."

In this general view there appears a strict conformity to the
opinions of Calvin, as before given. All things are the subjects of
decree and preordination ; election and reprobation are grounded
upon the mere will of God ; election is the choosing men, not only
to salvation, but to the means of salvation ; from which the reprobates
are therefore excluded, as passed by, and foreordained to wrath ;
and yet, though the " means of salvation" are never put within their
reach, this wrath is inflicted upon them (ifor their sin :" and to the
praise of God's justice ! The church of Scotland adopts, also, the
notion that decrees of election and reprobation extend to angels as
well as men ; a pretty certain proof, that the framers of this catechism
were not sublapsarians, for as to angels, there could be no election
out of a, " common misery ;" and with Calvin, therefore, they choose
to refer the whole to the arbitrary pleasure and will of God. —

(3) " Non solent enim supralapsarii dicere Deum quosdam ad aeternam damna-
tionem creasse et prcedestinasse ; eo quod damnatio actum judicialem designet, ac
proinde peccati meritum pra^supponat ; sed malunt uti voce ezitii, ad quod Deus,
tanquam absolutusDominus, jus habeat creandiet destinandi quoscunque voluerit.1'
— Curcellaeus De Jure Dei, &c, cap. x. See also Bishop Womack's Calvinistio
Cabinet, &c, p. 394.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL IISSTI T 0TES. 137

!* The angels who stood in their integrity, Paul calls elect ; if their
constancy rested on the Divine pleasure, the defection of others
argues their having been forsaken : (direlectos) a fact, for which
no other cause can be assigned, than the reprobation hidden in the
secret counsel of God."

The ancient church of the Vaudois, in the valleys of Piedmont,
have a confession of faith, bearing date A. D. 1120; and which,
probably, transmits the opinions of much more ancient times. The
only article which bears upon the extent of the death of Christ is
drawn up, as might be expected in an age of the church when it
was received, as a matter almost entirely undisputed, that Christ
died for the salvation of the whole world. Art. 8. " Christ is our
life, truth, peace, and righteousness; also our pastor, advocate,
sacrifice, and priest, who died for the salvation of all those that,
believe, and is risen again for our justification.'*

The Confession of Faith, published by the churches of Piedmont
in 1655, bears a different character. In the year 1630, a plague
which was introduced from France into these valleys, swept off all
the ministers but two, and with them ended the race of their ancient
barbes, or pastors. (4) The Vaudois were then under the necessity
of applying to the reformed churches of France and Geneva for a
supply of ministers ; and with them came in the doctrine of Calvin
in an authorized form. It was thus embodied in the Confession of
1655. Art. 11. "God saves from corruption and condemnation
those whom he has chosen from the foundation of the world, not for
any disposition, faith, or holiness, that he foresaw in them, but of
his mere mercy in Jesus Christ his Son : passing by all the rest,
according to the irreprehensible reason of his, free will and justice.''''
The last clause is expressed in the very words of Calvin.

The 12th Article in the Confession of the French churches,
1558, is, in substance, Calvinistic, though brief and guarded in
expression. " We believe, that out of this general corruption and
condemnation in which all men arc plunged, God doth deliver them
whom he hath, in his eternal and unchangeable counsel; chosen of
his mere goodness and mercy, through our Lord Jesus Christ,
without any consideration of their works, leaving the rest in their
sins and damnable estate, that he may show forth in them his justice,
as, in the elect, he doth most illustriously declare the riches of his
mercy. For one is not better than another, until such time as God
doth make the difference, according to his unchangeable purpose
which he hath determined in Jesus Christ before the creation of

(4) Sco "Historical Defence, &c, of the Waldenaeg," bv Sim?

Vol III 18

138 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the world."(o) This confession was drawn up by Calvin himself,
though not in language so strong as he usually employs ; which,
perhaps, indicates that the majority of the French pastors were
inclined to the sublapsarian theory, and did not, in every point,
coincide with their great master.

The Westminster Confession gives the sentiments both of the
English Presbyterian churches, and the church of Scotland. (6)
Chap. 3 treats of the predestination.

" By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some
men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others
foreordained to everlasting death. These angels and men thus
predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably
designed ; and their number is so certain and definite, that it cannot
cither be increased or diminished. Those of mankind that are
predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world
was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose and the-
secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ
unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without
any foresight of faith and good works, or perseverance in either of
them, or any other thing in the creature as conditions or causes
moving him thereunto ; and all to the praise of his glorious grace.
As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the
eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means
thereunto. Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam,
are redeemed by Christ ; are effectually called unto faith in Christ,
by his Spirit working in due season ; are justified, adopted, sancti-
fied, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation ; neither
are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopt-
ed, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. The rest of mankind
God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own
will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth,
for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and
to ordain them to dishonour and wrath for their sin, to the praise
of his glorious justice."

Here we have no attempts at qualification after the example of
the Synod of Dort ; but the whole is conformed to the higher and
most unmitigated parts of the Institutes of Calvin. By the side of
the Presbyterian Confession, the seventeenth article of the Church

(5) Quick's " Synodicon in Gallia Reformata."

(C) The title of it is "The Confession of Faith agreed upon by the Assembly of
Divines at Westminster, with the assistance of Commissioners from the Church
of Scotland." The date of the ordinance for convening this assembly is 1643. The
Confession was approved bv the General Assembly of the Church of Scotrand in
1647.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 139

of England must appear exceedingly moderate ; and, as to Cahin-
istic predestination, to say the least, equivocal. It never gave
satisfaction to the followers of Calvin, who had put his stronger
impress upon the Augustinism which floated in the minds of many
of the divines of the Reformation, who generally, as appears from
the earliest Protestant confessions and catechisms, (7) thought fit to
recommend that either these points should not be touched at all, or
so speak of them as to admit great latitude of interpretation, and
that, probably, in charitable respect to the varying opinions of the
theologians and churches of the day. It is of the perfected form
of Calvinism that Arminius speaks, when he says, " It neither
agrees nor corresponds with the harmony of those confessions which
were published together in one volume at Geneva, in the name of
the Reformed and Protestant Churches. If that harmony of con-
fessions be faithfully consulted, it will appear, that many of them do
not speak in the same manner concerning predestination ; that some
of them only incidentally mention it, and that they evidently never
once touch upon those heads of the doctrine which are now in
great repute, and particularly urged in the preceding scheme of
predestination. The confessions of Bohemia, England, and Wirt-
emburg, and the first Helvetian Confession, and that of the four
cities of Strasburgh, Constance, Memmingen, and Lindau, make
no mention of this predestination : those of Basle and Saxony only-
take a very cursory notice of it in three words. The Augustan
Confession speaks of it in such a manner as to induce the Genevan
editors to think that some annotation was necessary on their part
to give us a previous warning. The last of the Helvetian Confes-
sions, to which a great portion of the Reformed Churches have
expressed their assent, likewise speaks of it in such a strain as
makes me very desirous to see what method can possibly be adopted
to give it any accordance with that doctrine of the predestination
which I have stated. Without the least contention or cavilling, it
may be very properly made a subject of doubt, whether this doctrine
agrees with the Belgic Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism." (8)
I have given these extracts to show that nothing in the preceding
discussion has been assumed as Calvinism, but what is to be found

(7) The Augsburg Confession says, " Non est hie opus disputation ibus de pro?-
destinatione et similibus. Nam promissio est universalis et nihil detrahit operibus,
sed exsuscitat ad fidem et ver ebona opera." Act 20. And the Saxon Confession
is equally indifferent to the subject. " Non addimus hie quaestiones de praidesti-
natione seu de electione ; scddeducimusomneslectorcs ad verbum Dei, et jubemus
lit voluntatem Dei verbo ipsius discant sicut iEtcraus Pater express^ voce proecipit ,
hunc audite." Art. de Remiss. Pecc.

(8) Njchoi.'s Worjis of Arrninius, vol. 1, p. 5">~

HO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- j_PAKT

hi the writings of the founder of the system, and in the confessions
and creeds of churches which professedly admitted his doctrine.

With respect to modifications of this system, the sublapsarian
theory has been already considered and shown to be substantially
the same as the system which it professes to mitigate and improve.
We may now adduce another modified theory ; but shall, upon
examination, find it but little, if at all, removed out of the reach of
those objections which have been stated to the various shades of the
predestinating scheme already noticed.

That scheme is in England usually called Baxterianism, from the
celebrated Baxter, who advocated it in his Treatise of Universal
Redemption, and in his JWethodus Theologies. He Avas, however, in
this theory but the disciple of certain divines of the French Pro-
testant church, whose opinions created many dissensions abroad,
and produced so much warmth of opposition from the Calvinistic
party, that they were obliged first to engage in the hopeless attempt
of softening down the harsher aspects of the doctrine of Calvin and
the Synod of Dorr, in order to keep themselves in countenance :
then to attack the Arminians with asperity, in order to purge them-
selves of the suspicion of entire heterodoxy in a Calvinistic church ;
and, finally, to Avithdraw from the contest. The Calvinism of the
church of France was, however, much mitigated in subsequent
times by the influence of the writings of these theologians ; a result
which also has followed in England from the labours of Baxter,
who, though he formed no separate school, has had numerous fol-
lowers in the Calvinistic churches of this country. The real author
of the scheme, at least in a systematized form, was Camero, who
taught divinity at Saumur, and it was unfolded and defended by his
disciple Amyraldus, to whom Curcellaeus replied in the work from
which I have above made some quotations. Baxter says, in his
preface to his Saint's Rest, "The middle way which Camero,
Crocius, Martinius, Amyraldus, Davenant, with all the divines of
Britain and Bremen, in the Synod of Dort go, I think is nearest the
truth of any that I know who have written on these points." (9)
This system he laboured powerfully to defend, and his works on
this subject, although his system is often spoken of, being but little
known to the general reader, the following exhibition of this scheme,
from his work entitled " Universal Redemption," may be acceptable.
It makes great concessions to that view, of the scriptural doctrine

(9) Of Camero, or Cameron, Amyraldus, Courcelles, and the controversy in
which they were engaged, see an interesting account in Nichol's Arminianism
and Calvinism Compared, vol. 1, appendix c, a work of elaborate research, and
abounding with the most curious information as to the opinions and history of
those times.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 141

which we have attempted to establish ; but, for want of going another
step, it is, perhaps, the most inconsistent theory to which the varied
attempts to modify Calvinism have given rise. Baxter first differs
from the majority of Calvinists, though not from all, in his statement
of the doctrine of satisfaction.

" Christ's sufferings were not a fulfilling of the law's threatening
(though he bore its curse materially ;) but a satisfaction for our not
fulfilling the precept, and to prevent God's fulfilling the threatening
on us."

" Christ paid not, therefore, the idem, but the tantundem, or
aquivalens ; not the very debt which we owed and the law required,
but the value ; (else it were not strictly satisfaction, which is redditio
aquivalentis :) And (it being improperly called the paying of a debt,
but properly a suffering for the guilty) the idem is nothing but sup-
plicium delinquentis. In criminals, dum alius solvet simul aliud solvitur.
The law knoweth no vicarius po&nm ; though the law maker may
admit it, as he is above law ; else there were no place for pardon, if
the proper debt be paid and the law not relaxed, but fulfilled."

" Christ did neither obey nor suffer in any man's stead, by a strict,
proper representation of his person in point of law ; so as that the law
should take it, as done or suffered by the party himself But only
as a third person, as a mediator, he voluntarily bore what else the
.sinner should have borne."

" To assert the contrary (especially as to particular persons
considered in actual sin) is to overthrow all Scripture theology,
and to introduce all Antinomianism ; to overthrow all possibility of
pardon, and assert justification before we sinned or were born, and
to make ourselves to have satisfied God.

" Therefore we must not say that Christ died noslro loco, so as
to personate us, or represent our persons in law sense; but only to
bear what else we must have borne."(l)

This system explicitly asserts, that Christ made a satisfaction by
his death equally for the sins of every man ; and thus Baxter essen-
tially differs both from the rigid Calvinists, and, also, from the
sublapsarians, who, though they may allow that the reprobate derive
some benefits from Christ's death, so that there is a vague sense in
which he may be said to have died for all men, yet they, of course,
deny to such the benefit of Christ's satisfaction or atonement which
Baxter contends for.

"Neither the law, whose curse Christ bore, nor God, as the
legislator to be satisfied, did distinguish between men as elect and
reprobate, or as believers and unbelievers, de present! vel defuturo :
(1) Universal Redemption, p. 48-51.

H^ THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and to impose upon Christ, or require from him satisfaction for the
sins of one sort more than of another, but for mankind in general.

" God the Father, and Christ the Mediator, now dealeth with no
man upon the mere rigorous terms of the first law ; (obey perfectly
and live, else thou shalt die ;) but giveth to all much mercy, which,
according to the tenor of that violated law, they could not receive,
and calleth them to repentance, in order to their receiving farther
mercy offered them. And accordingly he will not judge any at
last according to the mere law of works, but as they have obeyed
or not obeyed his conditions or terms of grace.

" It was not the sins of the elect only, but of all mankind fallen,
which lay upon Christ satisfying. And to assert the contrary, inju-
riously diminisheth the honour of his sufferings ; and hath other
desperate ill consequences. "(2)

The benefits derived to all men equally, from the satisfaction of
Christ, he thus states,

" All mankind immediately upon Christ's satisfaction, are redeem-
ed and delivered from that legal necessity of perishing which they
were under, (not by remitting sin or punishment directly to them,
but by giving up God's jus puniendi into the hands of the Redeemer ;
nor by giving any right directly to them, but per meram resultantiam
this happy change is made for them in their relation, upon the said
remitting of God's right and advantage of justice against them,) and
they are given up to the Redeemer as their owner and ruler, to be
dealt with upon terms of mercy which have a tendency to their
recovery.

" God the Father and Christ the Mediator hath freely, without
any prerequisite condition on man's part, enacted a law of grace
of universal extent, in regard of its tenor, by which he giveth, as a
deed of gift, Christ himself, with all his following benefits which he
bestoweth ; (as benefactor and legislator;) and this to all alike,
without excluding any ; upon condition they believe, and accept
the offer.

" By this law, testament, or covenant, all men are conditionally
pardoned, justified, and reconciled to God already, and no man
absolutely ; nor doth it make a difference, nor take notice of any
till men's performance or non-performance of the condition makes
a difference.

" In the new law Christ hath truly given himself 'with a conditional
pardon, justification, and conditional right to salvation, to all men in
the world, without exception." (3)
On the case of the heathen :

(2) Ibid. p. 36, 37. and 50. (3) Ibid. p. 36, 4y

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 143

" Though God hath been pleased less clearly to acquaint us on
what terms he dealeth with those that hear not of Christ, yet it
being most clear and certain, that he dealeth with them on terms of
grace, and not on the terms of the rigorous law of works, this general
may evince them to be the mediator's subjects, and redeemed.

" Though it be very difficult, and not very necessary, to know
what is the condition prescribed to them that hear not of Christ, or
on what terms Christ will judge them ; yet, to me it seems to be
the covenant made with Mam, Gen. iii, 15, which they are under,
requiring their taking God to be their only God and Redeemer, and
to expecting mercy from him and loving him above all, as their end
and chief good; and repenting of sin, and sincere obedience,
according to the laws promulgated to them, to lead them farther.

" All those that have not heard of Christ, have yet much mercy
which they receive from him, and is the fruit of his death : accord-
ing to the well or ill using whereof it seems possible that God will
judge them.

" It is a course to blind, and not to inform men, to lay the main
stress in the doctrine of redemption upon our uncertain conclusions
of God's dealing with such as never heard of Christ, seeing all proof
is per notiora ; and we must reduce points uncertain to the certain,
and not the certain to the uncertain, in our trial." (4)

In arguments drawn from the consequences which follow the
denial of " universal satisfaction," Baxter is particularly terse and
conclusive.

" The doctrine which denieth universal satisfaction hath all these
inconveniences and absurd consequents following : therefore it is
not of God, nor true.

" It either denieth the universal promise or conditional gift of
pardon and life to all men if they will believe, and then it overturneth
the substance of Christ's law and Gospel promise ; or else it maketh
God to give conditionally to all men a pardon and salvation which
Christ never purchased, and without his dying for men.

" It maketh God either not to offer the effects of Christ's satis-
faction (pardon and life) to all, but only to the elect ; or else to
offer that which is not, and which he cannot give.

" It denieth the direct object of faith, and of God's offer, that is
Christum qui satisfecit, (a Christ that hath satisfied.)

"It either denieth the non-elect's deliverance from that flat

necessity of perishing, which came on man for sinning against the

first law, by its remediless, unsuspended obligation ; (and so neither

Christ, Gospel, or mercy, had ever any nature of a remedy to them,

(4) Ibid. p. 37, 38, and 54.

144 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

nor any more done towards their deliverance than towards the
deliverance of the devils ;) or else it maketh this deliverance and
remedy to be without satisfaction by Christ for them.

" It either denieth that God commandeth all to believe, (but only
the elect ;) or else maketh God to assign them a deceiving object
for their faith, commanding them to believe in that which never was,
and to trust in that which would deceive them if they did trust it.

" It maketh God either to have appointed and commanded the
non-elect to use no means at all for their recovery and salvation, or
else to have appointed them means which are all utterly useless and
insufficient, for want of a prerequisite cause without them ; yea,
which imply a contradiction.

" It maketh the true and righteous God to make promises of
pardon and salvation to all men on condition of believing, which
he neither would nor could perform, (for want of such satisfaction
to his justice,) if they did believe.

" It denieth the true sufficiency of Christ's death for the pardon-
ing and saving of all men, if they did believe.

" It makes the cause of men's damnation to be principally for
want of an expiatory sacrifice and of a Saviour, and not of believing.

" It leaveth all the world, elect as well as others, without any
ground and object for the first justifying faith, and in an utter un-
certainty whether they may believe to justification or not.

" It denieth the most necessary humbling aggravation of men's
sins, so that neither the minister can tell wicked men that they have
sinned against him that bought them, nor can any wicked man so
accuse himself ; no, nor any man that doth not know himself to be
elect : they cannot say, my sins put Christ to death, and were the
cause of his sufferings : nay, a minister cannot tell any man in the
world, certainly, (their sins put Christ to death,) because he is not
certain who is elect or sincere in the faith.

" It subverteth Christ's new dominion and government of the
world, and his general legislation and judgment according to his
law, which is now founded in his title of redemption, as the first
dominion and government was on the title of creation.

" It maketh all the benefits that the non-elect receive, whether
spiritual or corporal ; and so even the relaxation of the curse of
the law, (without which relaxation no man could have such mer-
cies,) to befall men without the satisfaction of Christ; and so either
make satisfaction, as to all those mercies, needless, or else must
find another satisfier.

" It maketh the law of grace to contain far harder terms than
the law of works did in its utmost rigour

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 14<5

" It maketh the law of Moses either to bind all the non-elect still
to all ceremonies and bondage ordinances, (and so sets up Judaism,)
or else to be abrogated and taken down, and men delivered from
it, without Christ's suffering for them.

" It destroys almost the whole work of the ministry, disabling
ministers either to humble men by the chiefest aggravations of their
sins, and to convince them of ingratitude and unkind dealing with
Christ, or to show them any hopes to draw them to repentance, or
any love and mercy tending to salvation to melt and win them to the
love of Christ ; or any sufficient object for their faith and affiance,
or any means to be used for pardon or salvation, or any promise
to encourage them to come in, or any threatening to deter them.

" It makes God and the Redeemer to have done no more for the
remedying of the misery of most of fallen mankind than for tlie
devils, nor to have put them into any more possibility of pardon or
salvation.

" Nay, it makes God to have dealt far hardlier with most men
than with the devils ; making them a law which requireth their
believing in one that never died for them, and taking him for their
Redeemer that never redeemed them, and that on the mere fore-
sight that they would not believe it, or decree that they should not ;
and so to create by that law a necessity of their far sorer punish-
ment, without procuring them any possibility of avoiding it.

" It makes the Gospel of its own nature to be the greatest plague
and judgment to most of men that receive it, that ever God sendeth
to men on earth, by binding them over to a greater punishment, and
aggravating their sin, without giving them any possibility of remedy.

" It maketh the case of all the world, except the elect, as de-
plorate, remediless, and hopeles, as the case of the damned, and so
denieth them to have any day of grace, visitation, or salvation, or
any price for happiness put into their hands.

" It maketh Christ to condemn men to hell fire for not receiving
him for their Redeemer that never redeemed them, and for not
resting on him for salvation by his blood, which was never shed for
them, and for not repenting unto life, when they had no hope of
mercy, and faith and repentance could not have saved them.

" It putteth sufficient excuses into the mouths of the condemned.

" It maketh the torments of conscience iii hell to be none at all,
and teacheth the damned to put away all their sorrows and self
accusations.

" It denieth all the privative part of those torments which men
are obliged to sutler by the obligation of Christ's law, and so maketh
hell either no hell at all, or next to none.

Vol, III- 19

146 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTED [PART

" And I shall anon show how it leads to infidelity and other sins,
and, after this, what face of religion is left unsubverted 1 Not that
I charge those that deny universal satisfaction with holding all these
abominations ; but their doctrine of introducing them by necessary
consequence : it is the opinion and not the men that I accuse."

A thorough Arminian could say nothing stronger than what is
asserted in several ,of the above quotations ; and, perhaps, what
might not be borne from him, may call attention from Baxter, and
happy would it be if every advocate of Calvin's reprobation would
give these " consequents," a candid consideration.

The peculiarity of Baxter's scheme will be seen from the follow-
ing farther extracts ; and, after all, it singularly leaves itself open
to almost all the objections which he so powerfully urges against
Calvinism itself.

" Though Christ died equally for all men, in the aforesaid law
sense, as he satisfied the offended legislator, and as giving himself to
all alike in the conditional covenant; yet he never properly in-
tended OR PURPOSED THE ACTUAL JUSTIFYING AND SAVING OF

all, nor of any but those that come to be justified and saved : he
did not, therefore, die for all, nor for any that perish, with a decree
or resolution to save them, much less did he die for all alike,

AS TO THIS INTENT.

" Christ hath given faith to none by his law or testament, though
he hath revealed, that to some he will, as benefactor and Dominus
Absolutus, give that grace which shall infallibly produce it ; and
God hath given some to Christ that he might prevail with them
accordingly ; yet this is no giving it to the person, nor hath he in
himself ever the more title to it, nor can any lay claim to it as
their due.

"It belongeth not to Christ as satisfier, nor yet as legislator, to
make wicked refusers to become willing, and receive him and the
benefits which he otters ; therefore he may do all for them that is
lore expressed, though he cure not their unbelief.

" Faith is a fruit of the death of Christ, (and so is all the good
which we do enjoy,) but not directly, as it is satisfaction to justice ;
but only remotely, as it proceedeth from that jus dominii which
Christ has received to send the Spirit in what measure and to
whom he will, and to succeed it accordingly ; and as it is neces-
sary to the attainment of the farther ends of his death in the certain
gathering and saving of the elect."(5)

Thus, then, the whole theory comes to this, that, although a con-
ditional salvation has been purchased by Christ for all men, and is
(5) Ibid. p. 63, Ac

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 11*/

offered to them, and all legal difficulties are removed out of the way
of their pardon as sinners by the atonement, yet Christ hath not
purchased for any man the gift of faith, or the power of performing
the condition of salvation required ; but gives this to some, and does
not give it to others, by virtue of that absolute dominion over men
which he has purchased for himself ; so that, in fact, the old scheme
of election and reprobation still comes in, only with this difference,
that the Calvinists refer that decree to the sovereignty of the Father,
Baxter to the sovereignty of the Son; one makes the decree of
reprobation to issue from the Creator and Judge ; the other,
(which is indeed the more repulsive view,) from the Redeemer
himself, who has purchased even those to whom he denies the gift
of faitji with his own most precious blood. This is plain from the
following quotation :

" God did not give Christ faith for his blood shed in exchange ;
the thing that God was to give the Son for his satisfaction, was
dominion and rule of the redeemed creature, and power therein to
use what means he saw fit for the bringing in of souls to himself,
even to send forth so much of his word and Spirit as he pleased; both
the Father and Son resolving, from eternity, to prevail infallibly
with all the elect ; but never did Christ desire at his Father's hands
that all whom he satisfied for, should be infallibly and irresistibly
brought to believe, nor did God ever grant or promise any such
thing. Jesus Christ, as a ransom, died for all, and as Rector per
leges, or legislator, he hath conveyed the fruits of his death to all,
that is, those fruits which it appertained to him as legislator to con-
vey, which is right to what his new law or covenant doth promise ;
but those mercies which he gives as Dominus absolutus, arbitrarily
besides or above his engagement, he neither gives nor ever intended
to give to all that he died for." (6)

The only quibble which prevents the real aspect of this scheme
from being at first seen, is, that Baxter, and the divines of this
school, give to the elect irresistible effectual grace ; but contend,
that others have sufficient grace. This kind of grace is called, aptly
enough, by Baxter himself, " sufficient ineffectual grace ;" and that
it is worthy the appellation, his own account of it will show.

" I say it again, confidently, all men that perish (who have the
use of reason) do perish directly, for rejecting sufficient recovering
grace. By grace, I mean mercy contrary to merit : by recover-
ing, I mean such as tendeth in its own nature towards their reco-
very, and leadeth or helpeth them thereto. By sufficient, I meau,
■vot sufficient directly to save them ; (for such none of the

(f»> Ibid. p. 425.

[48 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE^. [PART

elect have till they are saved ;) nor yet sufficient to give them

FAITH OR CAUSE THEM SAVINGLY TO BELIEVE. Bllt it is Sufficient

to bring them nearer Christ than they are, though not to put them
into immediate possession of Christ by union with him, as faith
would do. It is an easy truth, that all men naturally are far from
Christ, and that some, by custom in sinning, for want of inform-
ing and restraining means, are much farther from him than others,
(as the heathens are,) and that it is not God's usual way (nor to be
expected) to bring these men to Christ at once, by one act, or
without any preparation, or first bringing them nearer to him. It
is a similitude used by some that oppose what I now say : suppose
a man in a lower room should go no more steps than he in the mid-
dle room, he must go many steps before he came to be as near you
as the other is. Now, suppose you offer to take them by the hand
when they come to the upper stairs, and give them some other suf-
ficient help to come up the lower steps : if these men will not use
the help given them to ascend the first steps, (though entreated,)
who can be blamed but themselves if they came not to the top 1 It
is not your fault but theirs, that they have not your hand to lift
them up at the last step. So is our present case. Worldlings, and
sensual ignorant sinners, have many steps to ascend before they
come to justifying faith : and heathens have many steps before they
come as far as ungodly Christians, (as might easily be manifested
by enumeration of several necessary particulars.) Now, if these will
not use that sufficient help that Christ gives them to come the first,
or second, or third step, who is it long of that they have not
faith ?"(7)

But Ave have no reason to conclude, from this system, that if they
took the steps required, it would bring them " nearer to Christ than
they are," or, at least, bring them up to saving faith, which is
the great point, since Mr. Baxter's own doctrine is, that Christ
" never properly intended or purposed the actual justifying, and
saving of all, and did not, therefore, die for all, nor for any that
perish, with a design or resolution to save them, much less did he die
for all, as to this intent." Those, then, for whom Christ died, not
with intent to give saving faith, cannot be saved ; yet we are told,
that to these sufficient grace is given, to take a step or two which
would bring them " nearer to Christ." Suppose such persons, then,
to take these steps, yet, as Christ died not for them, with intent to
give them saving faith, without this intent, they cannot have saving
faith, since it is not a part of Christ's purchase, but his arbitrary
gift. The truth then is, that their salvation is as impossible as that

(?) Ibid. p. 434.

SECOND.] I11EOLOGICAL INSTiTXJTEij. 141*

of the reprobates under the supralapsarian scheme, and the rea-
son of their doom is no act of their own, but an act of Christ him-
self, who, as " absolute Lord," denies that to them which is necessary
to their salvation.

It is, however, but fair that Mr. Baxter should himself answer
this objection.

" Objection. — Then, they that come not the first step are excusa-
ble ; for, if they had come to the step next believing, they had no
assurance that Christ would have given them faith.

" Answer. — No such matter : For though they had no assurance,
they had both God's command to seek more grace, and sufficient
encouragement thereto ; they had such as Mr. Cotton calls half
promises, that is, a discovery of a possibility, and high degree of
probability of obtaining ; as Peter to Simon, pray, if perhaps the
thoughts of thy heart may be forgiven. They may think God will
not appoint men vain means, and he hath appointed some means
to all men to get more grace* and bring them nearer Christ than
they are. Yea, no man can name that man since the world was
made, that did his best in the use of these means, and lost his labour.
So that if all men have not faith, it is their own fault ; not onty as
originally sinners, but as rejecting sufficient grace to have brought
them nearer Christ than they were ; for which it is that they justly
perish, as is more fully opened in the dispute of sufficient grace."

One argument from Scripture demolishes this whole scheme.
Mr. Baxter makes the condemnation of men to rest upon their not
coming " nearer to Christ" than they are in their natural state ; but
the Scripture places their guilt in not fully " coming to him ;" or,
in other words, in their not believing in Christ " to salvation," since
it has made faith their duty, and has connected salvation with faith.
That they must take previous steps, such as consideration and re-
pentance, is true, and that they are guilty for not taking them ; but
then their guilt arises from their rejection of a strength and grace
to consider and repent which is imparted to them, in order to lead
them, through this process, to saving faith itself; and they are con-
demned for not having this faith, because not only the preparatory
steps, but the faith itself is put within their reach, or they could not
be condemned for unbelief. If Baxter really meant that any steps
these non-elect persons could take, would actually put them into
possession of saving faith, he would have said so in so many plain
words, and then, between him and the Arminians there would have
been no difference, so far as they who perish are concerned. But
coming nearer to Christ, and nearer to saving faith are with him
quite distinct. His concern was not, to show how the non-elect

loO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

might be saved ; but how they might with some plausibility be
damned.

" What then," says Dr. Womack, " is the universal redemption
you or they speak of? Doth it consist in the ablation of the curse
or pain, the impetration of grace and righteousness, and the collation
of life and glory 1 Man's misery consists but of two parts, sin and
punishment. Doth your universal redemption make sufficient pro-
vision to free the non-elect from both, or from either of these 1 From
the wrath to come, the damnation of hell, or from iniquity and their
rain conversation? Indeed, in your assize sermons, you did very
seasonably preach up Christ to be a Lord Chief Justice to judge the
reprobate ; but I cannot find that ever you declare him to be their
Lord Keeper, or their Lord Treasurer, to communicate his saving
grace for their conversion, or to secure them against the assaults
and rage of their ghostly enemy. These last offices you suppose
him to bear in favour of the elect only, so that your universal re-
demption holds a very fair correspondence with your sufficient grace,
(as to the non-elect,) — there is not one single person sanctified by
this, or saved by that." (8)

The remark of Curcellaeus on the same system as delivered by
Amyraldus, is conclusive.

" Besides, since faith is necessary, in order to make us partakers
of the benefits which are procured by the death of Christ, and since
no one can obtain it by his natural powers, (for it is imparted
through a special gift, from which God, by an absolute decree, has
excluded the greatest portion of mankind,) of what avail is it that
Christ has died for those to whom faith is denied ? Does not the affair
revert to the same point, as if he had never entertained an intention of
redeeming them?" (9)

This cannot consistently be denied. Mr. Baxter, indeed, says,
that " none can name the man since the world was made, that did
his best in the use of the means to obtain more grace, and lost his
labour." So we believe, but this helps not Mr. Baxter. One of
his main principles is, that there is a class of men to whom Christ
has resolved to give saving faith ; to the rest he has resolved not to
give it. The man, then, who seeks more than common grace, and
obtains saving grace, is either in the class to whom Christ has
resolved, by right of dominion, to give saving grace, or he is not.
If the former, then he is one of the elect, and so the instance given
proves nothing as to the case of the non-elect ; but, if he be of the
latter class, then one of those to whom Christ never resolve^to give
saving grace, by some means obtains it, — how, it will be difficult to
(8) Cqlvinistic Cabinet Unlocked. (0) De Jure Dei Creatnras, &d>

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 161

say. In fact, it was never allowed by Mr. Baxter or his followers,
that any but the elect would be saved.

The remarks of a Calvinist upon the "middle scheme" of the
French divines, the same in substance as that which was afterwards
advocated by Baxter, may properly close our remarks.

" This mitigated view of the doctrine of predestination has only
one defect ; but it is a capital one. It represents God as dewing a
thing (that is salvation and happiness) for all, which, in order to
its attainment, requires a degree of his assistance and succour,
which he refuseth to many. This rendered grace and redemption
universal only in words, but partial in reality; and, therefore,
did not at all mend the matter The supralapsarians were con-
sistent with themselves ; but their doctrine was harsh and terrible,
and was founded on the most unworthy notions of the Supreme
Being ; and, on the other hand, the system of Amyraut was full of
inconsistencies : nay, even the sublapsarian doctrine has its diffi-
culties, and rather palliates than removes the horrors of supralap-
sarianism. What, then, is to be done 1 From what quarter shall
the candid and well-disposed Christian receive that solid satisfaction
and wise direction which neither of these systems is adapted to
administer ] These he will receive by turning his dazzled and feeble
eye from the secret decrees of God, which were neither designed
to be rules of action, nor sources of comfort to mortals here below ;
and, by fixing his view upon the mercy of God, as it is manifested
through Christ, the pure laws and sublime promises of his Gospel,
and the equity of his present government and future tribunal."(l)

The theory to which the name of Baxter has given some weight
in this country, has been introduced more at length, because with
it stands or falls every system of moderated or modified Calvinism,
which by more modern writers has been advocated. The schemo
of Dr. Williams, of Rotherham, is little beside the old theory of
supralapsarian reprobation, in its twofold enunciation of preten-
tion, by which God refuses help to a creature which cannot stand
without help, and his consequent damnation for the crimes com-
mitted in consequence of this withholding of supernatural aid. The
dress is altered, and the system has a dash of Cameronism, but it is
in substance the same. All other mitigated schemes rest on two
principles, the sufficiency of the atonement for all mankind, and
the sufficiency of grace to those who believe not. For the first, it
Is enough to say, that the Synod of Dort and the higher Calvinistic
school will agree with them upon this point, and so nothing is
gained ; for the second, that the sufficiency of grace in these
(1) Maclaine's Notes on Mosheim's History.

lo2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

schemes is always understood in Baxter's sense, and is mere verb-
iage. It is not " the grace of God which bringeth salvation ;"
for no man is actually saved without something more than this
" sufficient grace" provides. That which is contended for, is, in
fact, not a sufficiency of grace in order to salvation ; but, in order
to justify the condemnation which inevitably follows. For this alone
the struggle is made, but without success. The main characteristic
of all these theories, from the first to the last, from the highest to
the lowest is, that a part of mankind are shut out from the mercies
of God, on some ground irrespective of their refusal of a sincere
offer to them of salvation through Christ, made with a communi-
cated power of embracing it. Some power they allow to the
reprobate, as natural power, and degrees of superadded moral
power ; but in no case the power to believe unto salvation ; and
thus, as one well observes, " when they have cut some fair trenches,
as if they would bring the water of life unto the dwellings of the
reprobate, on a sudden they open a sluice which carries it off again."
The whole labour of these theories is to find out some decent
pretext for the infliction of punishment on them that perish, inde-
pendent of the only reason given by Scripture, their rejection of a
mercy free for all.

Having exhibited the Calvinistic system on its own authorities,
it may be naturally asked from what mode or basis of thinking a
scheme could arise so much at variance with the Scriptures, and
with all received notions of just and benevolent administration
among men ; properties of government, which must be found more
perfectly in the government of God, by reason of the perfection of
its author, than in any other. That it had its source in a course of
induction from the sacred Scriptures, though erroneous, is not
probable ; for, if it had been left to that test, it is pretty certain it
would not have maintained itself. It appears rather to have arisen
from metaphysical hypotheses and school subtilties, to wrhich the
sense of Scripture has been accommodated, often very violently ; and
by subtilties of this kind, it has, at all times, been chiefly supported.

It has, for instance, been assumed by the advocates of this theo-
logical theory, that all things which come to pass have been fixed
by eternal decrees ; and that as many men actually perish, it
must, therefore, have been decreed that they should perish : and,
consistently with such a scheme, it became necessary to exclude
a part of the human race from all share in the benefits of Christ's
redemption. The argument employed to confirm the premises, is,
" that it is agreeable to reason and to the analogy of nature, that
God should conduct all things according to a deliberate and fixed

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 1 53

plan, independent of his creatures, rather than that he should be
influenced, even in his purposes, by the foresight of their capricious
conduct."(2) " It is not easy to reconcile the immutability and
efficacy of the Divine counsel which enters into our conceptions of
the first cause, with a purpose to save all, suspended upon a con-
dition which is not fulfilled with regard to many." (3) This has,
indeed, all along been the main stress of the argument for absolute
decrees, that a conditional decree reflects dishonour upon the Divine
attributes, "by leaving God, as it were, in suspense, and waiting to
see what men will do, before he passes a firm and irrevocable
decree ;" which, as they say, seems to imply want of power and
prescience in God, and to be inconsistent with other of his Divine
perfections. They especially think, that this is irreconcilable with
the immutability of God, and that to subject his decrees to the
changes of a countless number of mutable beings, must render him
the most mutable being in the universe.

The whole of this objection, however, seems to involve a petitio
principii. It is taken for granted, either that the decrees of God
are absolute appointments from eternity, and then any change of his
decrees, dependent upon the acts of creatures, would be a contra-
diction ; or else, that the acts of creatures being free, it folloAvs,
that God had from eternity no plan, and conducts his own govern-
ment only as circumstances may arise. But, that either the decrees
of God are fixed and absolute, or, that God can have no plan of
government if that be denied, is the very alternative to be proved,
the matter which is in debate. It becomes necessary, therefore,
in order to ascertain the truth, to fix the sense of the favourite term
"decrees," and for this we have no sound guide but the Holy
Scriptures, which, as to what relates to man's salvation at least,
contain the only exposition of the purposes of God.

The term " decree" is no where in Scripture used in the sense
in which it is taken in the theology of the Calvinists. It is properly
a legislative or judicial term, importing the solemn decision of a
court, and was adopted into that system, probably, because of tin.'
absolute meaning it conveys, which quality of absoluteness is, in
fact, the point debated. The "purpose" and " counsel" of God are
the scriptural terms applicable to this subject ; one of which,
"counsel," expresses an act of wisdom, and the other, necessarily
implies it, as it is the "purpose" design, or determination of a
Being of infinite perfection, who can purpose, design, will, and
determine, nothing but under the .direction of his intelligence, and
the regulation of his moral attributes.

(2) Dr. Rankin's Institutes. (3) Dr. Hill's Lecture?

Vot.. in 2o

154 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

Terms are not indeed to be objected to merely because they are
not found in the word of God ; but their signification must be
controlled by it, otherwise, as in the case of the term decrees, a
meaning is often silently brought in under covert of the term, which
becomes a postulate in argument : a practice which has been a
fruitful source of misapprehension and error. The decrees of God,
if the phrase then must be continued, can only scripturally signify
the determinations of his will in his government of the world he has
made ; and those determinations are plainly, in Scripture, referred
to two classes, what he has himself determined to do, and what he
lias determined to permit to be done by free and accountable crea-
tures. He determined, for instance, to create man, and he deter-
mined to permit his fall ; he determined also the only method of
dispensing pardon to the guilty, but he determined to permit men
to reject it and to fall into the punishment of their offences.
Calvin, indeed, rejects the doctrine of permission. "It is not pro-
bable," he says, " that man procured his own destruction by the
mere permission, and without any appointment of God." He had
reason. for this; for to have allowed this distinction would have
been contrary to the main principles of his theological system,
which are, that " the will of God is the necessity of things," and that
all things are previously fixed by an absolute decree ; so that they
must happen. The consequence is, that he and his followers
involve themselves in the tremendous consequence of making God
the author of sin ; which, after all their disavowals, and we grant
them sincere, will still logically cleave to them : for it is obvious,
that by nothing can we fairly avoid this consequence but by allow-
ing the distinction between determinations to do, on the part of
God, and determinations to permit certain things to be done by
others. The principle laid down by Calvin is destructive of all
human agency, seeing it converts man into a mere instrument;
whilst the other maintains his agency in its proper sense, and, there-
fore, his proper accountability. On Calvin's principle, man is no
more an agent than the knife in the hand of the assassin ; and he
is not more responsible, therefore, in equity, to punishment, than
the knife by which the assassination is committed, were it capable
of being punished. For if man has not a real agency, that is, if
there is a necessity above him so controlling his actions as to render
it impossible that they should have been otherwise, he is in the hands
of another, and not master of himself, and so his actions cease to be
his own.

A decree to permit involves no such consequences. This is indeed
acknowledged ; but then, on the other hand, it is urged that this

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. *5°

imposes an uncertainty upon the Divine plans, and makes him de-
pendent upon the acts of the creature. In neither of these allegations
is there any weight ; for as to the first, there can be no uncertainty
in the principles of the administration of a Being who regulates the-
whole by the immutable rules of righteousness, holiness, truth, and
goodness ; so that all the acts of the creature do but call forth some
new illustration of his unchangeable regard to these principles.
Nor can any act of a creature render his plans uncertain by coming
upon him by surprise, and thus oblige him to alter his intentions on
the spur of the moment. What the creature will do, in fact, is
known beforehand with a perfect prescience, which yet, as we have
already proved, (4) interferes not with the liberty of our actions;
and what God has determined to do in consequence, is made ap-
parent by what he actually does, which with him can be no new,
no sudden thought, but known and purposed from eternity, in the
view of the actual circumstances. As to the second objection, that
this makes his conduct dependent upon the acts of the creature,
so far from denying it, we may affirm it to be one of the plainest
doctrines of the word of God. He punishes or blesses men accord-
ing to their conduct ; and he waits until the acts of their sin or their
obedience take place, before he either punishes or rewards. The
dealings of a sovereign judge must, in the nature of things them-
selves, be dependent upon the conduct of the subjects over whom
he rules : they must vary according to that conduct ; and it is only
in the principles of. a righteous government that we ought to look,
for that kind of immutability which has any thing in it of moral
character. Still it is said, that though the acts of God, as a sove-
reign, change, and are, apparently, dependent upon the conduct of
creatures, yet that he, from all eternity, decreed, or determined to
do them : as for instance, to exalt one nation and to abase another j
to favour this individual, or to punish that ; to save this man, to
destroy the other. This may be granted ; but only in this sense,
that his eternal determination or decree was as dependent and con-
sequent upon his prescience of the acts which, according to the
immutable principles of his nature and government, are pleasing or
hateful to him, as the actual administration of favour or punishment
is upon the actual conduct of men in time. This brings on the
question of decrees absolute or conditional; and ..we are, happily,
not left to the reasonings of .men on this point ; but have the light
of the word of God, which abounds with examples of decrees, to
which conditions am annexed, on the performance or neglect of
which, by his creatures, their execution is made dependent. " If
thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted 1 but if thou docst not

<T)Part ii,c. 4.

15C THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTED [PART

well, sin lieth at the door." If this was God's eternal decree con-
cerning Cain, then it was plainly conditional from eternity ; for his
decrees in time cannot contradict his decrees from eternity, as to
the same persons and events. But Cain did " not well ;" was it
not, then, says a Calvinist, eternally and absolutely decreed that
he should not " do well ?" The reply is no ; because this supposed
absolute decree of the Calvinist would contradict the revealed
decree or determination of God, to put both the doing well and the
doing ill into Cain's own power, which is utterly inconsistent with
an absolute decree that he should have it in his power only to do
ill ; and the inevitable conclusion, therefore, is, that the only eternal
decree, or Divine determination concerning Cain in this matter
was, that he should be conditionally accepted, or conditionally left
to the punishment of his sins. To this class of conditional decrees
belong also all such passages, as " If ye be willing and obedient ye
shall eat the good of the land ; but if ye. refuse and rebel ye shall
be devoured by the sword." " If ye live after the flesh ye shall die ;
but if ye, through the Spirit, do mortify the deeds of the body, ye
shall live." " He that bclieveth shall be saved, and he that be-
lieveth not shall be damned." This last, especially, is God's decree
or determination, as to all who hear the Gospel, to the end of time.
It professes to be so on the very face of it, for its general and un-
restricted nature cannot be denied ; but if we are told, that there
is a decree affecting numbers of men as individuals, by which God
determined absolutely to pass them by, and to deny to them the
grace of faith, such an allegation cannot be true ; because it con-
tradicts the decree as revealed by God himself. His decree gives
to all who hear the news of Christ's salvation, the alternative of
believing and being saved, of not believing and being damned ; but
there is no alternative in the absolute decree of Calvinism : as to
the reprobate, no one can believe and be saved who is under such
decree ; God never intended he should ; and, therefore, he is put
by one decree in one condition, and by another decree in an entirely
opposite condition, which is an obvious contradiction.

But we have instances of the revocation of God's decrees, as well
as of their conditional character, one of which will be sufficient for
illustration. In the case of Eli, " I said indeed that thy house and
the house of thy father should walls, before me for ever ; but now
the Lord saith, be it far from me ; for them that honour me I will
honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed." No
passage can more strongly refute the Calvinistic notion of God's
immutability, which they seem to place in his never changing his
purpose, whereas, in fact, the scriptural doctrine is, that it consists

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 157

in his never changing the principles of his administration. One of
those principles is laid down in this passage. It is, "them that
honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly
esteemed." To this principle God is immutably true ; but it was
his unchangeable regard to that very principle which brought on
the change of his conduct towards the house of Eli, and induced
him to revoke his former promise. This is the only immutability
worthy of God, or which can be reconciled to the facts of his
government. For either the advocate of absolute predestination
must say that the promises and threatenings are declarations of his
will and purposes, or they are not. If they are not, they contradict
his truth ; but if the point, that they do in fact declare his will is
conceded, that will is either absolute or conditional. Let us then
try the case of Eli by this alternative. If the promise of continuing
the priesthood in the family of Eli were absolute, then it could not
be revoked. If the threatening expressed an absolute and eternal
will and determination to divert the priesthood from Eli's progeny,
then the promise was a mockery ; and God is in this, and all similar
instances, made to engage himself to do what is contrary to his
absolute intention and determination : in other words, he makes no
engagement in fact, whilst he seems to do it in form, which involves
a charge against the Divine Being which few Calvinists would be
bold enough to maintain. But if these declarations to Eli be
regarded as the expressions of a determination always taken, in the
mind of God, under the conditions implied in the fixed principles of
his government, then the language and the acts of God harmonize
with his sincerity and faithfulness, and, instead of throwing a shade
over his moral attributes, illustrate his immutable regard to those
wise, equitable, and holy rules by which he conducts his govern-
ment of moral agents. Nor will the distinction which some Cal-
vinists have endeavoured to establish between the promises and
threatenings of God and his decrees, serve them ; for where is it to
be found except in their own imagination 1 We have no intimation
of such a distinction in Scripture, which, nevertheless, professes to
reveal the eternal "purpose" and " counsel" of God on those matters
to which his promises and threatenings relate, — the salvation or
destruction of men. That counsel and purpose has, also, no mani-
festation in his word, but by promises and threatenings ; these make
up its whole substance, and, therefore, in order to make their dis-
tinction good, those who hold it must discover a distinction not only
between God's promises and threatenings and his decrees ; but be-
tween the eternal "counsels and purposes" of God and his decrees,
which they acknowledge to be identical-

lo8 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

The fallacy which seems to mislead them appears to be the
following : They allege that of two consequences, say the obedi-
ence or disobedience of Eli's house, we acknowledge, on both sides,
that one will happen. That which actually happens we also see
taken up into the course of the Divine administration, and made a
part of his subsequent plan of government, as the transfer of the
priesthood from the house of Eli : they, therefore, argue that the
Divine Being having his plan before him, and this very circumstance
entering into it, it was fixed from eternity as a part of that general
scheme by which the purposes of God were to be accomplished,
and which would have been uncertain and unarranged but for this
preordination. The answer to this is,

1. That the circumstance of an event being taken up into the
Divine administration, and being made use of to work out God's
purposes, is no proof that he willed and decreed it. He could not
will the wickedness of Eli's sons, and could not, therefore, ordain
and appoint it, or his decrees would be contrary to his will. The
making use of the result of the choice of a free agent only proves
that it was foreseen, and that there are, so to speak, infinite
resources in the Divine mind to turn the actions of men into the
accomplishment of his plans, without either willing them when they
are evil, or imposing fetters upon their freedom.

2. That though an event be interwoven with the course of the
Divine government, it does not follow that it was necessary to it.
The ends of a course of administration might have been otherwise
accomplished ; as, in the case before us, if Eli's house had remained
faithful, and the family of Zadok had not been chosen in its stead.
The general plan of God's government does not, therefore, neces-
sarily include every event which happens as a necessary part of its
accomplishment, since the same results might, in many cases, have
been brought out of other events ; and, therefore, it cannot be
conclusively argued, that as God wills the accomplishment of the
general plan, he must will in the same manner the particular events
which he may overrule to contribute to it But,

3. As to the general plan, it is also an unfounded assumption,
that it was the subject of an absolute determination. From this
lias arisen the notion that the fall of Adam was willed and decreed
by God. To this doctrine, which, for the sake of a metaphysical
speculation, draws after it so many abhorrent and antiscriptural
consequences, we must Semtir. God could not will that event
actively without willing sin ; he could not absolutely decree it
without removing all responsibility, and, therefore, all fault, from
'he first offender. If God be holy he could no*t will Adam's offence,

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 159

though he might determine not to prevent it by interfering with
man's freedom, which is a very different case ; and if in guarding
his law from violation by a severe sanction he proceeded with
sincerity, he could not appoint its violation. We may confidently
say, that he willed the contrary of Adam's offence ; and that he
used all means, consistent with his determination to give and main-
tain free agency to his creatures, to secure the accomplishment of
that will. It was against his will, therefore, that our progenitors
sinned and fell ; and his " purpose" and " counsel," or his decree,
if the term please better, to govern the' world according to the
principles and mode now in operation, was dependent upon an event
which he willed not ; but which, as being foreseen, was the plan-
he, in wisdom, justice, and mercy, adopted in the view of this con-
tingency. And suppose we were to acknowledge with some, that
the result will be more glorious to him, and more beneficial to the
universe, through the wisdom with which he overrules all thing's,
than if Adam and his descendants had stood in their innocency, it
will not follow, even from this, that the present was that order of
events which God absolutely ordered and decreed. We are told,
indeed, that if this was the best of possible plans, God was, by the
perfection of his nature, bound to choose it ; and that if he chose
it, his will, in this respect, made all the rest necessary. But, to say
nothing of the presumption of determining what God was bound to
do in any hypothetic case, the position that God must choose the
best of possible plans is to be taken with qualification. We can
neither prove that the state of things which shall actually issue is
the best among those possible ; nor that among possible systems
there can 'be a best, since they are all composed of created things,
and no system can actually exist, to which the Creator, who is
infinite in power, could not add something. Were no sin involved
in the case it would be clearer ; but it is not only unsupported by
any declaration of Scripture, but certainly contrary to many of its
principles, to assume that God originally, so to speak, and, in the
first instance, willed and decreed a state of things which should
necessarily include the introduction of moral evil into his creation,
in order to manifest his glory and work out future good to the
creature ; because we know that sin is that " abominable thing''
which he hateth. A monarch is surely not bound secretly to ap-
point and decree the circumstances which must necessarily lead to a
rebellion, in order that his clemency may be more fully manifested
in pardoning the rebels, or the strength of his government displayed
in.their subjugation ; although his subjects, upon the whole, might
derive some higher benefit. We may, therefore, conclude that

itJO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

God willed with perfect truth and sincerity that man should not
fall, although he resolved not to prevent that fall by interfering with
his freedom, Avhich would have changed the whole character of his
government towards rational creatures ; and that his plan, or decree,
to govern the world upon the principle of redemption and mediation
was no absolute ordination, but conditional upon man's offence ; and
was an " eternal purpose," only in the eternal foresight of the actual
occurrence of the fall of man, which yet, it is no contradiction to
say, was against his will.

So fallacious are all such notions as to God's fixed plans. Fixed
they may be, without being absolutely decreed ; because fixed, in
reference to what takes place, even in opposition to his will and
intention ; and as to the argument drawn by Calvinists from the
perfections of God, it is surely a more honourable view of him to
suppose that his will and his promulgated law accord and consent,
than that they are in opposition to each other ; more honourable to
him, that he is immutable in his adherence to the principles, rather
than in the acts of government ; more honourable to him, that he
can make the conduct of his free creatures to work out either his
original purposes, or purposes more glorious to himself and beneficial
to the universe, than that he should frame plans so fixed as to have
no reference to the free actions of creatures, whom, by a strange
contradiction, he is represented as still holding accountable for their
conduct ; plans which all these creatures shall be necessitated to
fulfil, so as to be capable of no other course of action whatever, or
else that his government must become loose and uncertain. This
is, indeed, to have low thoughts, even of the infinite wisdom of God ;
and either involves his justice and truth in deep obscurity, or pre-
sents them to us under very equivocal aspects. Which of these
views is the most consonant with the Bible, may be safely left with
the candid reader.

The Prescience of God is also a subject by which Calvinists
have endeavoured to give some plausibility to their system. The
argument, as popularly stated, has been, that, as the destruction or
salvation of every individual is foreseen, it is, therefore, certain, and,
as certain, it is inevitable and necessary. The answer to this is, that
certainty and necessity are not at all connected in the nature of
things, and are, in fact, two perfectly distinct predicaments. Cer-
tainty has no relation to an event at all as evitable or inevitable,
free or compelled, contingent or necessary. It relates only to the
issue itself, the act of any agent, not to the quality of the act or
event with reference to the circumstances under which it is pro-
duced. A free action is as much an event as a necessitated one,

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 161

and, therefore, is as truly an object of foresight, which foresight
cannot change the nature of the action, or of the process through
which it issues, because the simple knowledge of an action, whether
present, past, or to come, has no influence upon it of any kind.
Certainty is, in fact, no quality of an action at all ; it exists, properly
speaking, in the mind foreseeing, and not in the action foreseen ;
but freedom or constraint, contingency or necessity qualify the
action itself, and determine its nature, and the rewardableness, or
punitive demerit of the agent. When, therefore, it is said, that what
God foresees will certainly happen, nothing more can be reasonably
meant, than that he is certain that it will happen ; so that we must
not transfer the certainty from God to the action itself, in the false
sense of necessity, or, indeed, in any sense ; for the certainty is in
the Divine mind, and stands there opposed, not to the contingency
of the action, but to doubtfulness as to his own prescience of the
result. There is this certainty in the Divine mind as to the actions
of men, that they icill happen : but that they must happen cannot
follow from this circumstance. If they must happen, they are
under some control which prevents a different result ; but the most
certain knowledge has nothing in it which, from its nature, can
control an action in any way, unless it should lead the being en-
dowed with it to adopt measures to influence the action, and then
it becomes a question, not of foreknowledge, but of power and
influence, which wholly changes the case. This is a sufficient reply
to the popular manner of stating the argument. The scholastic
method requires a little more illustration.

The knowledge of possible things, as existing from all eternity
in the Divine understanding, has been termed " scientia simplicis
hitelligcntioi" or by the schoolmen, "scientia indefinita" as not
determining the existence of any thing. The knowledge which
God had of all real existences is termed " scientia visionis" and by
the schoolmen, "scientia dejinita" because the existence of all objects
of this knowledge is determinate and certain. To these distinctions
another was added by those who rejected the predestinarian hypo-
thesis, to which they gave the name "scientia media" as being
supposed to stand in the middle between the two former. By this
is understood, the knowledge, neither of things as possible, nor of
events appointed and decreed by God ; but of events which are to
happen upon certain conditions. (5)

(5) " Ordo autem hie ut rcctc intelligi possit, observandum est triplicem Deo
ecientiam tribui solerc : unam nccessariam, quae omnem voluntatis liberie actum
naturae ordine antecedit, quae etiam practica et simplicis intellig entice dici potest,
qua seipsum et alia omnia pogsibilia intelligit. Alteram libefam, qua consequitm*

Vol. ID 21

162

THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. (PART

The third kind of knowledge, or scientia media, might very well
be included in the second, since scientia visionis ought to include not
what God will do, and what his creatures will do under his appoint-
ment, but what they will do by his permission as free agents, and
what he will do, as a consequence of this, in his character of
Governor and Lord. But since the predestinarians had confounded
scientia visionis with a predestinating decree, the scientia media well
expressed what they had left quite unaccounted for, and which
they had assumed did not really exist, — the actions of creatures
endowed with free will, and the acts of Deity which from eternity
were consequent upon them. If such actions do not take place,
then men are not free ; and if the rectoral acts of God are not
consequent upon the actions of the creature in the order of the
Divine intention, and the conduct of the creature is consequent
upon the foreordained rectoral acts of God, then we reach a ne-
cessitating eternal decree, which, infact,the predestinarian contends
for : but it unfortunately brings after it consequences which no
subtilties have ever been able to shake off, — that the only actor in
the universe is God himself; and that the only distinction among
events is, that one class is brought to pass by God directly, and the
other indirectly; not by the agency, but by the mere instrumentality,
of his creatures.

The manner in which absolute predestination is made identical
with scientia visionis, will be best illustrated by an extract from the
writings of a tolerably fair and temperate modern Calvinist. Speak-
ing of the two distinctions, scientia simplicis intelligentice. and scientia
visionis, he says,

" Those who consider all the objects of knowledge as compre-
hended under one or other of the kinds that have been explained,
are naturally conducted to that enlarged conception of the extent
of the Divine decree, from which the Calvinistic doctrine of pre-
destination unavoidably follows. The Divine decree is the deter-
mination of the Divine will to produce the universe, that is, the
whole series of beings and events that were then future. The parts
of this series arise in succession ; but all were, from eternity, present
to the Divine mind ; and no cause was, at any time, to operate, or
no effect that was at any time to be produced in the universe, can
be excluded from the original decree, without supposing that the

actum voluntatis liberae, quae etiam visionis dici potest ; qua. Deus omnia, quse
facere et permittere decrevit ita distincte novit, uti ea fieri et permittere voluit.
Tertiam median, qua sub conditione novit quid homines aut angeli facturi essent
pro sua libertate,si cum his autillis circumstantiis, in hoc velin illo rerum ordiirej
constituerentur."— Disputat. Episcopii, Parti, Disp. v,

4EC0iST>.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 1(33

decree was at first imperfect and afterwards received accessions*
The determination to produce this world, understanding by that
word the whole combination of beings, and causes, and effects, that
were to come into existence, arose out of the view of all possible
worlds, and proceeded upon reasons to us unsearchable, by which
this world that now exists appeared to the Divine wisdom the fittest
to be produced. I say, the determination to produce this world
proceeded upon reasons ; because, we must suppose, that in forming
the decrees, a choice was exerted, that the Supreme Being was at
liberty to resolve either that he would create or that he would not
create ; that he would give his work this form or that form, as he
chose ; otherwise we withdraw from the Supreme Intelligence, and
subject all things to blind fatality. But if a choice was exerted in
forming the decree, the choice must have proceeded upon reasons ;
for a choice made by a wise Being, without any ground of choice,
is a contradiction in terms. At the same time it is to be remem-
bered, that as nothing then existed but the Supreme Being, the only
reason which could determine him in choosing what he was to
produce, was its appearing to him fitter for accomplishing the end
which he proposed to himself than any thing else which he might
have produced. Hence scientia visionis is called by theologians
scientla libera. \ To scientia simplicis intelligent'uB they gave the
epithet naturalis, because the knowledge of all things possible arises
necessarily from the nature of the Supreme mind ; but to scientia
visionis they gave the epithet libera, because the qualities and extent
of its objects are determined, not by any necessity of nature, but
by the will of the Deity. Although in forming the Divine decree
there was a choice of this world, proceeding upon a representa-
tion of all possible worlds, it is not to be conceived, that there was
any interval between the choice and representation, or any succes-
sion in the parts of the choice. In the Divine mind there was an
intuitive view of that immense subject, which it is not only impossible
for our minds to comprehend at once, but in travelling through
the parts of which we are instantly bewildered ; and one degree,
embracing at once the end and means, ordained with perfect wisdom
all that was to be.

" The condition of the human race entered into this decree. It
is not, perhaps, the most important part of it when we speak of the
formation of the universe, but it is a part which, even were it more
insignificant than it is, could not be overlooked by the Almighty,
whose attention extends to all his works, and which appears, by
those dispensations of his Providence that have been made known
to us, to be interesting in his eyes. A decree respecting the con'-

164 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

dition of the human race includes the history of every individual :
the time of his appearing upon the earth ; the manner of his exist-
ence while he is an inhabitant of the earth, as it is diversified by the
actions which he performs, and by the events, whether prosperous
or calamitous, which befall him, and the manner of his existence
after he leaves the earth, that is, future happiness or misery. A
decree respecting the condition of the human race also includes the
relations of the individuals to one another : it fixes their connexions
in society, which have a great influence upon their happiness and
their improvement ; and it must be conceived as extending to the
important events recorded in Scripture, in which the whole species
have a concern. Of this kind is the sin of our first parents, the
consequence of that sin reaching to all their posterity, the mediation
of Jesus Christ appointed by God as a remedy for these conse-
quences, the final salvation, through his mediation, of one part of
the descendants of Adam, and the final condemnation of another
part, notwithstanding the remedy. These events arise at long'
intervals of time, by a gradual preparation of circumstances, and
the operation of various means. But by the Creator, to whose
mind the end and means were at once present, these events were
beheld in intimate connexion with one another, and in conjunction
with many other events to us unknown, and consequently all of
them, however far removed from one another as to the time of their
actual existence, were comprehended in that one decree by which
he determined to produce the world." (6)

Now some things in this statement may be granted ; as for in-
stance, that when the choice, speaking after the manner of men,
was between creating the world and not creating it, it appeared
litter to God to create than not to create ; and that all actual
events were foreseen, and will take place, so far as they are future,
as they are foreseen ; but where is the connexion between these
points, and that absolute decree which in this passage is taken for
either the same thing as foreseeing, or as necessarily involved in it ?•
" The Divine decree," says Dr. Hill, " is the determination of the
Divine will to produce the universe, that is, the whole series of beings
and events that were then future." If so, it follows, that it was the
Divine will to produce the fall of man, as well as his creation ; the
offences which made redemption necessary, as the redemption itself:
to produce the destruction of human beings, and their vices which
are the means of that destruction ; the salvation of another part of
the race, and their faith and obedience, as the means of that salva-
tion:— for by "one decree, embracing at once the end and the
(6) Hill's Lee. vol. in, p. 3.8.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 1&»

means, he ordained, with perfect wisdom, all that was to be." This
is in the true character of the Calvinistic theology ; it dogmatises
with absolute confidence on some metaphysical assumption, and
forgets for the time, that any such book as the Bible, a revelation
of God, by God himself, exists in the world. If the determination
of the Divine will, with respect to the creation of man, were the
same kind of determination as that which respected his fall, how
then are we to account for the means taken by God to prevent the
fall, which were no less than the communication of an upright and
perfect nature to man, from which his ability to stand in his upright-
ness arose, and the threatening of the greatest calamity, death, in
order to deter him from the act of offence 1 How, in that case, are
we to account for the declarations of God's hatred to sin, and for
his own express declaration that " he w'dleth not the death of him
that dieth ?" How, for the obstructions he has placed in the way
of transgression, which would be obstructions to his own determi-
nations, if they can be allowed to be obstructions at all 1 How, for
the intercession of Christ 1 How, for his tears shed over Jerusalem 1
Finally, how, for the declaration that " he willeth all men to be
saved," and for his invitations to all, and the promises made to all 1
Here the discrepancies between the metaphysical scheme and the
written word are most strongly marked ; are so totally irreconcila-
ble to each other, as to leave us to choose between the speculations
of man, as to the operations of the Divine mind, and the declared
will of God himself. The fact is, that Scripture can only be inter-
preted by denying that the determination of the Divine will is, as to
" beings and events," the same kind of determination ; and we are
necessarily brought back again to the only distinction which is com-
patible with the written word, a determination in God to do, and a
determination to permit. For if we admit that the decree to effect
or produce is absolute, both " as to the end and means," then,
beside the consequences which follow as above stated, and which
so directly contradict the testimony of God himself; another equally
revolting also arises, namely, that as the end decreed is, as we are
told, most glorious to God, so the means, being controlled and
directed to that end, are necessarily and directly connected with
the glorification of God ; and, so men glorify God by their vices,
because by them they fulfil his will, and work out his designs ac-
cording to the appointment of his " wisdom." That this has beeji
boldly contended for by leading Calvinistic divines in former times,
and by some, though of a lower class, in the present day, is well
known : and that they are consistent in their deductions from the
above premises, is so obvious, that it. is matter of surprise, that those

166 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

Calvinists who are shocked at this conclusion should not either
suspect the principles from which it so certainly flows, or that,
admitting the doctrine, they should shun the explicit avowal of the
inevitable consequence.

The sophistry of the above statement of the Calvinistic view of
prescience and the decrees, as given by Dr. Hill, lies in this, that
the determination of the Divine will to produce the universe is made
to include a determination as absolute "to produce the whole
series of beings and events that were then future ;" and in assum-
ing that this is involved in a perfect prescience of things, as actually
to exist and take place. But among the " beings" to be produced,
were not only beings bound by their instincts, and by circumstances
which they could not control, to act in some given manner ; but
also beings endowed with such freedom that they might act in
different and opposite ways, as their own will might determine.
Either this must be allowed or denied. If it is denied, then man is
not a free agent, and, therefore, not accountable for his personal
offences, if offences those acts can be called, to the doing of which
{here is " a determination of the Divine will," of the same nature
as to the " producing of the universe" itself. This, however, is so
destructive of the nature of virtue and vice ; it so entirely subverts
the moral government of God by merging it into his natural govern-
ment ; and it so manifestly contradicts the word of God, which, from
the beginning to the end, supposes a power bestowed on man to
avoid sin, and on this establishes his accountableness ; that, with
all these fatal consequences hanging upon it, we may leave this
notion to its own fate. But if any such freedom be allowed to man,
(either actually enjoyed or placed within his reach by the use of
means which are within his power,) that he may both will and act
differently, in any given case, from his ultimate volitions and the
acts resulting therefrom, then cannot that which he actually does,
as a free agent, say some sinful act, have been " determined" hi
the same manner by the Divine will, as the " production" of the
universe and the " beings" which compose it. For if man is a
being free to sin or not to sin ; and it was the " determination of
the Divine will" to produce such a being ; it was his determination
to give to him this liberty of not doing that which actually he does ;
which is wholly contrary to a determination that he should act in
one given manner, and in that alone. For here, on the one hand,
it is alleged that the Divine will absolutely determines to produce
certain " events" and yet on the other it is plain that he absolutely
determined to produce " beings" who should, by his will and con-
sequent endowment, have in themselves the power to produce con-

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 167

trary events ; propositions which manifestly fight with each other,
and cannot both be true. We must either, then, give up man's free
agency and true accountability, or this absolute determination of
events. The former cannot be renounced without involving the
consequences above stated ; and the abandoning of the latter, brings
us to the only conclusion which agrees with the word of God, —
that the acts of free agents are not determined, but foreseen and per-
mitted; and are thus taken up, not as the acts of God, but as the
acts of men, into the Divine government. " Ye devised evil against
me," says Joseph to his brethren, " but God meant it for good."
Thus the principle which vitiates Dr. Hill's statement is detected.
Grotius has much better observed, " When we say that God is the
cause of all things, we mean of all such things as have a real exist-
ence ; which is no reason why those things themselves should not
be the cause of some accidents, such as actions are. God created
men, and some other intelligences superior to man, with a liberty
of acting ; which liberty of acting is not in itself evil, but may be
the cause of something that is evil ; and to make God the author
of evils of this kind, which are called moral evils, is the highest
wickedness. (7)

Perhaps the notions which Calvinists form as to the will may be
regarded as a consequence of the predestinarian branch of their
system ; but whether they are among the metaphysical sources of
their error, or consequents upon it, they may here have a brief notice.

If the doctrine just refuted were allowed, namely, that all events
are produced by the determination of the Divine will ; and that the
end and means are bound up in " one decree ;" the predestinarian
had sagacity enough to discern that the volitions, as well as the acts
of men, must be placed equally under bondage, to make the scheme
consistent ; and, that whenever any moral action is the end proposed,
the choice of the will, as the means to that end, must come under
the same appointment and determination. It is, indeed, not denied,
that creatures may lose the power to will that which is morally
good. Such is the state of devils ; and such would have been the
state of man, had he been left wholly to the consequences of the
fall. The inability is, however, not a natural, but a moral one ; for
volition, as a power of the mind, is not destroyed, but brought so
completely under the dominion of a corrupt nature, as not to be
morally capable of choosing any thing but evil. If man is not in
> this condition, it is owing, not to the remains of original goodness,
as some suppose, but to that " grace of God" which is the result of
the " free gift" bestowed upon all men ; but that the power to
(7) Truth of the Christian Religion, s. 8.

lt>S THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [FaRT

choose that which is good, in some respects, and as a first step to
the entire and exclusive choice of good in the highest decree, is in
man's possession, must be certainly concluded from the calls so
often made upon him in the word of God to change his conduct,
and, in order to this,, his will. " Hear, ye deaf, and see, ye blind,'*
is the exhortation of a prophet, which, whilst it charges both spiritual
deafness and blindness upon the Jews, supposes a power existing
in them, both of opening the eyes, and unstopping the ears. Such
are all the exhortations to repentance and faith addressed to sinners,
and the threatenings consequent upon continued impenitence and
unbelief; which equally suppose a power of considering, willing,
and acting, in all things adequate to the commencement of a reli-
gious course. From whatever source it may be derived, and no
other can be assigned to it consistently with the Scriptures than the
grace of God, this power must be experienced to the full extent of
the call and the obligation to these duties. A power of choosing
only to do evil, and of remaining impenitent, cannot be reconciled
to such exhortations. This would but be a mockery of men, and
a mere show of equitable government on the part of God, without
any thing correspondent to this appearance of equity in point of
fact. The Calvinistic doctrine, however, takes another course. As
the sin and the destruction of the reprobate is determined by the
decree, and their will is either left to its natural proneness to the
choice of evil, or is, by coaction, impelled to it ; so the salvation of
the elect being absolutely decreed, the will, at the appointed time,
comes under an irresistible impulse which carries it to the choice
of good. Nor is this only an occasional influence, leaving men
afterwards, or by intervals, to freedom of choice, which might be
allowed ; but, in all cases, and at all times, the will, when directed
to good, moves only under the unfrustrable impulses of grace. That
man, therefore, has no choice, or at least no alternative in either
case, is the doctrine assumed ; and no other view can be consistently
taken by those who admit the scheme of absolute predestination.
To one class of objects is the will determined ; no other being, in
either case, possible : and thus one course of action, fulfilling the
decree of God, is the only possible result, or the decree would not
be absolute, and fixed.

Some Calvinists have adopted all the consequences which follow
this view of the subject. They ascribe the actions and volitions o9
man to God, and regard sinful men as impelled to a necessity of
sinning, in order to the infliction of that punishment which they
think will glorify the sovereign wrath of him who made " the
wicked" intentionally " for the day of evil." Enough has been said

SECOND.} THEOLOGICAL INSTlTLi L>- fUH

in refutation of this gross and blasphemous opinion, which, though
it inevitably follows from absolute predestination, the more modest
writers of the same school have endeavoured to hide under various
guises, or to reconcile to some show of justice by various subtleties.

It has, for instance, been contended, that as in the case of trans-
gressors, the evil acts done by them are the choice of their corrupt
will, they are, therefore, done willingly ; and that they are in con-
sequence punishable, although their will could not but choose them.
This may be allowed to be true in the case of devils, supposing
them at first to have voluntarily corrupted an innocent nature
endowed with the power of maintaining its hmoeence, and that
they were under no absolute decree determining them to this
offence. For, though now their will is so much under the control
of their bad passions, and is in itself so vicious, that it has no dis-
position at all to good, and from their nature, remaining in its pre-
sent state, can have no such tendency ; yet the original act, or series
of acts, by which this state of their will and affections was induced,
being their own, and the result of a deliberate choice between moral
good and evil, both being in their own power, they are justly held
to be culpable for all that follows, having had, originally, the power
to avoid both the first sin and all others consequent upon it. The
same may be said of sinful men, who have formed in themselves,
by repeated acts of evil, at first easily avoided, various habits to
which the will opposes a decreasing resistance in proportion as they
acquire strength. Such persons, too, as are spoken of in the
Epistle to the Hebrews, those whom " it is impossible to renew unto
repentance," may be regarded as approaching very nearly to the
state of apostate spirits, and being left without any of the aids oi"
that Holy Spirit whom they have " quenched," cannot be supposed
capable of willing good. Yet are they themselves justly chargeable
with this state of their wills, and all the evils resulting from it. But
the case of devils is widely different to that of men who, by their
hereditary corruption, and the fall of human nature, to which they
were not consenting parties, come into the world with this infirm,
and, indeed, perverse state of the will, as to all good. It is not their
personal fault that they are born with a will averse from good ; and
it cannot be their personal fault that they continue thus inclined
only to evil if no assistance has been afforded, no gracious influence
imparted, to counteract this fault of nature, and to set the will so
far free, that it can choose either the good urged upon it by the
authority and exciting motives of the Gospel, or, " making light" of
that, to yield itself, in opposition to conviction, to the evil to which
it is by nature prone. It is not denied, that the will, in its purely

Vol. III. %%

170 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE^. [FA*'J

natural state, and independent of all grace communicated to man
through Christ, can incline only to evil ; but the question is, whether
it is so left ; and whether, if this be contended for, the circumstance
of a sinful act being the act of a will not able to determine other-
wise, from whatever cause that may arise, whether from the in-
fluence of circumstances or from coaction, or from its own invincible
depravity, renders him punishable who never had the means of
preventing his will from lapsing into this diseased and vitiated state ;
who was born with this moral disease ; and who, by an absolute
decree, has been excluded from all share in the remedy 1 This is
the only simplp and correct way of viewing the subject ; and it is
quite independent of all metaphysical hypotheses as to the will.
The argument is, that an aet which has the consent of the will is
punishable, although the will can only choose evil : we reply, that
this is only true where the time of trial is past, as in devils and
apostates ; and then only, because these are personally guilty of
having so vitiated their wills as to render them incapable of good.
But the case of men who have fallen by the fault of another, and
who are still in a state of trial, is one totally different. The sen-
tence is passed upon devils, and it is as good as past upon such
apostates as the apostle describes in the Epistle to the Hebrews ;
but the mass of mankind are still probationers, and are appointed to
be judged according to their works, whether good or evil. We
deny, then, first, that they are, in any case, left without the power
of willing good ; and we deny it on the authority of Scripture. For,
in no sense, can " life and death be set before us," in order that we
may " choose life," if man is wholly derelict by the grace of God,
and if he remains under his natural, and, but for the grace of God
given to all mankind, his invincible inclination to evil. For if this
be the natural state of mankind, and if to a part of them that
remedial grace is denied, then is not " life" set before them as an
object of " choice ;" and if to another part that grace is so given,
that it irresistibly and constantly works so as to compel the will to
choose predetermined and absolutely appointed acts, no " death" is
set before them as an object of choice. If, therefore, according to
the Scriptures, both life and death are set before men, then have
they power to choose or refuse either, which is conclusive, on the
one hand, against the doctrine of the total dereliction of the repro-
bate, and on the other against the unfrustrable operation of grace
upon the elect. So, also, when our Lord says, " I would have
gathered you as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and
ye would not," the notion that men who finally perish have no
power of willing that which is good, is totally disproved. The

SJJOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES'. 171

blame is manifestly, and beyond all the arts of cavilling criticism,
laid upon their not willing in a contrary manner, which would
be false upon the Calvinistic hypothesis. " I would not, and ye
could not," ought, in that case, to have been the reading ; since
they are bound to one determination only, either by the external
or internal influence of another, or by a natural and involuntary
disease of the will, for which no remedy was ever provided.

Thus it is decided by the word of God itself, that men who perish
might have " chosen life." It is confirmed, also, by natural reason ;
for it is most egregiously to trifle with the common sense of man-
kind to call that a righteous procedure in God whieh would by ajl
men be condemned as a monstrous act of tyranny and oppression
in a human judge, namely, to punish capitally, as for a personal
offence, those who never could will or act otherwise, being impelled
by an invincible and incurable natural impulse over which they
never had any control. Nor is the case at all amended by the
quibble that they act willingly, that is, with consent of the will ; for
since the will is under a natural and irresistible power to incline
only one way, obedience is full as much out of their power by this
slate of the will, which they did not bring upon themselves, as if
they were restrained from all obedience to the law of God by an
external and irresistible impulse always acting upon them.

The case thus kept upon the basis of plain Scripture, and the
natural reason of mankind, stands, as we have said, clear of all
metaphysical subtleties, and cannot be subjected to their determi-
nation ; but as attempts have been made to establish the doctrine
of necessity, from the actual phenomena of the human will, we may
glance, also, at. this philosophic attempt to give plausibility to the
predestinarian hypothesis.

The philosophic doctrine is, that the will is swayed by motives }
that motives arise from circumstances ; that circumstances are
ordered by a power above us, and beyond our control ; and that,
therefore, our volitions necessarily follow an order and chain of
events appointed and decreed by infinite wisdom. President Ed-
wards, in his well known work on the will, applied this philosophy
in aid of Calvinism ; and has been largely followed by the divines
of that school. But who does not see that this attempt to find a
refuge in the doctrine of philosophical necessity affords no shelter
to the Calvinian system, when pressed either by Scripture or by
arguments founded upon the acknowledged principles of justice 1
For what matters it, whether the will is obliged to one class of
volitions by the immediate influence of God, or by the denial of his
remedial influence, the doctrme of the elder Calvinists ; or thtit i/.

173 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. ^PAlU

is obliged to a certain class of volitions by motives which are irre-
sistible in their operation, which result from an arrangement of
circumstances ordered by God, and which we cannot control^
Take which theory you please you are involved in the same diffi-
culties ; for the result is, that men can neither will nor act other-
wise than they do, being, in one case, inevitably disabled by an act
of God, and in the other bound by a chain of events established by
an Almighty power. The advocates for this philosophic theory of
the will must be content to take this conclusion, therefore, and
reconcile it as they can with the Scriptures ; but they have the same
task as their elder brethren of the same faith, and have made it no
easier by their philosophy.

It is in vain, too, that they refer us to our own consciousness in
proof of this theory. Nothing is more directly contradicted by what
passes in every man's mind ; and if we may take the terms human
language has used on these subjects, as an indication of the general
feelings of mankind it is contradicted by the experience of all ages
and countries. For if the will is thus absolutely dependant upon
motives, and motives arise out of uncontrollable circumstances, for
men to praise or to blame each other is a manifest absurdity ; and ,
yet all languages abound in such terms. So, also, there can be no
such thing as conscience, which, upon this scheme, is a popular
delusion which a better philosophy might have dispelled. For why
do I blame or commend myself in my inward thoughts, any more
than I censure or praise others, if I am, as to my choice, but the
passive creature of motives and predetermined circumstances ?

But the sophistry is easily detected. The notion inculcated is,
that motives influence the will just as an additional weight thrown
into an even scale poises it and inclines the beam. This is the
favourite metaphor of the necessitarians ; yet, to make the com-
parison good, they ought to have first proved the will to be as
passive as the balance, or, in other words, they should have annihi-
lated the distinction between mind and matter. But this necessary
connexion between motive and volition may be denied. For what
are motives, as rightly understood here 1 Not physical causes, as a
weight thrown into a scale ; but reasons of choice, views and con-
ceptions of things in the mind, which, themselves, do not work the
will, as a machine ; but in consideration of which, the mind itself
wills and determines. But if the mind itself were obliged to deter-
mine by the strongest motive, as the beam is to incline by the
heaviest weight, it would be obliged to determine always by the
best reason ; for motive being but a reason of action considered in
■the mind, then the best reason, being in the nature of things the

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 173

strongest, must always predominate. But this is, plainly, contrary
to fact and experience. If it were not, all men would act reasonably,
and none foolishly ; or, at least, there would be no faults among
them but those of the understanding, none of the heart and affections.
The weakest reason, however, too generally succeeds when appetite
and corrupt affection are present ; that is to say, the weakest motive.
For if this be not allowed, we must say, that under the influence of
appetite the weakest reason always appears the strongest, which is
also false, in fact; for then there would be no sins committed
against judgment and conviction, and that many of our sins are of
this description, our consciences painfully convict us. That the mind
wills and acts generally under the influence of motives, may, there-
fore, be granted ; but that it is passive, and operated upon by them
necessarily, is disproved by the fact of our often acting under the
weakest reason or motive, which is the character of all sins against
our judgment.

But were we even to admit that present reasons or motives
operate irresistibly upon the will, the necessary connexion between
motive and volition would not be established ; unless it could be
proved that we have no power to displace one motive by another,
nor to control those circumstances from which motives flow. Yet,
who will say that a person may not shun evil company and fly from
many temptations 1 Either this must be allowed, or else it must be
a link in the necessary chain of events fixed by a superior power,
that we should seek and not fly evil company ; and so the exhorta-.
tions, "when sinners entice thee consent thou not," and "go not
into the way of sinners," are very impertinent, and only prove that
Solomon was no philosopher. But we are all conscious that we
have the power to alter, and control, and avoid, the force of mo-
tives. If not, why does a man resist the same temptation at one time
and yield to it at another, without any visible change of the circum-
stances ] He can also both change his circumstances by shunning
evil company ; and fly the occasions of temptation ; and control
that motive at one time to which he yields at another, under similar
circumstances. Nay, he sometimes resists a powerful temptation,,
which is the same thing as resisting a powerful motive, and yields
at another to a feeble one, and is conscious that he does so : a
sufficient proof that there is an irregularity and corruptness in the
self-determining active power of the mind, independent of motive.
Still, farther, the motive or reason for an action may be a bad one,
and yet be prevalent for want of the presence of a better reason
or motive to lead to a contrary choice and act ; but, in how many
instances is this the true cause why a better reason or stronger

174 .THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

motive is not present, that we have lived thoughtless and vain lives,
little considering the good or evil of things'? And if so, then the
thoughtless might have been more thoughtful, and the ignorant
might have acquired better knowledge, and thereby have placed
themselves under the influence of stronger and better motives. Thus
this theory does not accord with the facts of our own consciousness,
but contradicts them. It is, also, refuted by every part of the moral
history of man ; and it may be, therefore, concluded that those
speculations on the human will, to which the predestinarian theory
has driven its advocates, are equally opposed to the words of
Scripture, to the philosophy of mind, to our observation of what
passes in others, and to our own convictions.

Our moral liberty manifestly consists in the united power of
thinking and reasoning, and of choosing and acting upon such
thinking and reasoning ; so that the clearer our thought and con-
ception is of what is fit and right, and the more constantly our choice
is determined by it, the more nearly we rise to the highest acts and
exercises of this liberty. The best beings have, therefore, the highest
degree of moral liberty, since no motive to will or act wrong is any
thing else but a violation of this established and original connexion
between right reason, choice, and conduct ; and if any necessity
bind the irrational motive upon the will, it is either the result of bad
voluntary habit, for which we are accountable ; or necessity of
nature and circumstances, for which we are not accountable. In
the former case the actually influencing motive is evitable, and the
theory of the necessitarians is disproved : in the latter it is confirmed ;
but then man is neither responsible to his fellow man nor to God.

Certain notions as to the Divine Sovereignty have also been
resorted to by Calvinists, in order to render that scheme plausible
which cuts off the greater part of the human race from the hope of
salvation, by the absolute decree of God.

That the sovereignty of God is a scriptural doctrine no one can
deny ; but it does not follow, that the notions which men please to
form of it should be received as scriptural ; for religious errors
consist not only in denying the doctrines of the word of God, but
also in interpreting them fallaciously.

The Calvinistic view of God's sovereignty appears to be, his doing
what he wills, only because he wills it. So Calvin himself has stated
the case, as we have noticed above ; but as this view is repugnant
to all worthy notions of an infinitely wise Being, so it has no coun-
tenance in Scripture. The doctrine which we are there taught is^
that God's sovereignty consists in his doing many things by virtue
of his own supreme right and dominion, but that this right is under

SECOND.] 1HE0L0G1CAL INSTITUTES. H6

the direction of his " counsel" or " wisdom." The brightest act of
sovereignty is that of creation, and one in which, if in any, mere
"will might seem to have the chief place ; yet, even in this act, by
which myriads of beings of diverse powers and capacities were
produced, " we are taught that all was done in wisdom." Nor can
it be said that the sovereignty of God in creation, is uncontrolled
by either justice or goodness. If the final cause of creation had
been the misery of all sentient creatures, and all its contrivances
had tended to that end : if, for instance, every sight had been dis-
gusting, every smell a stench, every sound a scream, and every
necessary function of life had been performed with pain, we must
necessarily have referred the creation of such a world to a malignant
being ; and, if we are obliged to think it impossible that a good
being could have employed his almighty power with the direct inten-
tion to inflict misery, we then concede that his acts of sovereignty
are, by the very perfection of his nature, under the direction of his
goodness, as to all creatures potentially existing, or actually existing
whilst still innocent. Nor can we think it borne out by Scripture,
or by the reasonable notions of mankind, that the exercise of God's
sovereignty in the creation of things is exempt from any respect
to justice, a quality of the Divine nature, which is nothing but his
essential rectitude in exercise. » It is true, that as existence, under
all circumstances in which to exist is better upon the whole than
not to exist, leaves the creature no claim to have been otherwise
than it is made ; and that God has a sovereign right to make one
being an archangel and another an insect, so that "the thing
formed" may not say " to him that formed it, why hast thou made
me thus 1" It could deserve nothing before creation, its being not
having commenced ; all that it is, and has, (its existent state being
better than non-existence,) is, therefore, a boon conferred; and,
in matters of grace, no axiom can be more clear, than that he who
gratuitously bestows has the right " to do what he will with his own."
But every creature having been formed without any consent of its
own, if it be innocent of offence, either from the rectitude of its
nature, or from a natural incapacity of offending, as not being a
moral agent, appears to have a claim, in natural right, upon ex-
emption from such pains and sufferings, as would render existence
a worse condition than never to have been called out of nothing.
For, as a benevolent being, which God is acknowledged to be,
cannot make a creature with such an intention and contrivance,
that, by its very constitution, it must necessarily be wholly misera-
ble; and we see in this, that his sovereignty is regulated by his
gpodness as to the commencement of the existence of sentient

nt» THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAET

creatures ; so, from the moment they begin to be, the government
of God over them commences, and sovereignty in government neces-
sarily grounds itself upon the principles of equity and justice, and
" the Judge of the whole earth" must and will " do right."

This is the manifest doctrine of Scripture, for, although Almighty
God often gives " no account of his matters," nor, in some instances,
admits us to know how he is both just and gracious in his adminis-
tration, yet are we referred constantly to those general declarations
of his own word, which assure us that he is so, that we may " walk
by faith," and wait for that period, when, after the faith and patience
of good men have been sufficiently tried, the manifestation of these
facts shall take place to our comfort and to his glory. In many
respects, so far as we are concerned, we see no other reason for
his proceedings, than that he so wills to act. But the error into
which our brethcen often fall, is to conclude, from their want of
information in such cases, that God acts merely because he wills
so to act ; that because he gives not those reasons for his conduct
which we have no right to demand, that he acts without any reasons
at all ; and because we are not admitted to the secrets of his council
chamber, that his government is perfectly arbitrary, and that the
main spring of his leading dispensations is to make a show of power :
a conclusion which implies a most unworthy notion of God, which
he has himself contradicted in the most explicit mariner. Even his
most mysterious proceedings are called "judgments;" and he is
said to work all things " according to the counsel of his own willy *
a collation of words, which sufficiently show that not blind will,
but will subject to "counsel" is that sovereign will which governs
the world.

" Whenever, therefore, God acts as a governor, as a re warder,
, or punisher, he no longer acts as a mere sovereign, by his own sole
will and pleasure, but as an impartial judge, guided in all things by
invariable justice.

" Yet it is true, that, in some cases, mercy rejoices over justice,
although severity never does. God may reward more, but he will
never punish more than strict justice requires. It may be allowed,
that God acts as sovereign in convincing some souls of sin, arresting
them in their mad career by his resistless power. It seems also,
that, at the moment of our conversion, he acts irresistibly. There
may likewise be many irresistible touches in the course of our
Christian warfare ; but still, as St. Paul might have been either
obedient or ' disobedient to the heavenly vision,' so every individual
may, after all that God has done, either improve his grace, or make
it of none effect.

SECOND.} THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. Wt

"Whatever, therefore, it has pleased God to do, of his sovereign
pleasure, as Creator of heaven and earth ; and whatever his mercy
may do on particidar occasions, over and above what justice
requires, the general rule stands firm as the pillars of heaven. ' The
Judge of all the earth will do right :' ' he will judge the world ill
righteousness,' and every man therein, according to the strictest
justice. He will punish no man for doing any thing which he could
not possibly avoid ; neither for omitting any thing which he could
not possibly do. Every punishment supposes the offender might
have avoided the offence for which he is punished, otherwise to
punish him would be palpably unjust, and inconsistent with the
character of God our governor." (8)

The case of heathen nations has sometimes been referred to
by Calvinists, as presenting equal difficulties to those urged against
their scheme of election and reprobation. But the cases are not at
all parallel, nor can they be made so, unless it could be proved that
heathens, as such, are inevitably excluded from the kingdom of
heaven ; which is not, as some of them seem to suppose, a conceded
point. Those, indeed, if there be any such, who, believing in the
universal redemption of mankind, should allow this, woidd be most
inconsistent with themselves, and give up many of those principles
on which they successfully contend against the doctrine of absolute
reprobation ; but the argument lies in small compass, and is to be
determined by the word of God, and not by the speculations of men.
The actual state of pagan nations is affectingly bad ; but nothing
can be deduced from what they are in fact against their salvability ;
for although there is no ground to hope for the salvation of great
numbers of them, actual salvation is one thing, and possible salva-
tion is another. Nor does it affect this question, if we see not how
heathens may be saved ; that is, by what means repentance, and
faith, and righteousness, should be in any such degree wrought in
them, as that they shall become acceptable to God. The dispen-
sation of religion under which all those nations are to whom the
Gospel has never been sent, continues to be the patriarchal dispen- ,
sation. That men were saved under that in former times we know,
and at what point, if any, a religion becomes so far corrupted, and
truth so far extinct, as to leave no means of salvation to men, nothing
to call forth a true faith in principle, and obedience to what remains
known or knowable of the original law, no one has the right to
determine, unless he can adduce some authority from Scripture.
That authority is certainly not available to the conclusion, that, in
point of fact, the means of salvation are utterly withdrawn from

f8> WesleVs Works, vol. 15. p. 2?

vQh, in,

178 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

heathens. We may say that a murderous, adulterous, and idola-
trous heathen will be shut out from the kingdom of heaven ; we
must say this, on the express exclusion of all such characters from
future blessedness by the word of God ; but it would be little to the
purpose to say, that, as far as we know, all of them are wicked and
idolatrous. As far as we know they may, but we do not know the
whole case ; and, were these charges universally true, yet the ques-
tion is not what the heathen are, but what they have the means of
becoming. We indeed know that all are not equally vicious, nay,
that some virtuous heathens have been found in all ages ; and some
earnest and anxious inquirers after truth, dissatisfied with the notions
prevalent in their own countries respectively ; and what these few
were, the rest might have been likewise. But, if we knew no such
instances of superior virtue and eager desire of religious information
among them, the true question, " what degree of truth is, after all,
attainable by them ?" would still remain a question which must be
determined not so much by our knowledge of facts which may be
very obscure ; but such principles and general declarations as we
find applicable to the case in the word of God.

If all knowledge of right and wrong, and all gracious influence
of the Holy Spirit, and all objects of faith have passed away from
the heathen, through the fault of their ancestors " not liking to
retain God in their knowledge," and without the present race having
been parties to this wilful abandonment of truth, then they would
appear no longer to be accountable creatures, being neither under
law nor under grace ; but as we find it a doctrine of Scripture that
all men are responsible to God, and that the " whole world" will
be judged at the last day, we are bound to admit the accountability
of all, and with that, the remains of law and the existence of a
merciful government towards the heathen on the part of God.
With this the doctrine of St. Paul accords. No one can take stronger
views of the actual danger and the corrupt state of the Gentiles
than he ; yet he affirms that the Divine law had not perished wholly
from among them ; that though they had received no revealed law,
yet they had a law " written on their hearts ;" meaning, no doubt,
the traditionary law, the equity of which their consciences attested ;
and, farther, that though they had not the written law, yet, that
" by nature," that is, " without an outward rule, though this, also,
strictly speaking, is by preventing grace," (9) they were capable of
doing all the things contained in the law. He affirms, too, that all
such Gentiles as were thus obedient, should be "justified, in the
day when God shall judge the secrets of men, by Jesus Christ,
(9) Wesley's Notes, in loc.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITL'TKs. 179

according to his Gospel." The possible obedience and the possible
"justification" of heathens who have no written revelation are points,
therefore, distinctly affirmed by the apostle in his discourse in the
second chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and the whole matter
of God's sovereignty, as to the heathen, is reduced, not to the leaving
of any portion of our race without the means of salvation, and then
punishing them for sins which they have no means of avoiding ; but
to the fact of his having given superior advantages to us, and inferior
ones only to them ; a proceeding which we see exemplified in the
most enlightened of Christian nations every day, for neither every
part of the same nation is equally favoured with the means of grace,
nor are all the families living in the same town and neighbourhood
equally circumstanced as to means of religious influence and im-
provement. The principle of this inequality is, however, far different
from that on which Calvinistic reprobation is sustained; since it
involves no inevitable exclusion of any individual from the kingdom
of God, and because the general principle of God's administration
in such cases is elsewhere laid down to be, the requiring of much
where much is given, and the requiring of little where little is given :
■ — a principle of the strictest equity.

An unguarded opinion as to the irresistibility of grace, and
the passiveness of man in conversion, has also been assumed, and
made to give an air of plausibility to the predestinarian scheme. It
is argued, if our salvation is of God and not of ourselves, then those
only can be saved to whom God gives the grace of conversion ; and
the rest, not having this grace afforded them, are, by the inscrutable
counsel of God, passed by, and reprobated.

This is an argument a posteriori ; from the assumed passiveness
of man in conversion to the election of a part only of mankind to
life. The argument a priori is from partial election to life to the
doctrine of irresistible grace, as the means by which the Divine
decree is carried into effect. The doctrine of such an election has
already been refuted, and it will be easy to show that it derives no
support from the assumption that grace must work irresistibly in
man in order that the honour of our salvation may be secured to
God, which is the plausible dress in which the doctrine is generally
presented.

It is allowed, and all scriptural advocates of the universal re-
demption of mankind will join with the Calvinists in maintaining
the doctrine, that every disposition and inclination to good which
originally existed in the nature of man is lost by the fall ; that all
men, in their simply natural state, are " dead in trespasses and sins,"
and have neither the will nor the power to turn to God ; and that

ISO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, ' [PAKT

no one is sufficient of himself to think or do any thing of a saving
tendency. But, as all men are required to do those things which
have a saving tendency, we contend, that the grace to do them has
been bestowed upon all. Equally sacred is the doctrine to be held,
that no person can repent or truly believe except under the influ-
ence of the Spirit of God ; and that we have no ground of boasting
in ourselves, but that all the glory of our salvation, commenced and
consummated, is to be given to God alone, as the result of the
freeness and riches of his grace.

It will also be freely allowed, that the visitations of the gracious
influences of the~ Holy Spirit are vouchsafed in the first instance,
and in numberless other subsequent cases, quite independent of our
seeking them or desire for them ; and that when our thoughts are
thus turned to serious considerations, and various exciting and
quickening feelings are produced within us, we are often wholly
passive ; and also, that men are sometimes suddenly and irresisti-
bly awakened to a sense of their guilt and danger by the Spirit of
God, either through the preaching of the word instrumentally or
through other means, and sometimes, even, independent of any
external means at all ; and are thus constrained to cry out, " What
must I do to be saved I" All this is confirmed by plain verity of
Holy Writ ; and is, also, as certain a matter of experience as that
the motions of the Holy Spirit do often silently intermingle them-
selves with our thoughts, reasonings, and consciences, and breathe
their milder persuasions upon our affections.

From these premises the conclusions which legitimately flow,
are in direct opposition to the Calvinistic hypothesis. They esta-
blish,

1. The justice of God in the condemnation of men, which their
doctrine leaves under a dark and impenetrable cloud. More or
less of these influences from on high visit the finally impenitent, so
as to render their destruction their own act by resisting them.
This is proved, from the " Spirit" having " strove" with those who
were finally destroyed by the flood of Noah ; from the case of the
finally impenitent Jews and their ancestors, who are charged with
" always resisting the Holy Ghost ;" from the case of the apostates
mentioned in the Epistle to the Hebrews, who are said to have done
" despite to the Spirit of grace ;" and from the solemn warnings
given to men in the New Testament, not to " grieve" and " quench5*
the Holy Spirit. If, therefore, it appears that the destruction of
men is attributed to their resistance of those influences of the Holy
Spirit, which, but for that resistance, would have been saving, ac-
cording to the design of God in imparting them, then is the justice

Wb'OND.] IHEULOGRAL INSTITUTES^ I8J

of God manifested in their punishment; and it follows, also, that
his grace so works in men, as to be both sufficient to lead them into
a state of salvation, and even actually to place them in this state,
and yet so as to be capable of being finally and fatally frustrated.

2. These premises, also, secure the glory of our salvation to the
grace of God ; but not by implying the Calvinistic notion of the
continued and uninterrupted irresistibility of the influence of grace
and the passiveness of man, so as to deprive him of his agency ; but
by showing that his agency, even when rightly directed, is upheld
and influenced by the superior power of God, and yet so as to be
still his own. For, in the instance of the mightiest visitation we can
produce from Scripture, that of St. Paul, we see where the irresisti-
ble influence terminated, and where his own agency recommenced.
Under the impulse of the conviction struck into his mind, as well
as under the dazzling brightness which fell upon his eyes, he was
passive, and the effect produced for the time necessarily followed ;
but all the actions consequent upon this were the results of delibe-
ration and personal choice. He submits to be taught in the doc-
trine of Christ ; " he confers not with flesh and blood ;" " he is not
disobedient to the heavenly vision ;" " he faints not" under the bur-
thensome ministry he had received ; and he " keeps his body under
subjection, lest after having preached to others he should himself
become a cast away." All these expressions, so descriptive of
consideration and choice, show that the irresistible impulse was not
permanent, and that he was subsequently left to improve it or not,
though under a powerful but still a resistible motive operating upon
him to remain faithful.

For the gentler emotions produced by the Spirit, these are, as
the experience of all Christians testifies, the ordinary and general
manner in which the Holy Spirit carries on his work in man ; and,
if all good desires, resolves, and aspirations, are from him, and not
from our own nature, (and, if we are utterly fallen, from our own
nature they cannot be,) then, if any man is conscious of having
ever checked good desires, and of having opposed his own convic-
tions and better feelings, he has in himself abundant proof of the
resistibiiity of grace, and of the superability of those good inclina-
tions which the Spirit is pleased to impart. He is equally conscious
of the pow*?r of complying with them, though still in the strength of
grace, which yet, whilst it works in him " to will and to do," neither
wills nor acts for him, nor even by him, as a passive instrument.
For if men were wholly and at all times passive under divine influ-
ence ; not merely in the reception of it, for all are, in that respect,
passive ; but, in the actings of it to practical ends, then would there

A&2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

be nothing to mark the difference between the righteous and the
wicked but an act of God, which is utterly irreconcilable to the
Scriptures. They call the former " obedient," the latter " disobe-
dient ;" one " willing," the other " unwilling ;" and promise or
threaten accordingly. They attribute the destruction of the one to
their refusal of the grace of God, and the salvation of the other, as
the instrumental cause, to their acceptance of it ; and to urge that
that personal act by which we receive the grace of Christ, detracts
from his glory as our Saviour by attributing our salvation to our-
selves, is to speak as absurdly as if we should say that the act of
obedience and faith required of the man who was commanded to
stretch out his withered arm, detracted from the glory of Christ's
healing virtue, by which, indeed, the power of complying with the
command, and the condition of his being healed, was imparted.

It is by such reasonings, made plausible to many minds, by an
affectation of metaphysical depth and subtilty, or by pretensions of
magnifying the sovereignty and grace of God, (often, we doubt not,
very sincere,) that the theory of election and reprobation, as held
by the followers of Calvin with some shades of difference, but in
all substantially the same, has had currency given to it in the church
of Christ in these latter ages. How unsound and how contrary to
the Scriptures they are, may appear from that brief refutation of
them just given ; but I repeat what was said above, that we are
never to forget that this system has generally had interwoven with
it many of the most vital points of Christianity. It is this which has
kept it in existence ; for otherwise it had never, probably, held
itself up against the opposing evidence of so many plain Scriptures,
and that sense of the benevolence and equity of God, which his
own revelations, as well as natural reason, has riveted in the con-
victions of mankind. In one respect the Calvinistic and the Soci-
nian schemes have tacitly confessed the evidence of the word of
God to be against them. The latter has shrunk from the letter and
common sense interpretation of Scripture within the clouds raised
by a licentious criticism ; the other has chosen rather to find refuge
in the mists of metaphysical theories. Nothing is, however, here
meant by this juxta-position of theories so contrary to each other,
but that both thus confess, that the prima facie evidence afforded by
the word of God is not in their favour. If we intendedjmore by
thus naming on the same page systems so opposite, one o$ which,
with all its faults, contains all that truth by which men may be
saved, whilst the other excludes it, " we should offend against the
generation of the children of Gon."

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 183

CHAPTER XXIX.

Redemption — Further Benefits.

Having endeavoured to establish the doctrine of the universal re-
demption of the human race, the enumeration of the leading blessings
which flow from it may now be resumed. We have already spoken
of justification, adoption, regeneration, and the witness of the Holy
Spirit, and we proceed to another as distinctly marked, and as
graciously promised in the Holy Scriptures : this is the entire
sanctification, or the perfected holiness of believers ; and as
this doctrine, in some of its respects, has been the subject of con-
troversy, the scriptural evidence of it must be appealed to and
examined. Happily for us, a subject of so great importance is not
involved in obscurity.

That a distinction exists between a regenerate state and a state
of entire and perfect holiness will be generally allowed. Regene-
ration, we have seen, is concomitant with justification ; but the
apostles, in addressing the body of believers in the churches to
whom they wrote their epistles, set before them, both in the prayers
they offer in their behalf, and in the exhortations they administer,
a still higher degree of deliverance from sin, as well as a higher
growth in Christian virtues. Two passages only need be quoted to
prove this. 1 Thess. v, 23, " And the very God of peace sanctify
you wholly, and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be
preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ."
2 Cor. vii, 1, " Having these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse
ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holi-
ness in the fear of God." In both these passages deliverance from
sin is the subject spoken of; and the prayer in one instance and
the exhortation in the other goes to the extent of the entire sancti-
fication of " the soul" and " spirit," as well as of the " flesh" ot
" body," from all sin ; by which can only be meant our complete
deliverance from all spiritual pollution, all inward depravation of"
the heart, as well as that which, expressing itself outwardly by the
indulgence of the senses, is called " filthiness of the flesh."

The attainableness of such a state is not so much a matter of
debate among Christians as the time when we are authorized to
expect it. For as it is an axiom of Christian doctrine, that " with-
out holiness no man can see the Lord ;" and is equally clear that
if we would " be found of him in peace" we must be found " with-

184 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. (PART

out spot, and blameless ;" and that the church will be presented by
Christ to the Father without " fault ;" so it must be concluded,
unless, on the one hand, we greatly pervert the sense of these pas-
sages, or, on the other, admit the doctrine of purgatory or some
intermediate purifying institution, that the entire sanctification of
the soul, and its complete renewal in holiness, must take place in
this world.

Whilst this is generally acknowledged, however, among spiritual
Christians, it has been warmly contended by many, that the final
stroke, which destroys our natural corruption, is only given at
death ; and that the soul, when separated from the body, and not
before, is capable of that immaculate purity which these passages,
doubtless, exhibit to our hope.

If this view can be refuted, then it must follow, unless a purga-
tory of some description be allowed after death, that the entire
sanctification of believers at any time previous to their dissolution,
and in the full sense of these evangelic promises, is attainable.

To the opinion in question, then, there appear to be the follow-
ing fatal objections :

1. That we nowhere find the promises of entire sanctification
restricted to the article of death, either expressly, or in fair infer-
ence from any passage of Holy Scripture.

2. That we nowhere find the" circumstance of the soul's union
with the body represented as a necessary obstacle to its entire
sanctification.

The principal passage which has been urged in proof of this from
the New Testament, is that part of the seventh chapter of the Epis-
tle to the Romans, in which St. Paul, speaking in the first person
of the bondage of the flesh, has been supposed to describe his state,
as a believer in Christ. But, whether he speaks of himself, or de-
scribes the state of others in a supposed case, given for the sake of
more vivid representation in the first person, which is much more
probable, he is clearly speaking of a person who had once sought
justification by the works of the law, but who was then convinced,
by the force of a spiritual apprehension of the extent of the acquire-
ments of that law, and by constant failures in his attempts to keep
it perfectly, that he was in bondage to his corrupt nature, and could
only be delivered from this thraldom by the interposition of another.
For, not to urge that his strong expressions of being " carnal," " sold
under sin," and doing always "the things which he would not,"
are utterly inconsistent with that moral state of believers in Christ
which he describes in the next chapter ; and, especially, that he
there declares that such as are in Christ Jesus " walk not after the

SECOND.'] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 185

flesh, but after the spirit ;"• the seventh chapter itself contains
decisive evidence against the inference which the advocates of the
necessary continuance of sin till death have drawn from it. The
apostle declares the person whose case he describes, to be under
the late, and not in a state of deliverance by Christ ; and then he
represents him not only as despairing of self deliverance, and a's
praying for the interposition of a sufficiently powerful deliverer, but
as thanking God that the very deliverance for which he groans is
appointed to be administered to him by Jesus Christ. " Who shall
deliver me from the body of this death % I thank God through Jesus
Christ our Lord."

This is, also, so fully confirmed by what the apostle had said in
the preceding chapter, where he unquestionably describes the mom!
state of true believers, that nothing is more surprising than that so
perverted a comment upon the seventh chapter, as that to which
we have adverted, should have been adopted or persevered in.
"What shall we say then 1 Shall we continue in sin, that grace may
abound ] God forbid ! How shall we, who are dead to sin, live any
longer therein 1 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized
into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ] Therefore, we are
buried with him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was
raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we
also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted
together in the likeness of his death, we shall be, also, in the like-
ness of his resurrection ; knowing this, that our old man is cruci-
fied with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed that
henceforth Ave should not serve sin ; for he that is dead is freed
from sin." So clearly does the apostle show that he who is
bound to the " body of death," as mentioned in the seventh chapter,
is not in the state of a believer ; and that he who has a true faith
in Christ, " is freed from sin."

It is somewhat singular, that the divines of the Calvinistic school
should be almost uniformly the zealous advocates of the doctrine of
the continuance of indwelling sin till death ; but it is but justice to
say, that several of them have as zealously denied that the apostle,
in the seventh chapter of the Romans, decribes the state of one who
is justified by faith in Christ, and very properly consider the case
there spoken of as that of one struggling in legal bondage, and
brought to that point of self despair and of conviction of sin and
helplessness which must always precede an entire trust in the merits
of Christ's death, and the power of his salvation.

.'3. The doctrine before us is disproved by those passages of
Scripture which connect our entire soncriTicatJon with subsequent

Voi IIT ;U

I&& THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. ^PAR'i

habits and acts, to be exhibited in the conduct of believers before
death. So in the quotation from Rom. vi, just given, — " knowing
this, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we
should not serve sin." So the exhortation in 2 Cor. vii, 1, also
given above, refers to the present life, and not to the future hour
of -our dissolution ; and in 1 Thess. v, 23, the apostle first prays
for the entire sanctification of the Thessalonians, and then for their
preservation in that hallowed state, " unto the coming of our Lord
Jesus C hrist. "

4. It is disproved, also, by all those passages which require us
to bring forth those graces and virtues which are usually called the
fruits of the Spirit. That these are to be produced during our life
and to be displayed in our spirit and conduct cannot be doubted ;
and we may then ask whether they are required of us in perfection
and maturity 1 If so, in this degree of maturity and perfection, they
necessarily suppose the entire sanctification of the soul from the
opposite and antagonist evils. Meekness in its perfection supposes
the extinction of all sinful anger; perfect love to God, supposes
that no atfection remains contrary' to it ; and so of every other per-
fect internal virtue. The inquiry, then, is reduced to this, whether
these graces, in such perfection as to exclude the opposite corrup-
tions of the heart, are of possible attainment. If they are not, then
we cannot love God with our whole hearts ; then we must be
sometimes sinfully angry ; and how, in that case, are we to inter-
pret that perfectness in these graces which God hath required of us,
and promised to us in the Gospel 1 For if the perfection meant (and
let it be observed that this is a scriptural term, and must mean
something) be so comparative as that we may be sometimes sinfully
angry, and may sometimes divide our hearts between God and the
creature, we may apply the same comparative sense of the term to
good words and to good works, as well as to good affections. Thus
when the apostle prays for the Hebrews, " Now the God of peace
that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great Shep-
herd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
make you perfect in every good work, to do his will," we must
understand this perfection of evangelical good works so that it shall
sometimes give place to opposite evil works, just as good affections
must necessarily sometimes give place to the opposite bad affections.
This view can scarcely be soberly entertained by any enlightened
Christian; and it must, therefore, be concluded, that the standard
of our attainable Christian perfection, as to the affections, is a love
of God so perfect as to " rule the heart" and exclude all rivalry,
and a meekness so perfect as to cast out all sinful anger and prevent

JfB&OKD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 18?

its return ; and that as to good works the rule is, that we shall be
so " perfect in every good work," as to " do the will of God"
habitually, fully, and constantly. If we fix the standard lower we
let in a license totally inconsistent with that Christian purity which
is allowed by all to be attainable, arid we make every man himself
his own interpreter of that comparative perfection which is often
contended for as that only which is attainable.

Some, it is true, admit the extent of the promises and the require-
ments of the Gospel as we have stated them ; but they contend,
that this is the mark at which we are to aim, the standard towards
which we are to aspire, though neither is attainable fully till death.
But this view cannot be true as applied to sanctification or deliver-
ance from all inward and outward sin. That the degree of every
virtue implanted by grace is not limited, but advances and grows
in the living Christian throughout life, may be granted ; and through
eternity also : but to say that these virtues are not attainable,
through the work of the Spirit, in that degree which shall destroy
all opposite vice, is to say, that God, under the Gospel requires us
to be what we cannot be, either through want of efficacy in his
grace, or from some defect in its administration ; neither of which
has any countenance from Scripture, nor is at all consistent with
the terms in which the promises and exhortations of the Gospel are
expressed. It is also contradicted by our own consciousness, which
charges our criminal neglects and failures upon ourselves, and not
upon the grace of God, as though it were insufficient. Either the
consciences of good men have in all ages been delusive and over
scrupulous; or this doctrine of the necessary, though occasional,
dominion of sin over us is false. .

5. The doctrine of the necessary indwelling of sin in the soul
till death involves other antiscriptural consequences. It supposes
that the seat of sin is in the flesh, and thus harmonizes with the'
pagan philosophy, which attributed all evil to matter. The doctrine
of the Bible, on the contrary, is, that the seat of sin is in the soul ;
and it makes it one of the proofs of the fall and corruption of our
spiritual nature, that we are in bondage to the appetites and motions
of the flesh. Nor does the theory which places the necessity of
sinning in the connexion of the soul with the body account for the
whole moral case of man. There are sins, as pride, covetousness,
malice, and others, which are wholly spiritual ; and yet no exception
is made in this doctrine of the necessary continuance of sin till
death as to them. There is, surely, no need to wait for the sepa-
ration of the soul from the body in order to be saved from evils
which are the sole offspring of the spirit ; and yet these are made.

Ifttf theological institutes. [pakx

as inevitable as the sins which more immediately connect them-
selves with the excitements of the animal nature.

This doctrine supposes, too, that the flesh must necessarily not
only lust against the Spirit, but in no small degree, and on many
occasions, be the conqueror : whereas, we are commanded to
" mortify the deeds of the body ;" to " crucify,'" that is, to put to
death, " the flesh ;" " to put off the old man," which, in its full mean-
ing, must import separation from sin in fact, as well as the renuncia-
tion of it in will ; and " to put on the new man." Finally, the apostle
expressly states, that though the flesh stands victoriously opposed
to legal sanctification, it is not insuperable by evangelical holiness.
— " For what the law could not do in that it was weak through the
flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and
for sin, condemned sin in the flesh ; that the righteousness of the
law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after
the Spirit," Rom. viii, 3, 4. So inconsistent with the declarations
and promises of the Gospel is the notion that, so long as we are in
the body, " the flesh" must of necessity have at least the occasional
dominion.

We conclude, therefore, as to the time of our complete sanctifi-
cation ; or, to use the phrase of the apostle Paul, " the destruction
of the body of sin ;" that it can neither be referred to the hour of
death, nor placed subsequently to this present life. The attainment
of perfect freedom from sin is one to Avhich believers are called
during the present life ; and is necessary to that completeness of
" holiness," and of those active and passive graces of Christianity
by which they are called to glorify God in this world, and to edify
mankind.

Not only the time, but the manner also, of our sanctification has
been matter of controversy : some contending that all attainable
degrees of it are acquired by the process of gradual mortification
and the acquisition of holy habits ; others alleging it to be instanta-
neous, and the fruit of an act of faith in the Divine promises.

That the regeneration which accompanies justification is a large
approach to this state of perfected holiness ; and that all dying to
sin, and all growth in grace, advances us nearer to this point of
entire sanctity, is so obvious, that on these points there can be no
reasonable dispute. But they are not at all inconsistent with a
more instantaneous work, when, the depth of our natural depravity
being more painfully felt, we plead in faith the accomplishment of
the promises of God. The great question to be settled is, whether
the deliverance sighed after be held out to us in these promises as
a present blessing % And, from what has been already said, there

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. lbf»

appears no ground to doubt this ; since no small violence would be
offered to the passages of Scripture already quoted, as well as to
many others, by the opposite opinion. All the promises of God
which are not expressly, or from their order, referred to future
time, are objects of present trust ; and their fulfilment now is made
conditional only upon our faith. They cannot, therefore, be pleaded
in our prayers, with an entire reliance upon the truth of God, in
vain. The general promise that we shall receive " all things what-
soever we ask in prayer, believing," comprehends, of course, " all
things" suited to our case which God has engaged to bestow ; and
if the entire renewal of our nature be included in the number,
without any limitation of time, except that in which we ask it in
faith, then to this faith shall the promises of entire sanctification be
given ; which, in the nature of the case, supposes an instantaneous
work immediately following upon our entire and unwavering faith.

The only plausible objections made to this doctrine may be
answered in few words.

It has been urged, that this state of entire sanctification supposes
future impeccability. Certainly not ; for if angels and our first
parents fell when in a state of immaculate sanctity, the renovated
man cannot be placed, by his entire deliverance from inward sin,
out of the reach of danger. This remark, also, answers the allega-
tion, that we should thus be removed out of the reach of temptation ;
for the example of angels and of the first man, who fell by tempta-
tion when in a state of native purity, proves that the absence of
inward evil is not inconsistent with a state of probation ; and that
this, in itself, is no guard against the attempts and solicitations of evil.

It has been objected, too, that this supposed state renders the
atonement and intercession of Christ superfluous in future. But
the very contrary of this is manifest when the case of an evangelical
renewal of the soul in righteousness is understood. This proceeds
from the grace of God in Christ, through the Holy Spirit, as the
efficient cause ; it is received by faith as the instrumental cause ;
and the state itself into which we are raised is maintained, not by
inherent native power, but by the continual presence and sanctify-
ing influence of the Holy Spirit himself, received and retained in
answer to ceaseless prayer ; which prayer has respect solely to the
merits of the death and intercession of Christ.

It has been further alleged, that a person delivered from all in-
ward and outward sin has no longer need to use the petition of the
Lord's prayer, — " and forgive us our trespasses ;" because he has
no longer need of pardon. To this we reply, 1. That it would be
absurd to suppose that any person is placed under the necessity of

MJO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

" trespassing,"' in order that a general prayer designed for men in
a mixed condition might retain its aptness to every particular case.
2. That trespassing of every kind and degree is not supposed by
this prayer to be continued, in order that it might be used always
in the same import, or otherwise it might be pleaded against the
renunciation of any trespass or transgression whatever. 3. That
this petition is still relevant to the case of the entirely sanctified and
the evangelically perfect, since neither the perfection of the first
man nor that of angels is in question ; that is, a perfection measured
by the perfect law, which, in its obligations, contemplates all crea-
tures as having sustained no injury by moral lapse, and admits,
therefore, of no excuse from infirmities and mistakes of judgment ;
nor of any degree of obedience below that which beings created
naturally perfect, were capable of rendering. There may, however,
be an entire sanctification of a being rendered naturally Aveak and
imperfect, and so liable to mistake and infirmity, as well as to defect
in the degree of that absolute obedience and service which the law
of God, never bent or lowered to human weakness, demands from
all. These defects, and mistakes, and infirmities, may be quite
consistent with the entire sanctification of the soul, and the moral
maturity of a being still naturally infirm and imperfect. Still,
further, if this were not a sufficient answer, it may be remarked,
that we are not the ultimate judges of our own case as to our " tres-
passes," or our exemption from them ; and we are not, therefore,
to put ourselves into the place of God, " who is greater than our
hearts." So, although St. Paul says, " I know nothing by myself,"
that is, I am conscious of no offence, he adds, " yet am I not hereby
justified ; but he that judgeth me is the Lord :" to whom, therefore;,
the appeal is every moment to be made through Christ the Media-
tor, and who, by the renewed testimony of his Spirit, assures every
true believer of his acceptance in his sight.

Another benefit which accrues to all true believers, is the -right
to pray, with the special assurance that they shall be heard in all
things which are according to the will of God. " And this is the
confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing accord-
ing to his will, he heareth us." It is under this gracious institution
that all good men are constituted intercessors for others, even for
the whole world ; and that God is pleased to order many of his
dispensations, both as to individuals and to nations, in reference to
"his elect who cry day and night unto him."

With respect to every real member of the body or church of
Christ, the providence of God is special; in other words, they are
individually considered in the administration of the affairs of this fife

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 191

by the Sovereign Ruler, and their measure of good and of evil is
appointed with constant reference to their advantage, either in this
fife or in eternity. " The hairs of their head" are, therefore, said
to be " numbered," and, " all things" are declared " to work toge-
ther for their good."

To them also victory over death is awarded. They are freed
from its fear in respect of consequences in another state ; for the
apprehension of future punishment is removed by the remission ol
their sins, and the attestation of this to their minds by the Holy
Spirit, whilst a patient resignation to the will of God, as to the mea-
sure of their bodily sufferings, and the strong hopes aud joyful anti-
cipations of a better life cancel and subdue that horror of pain and
dissolution which is natural to man. " Forasmuch,* then, as the
children are partakers of flesh and blood, he, also, himself took part
of the same, that, through death, he might destroy him that had the
power of death, that is, the devil, and deliver them, who, through
fear of death, were all their life time subject to bondage," Heb. ii,
14, 15.

The immediate reception op the soul into a state of
blessedness after death, is also another of the glorious promises
of the new covenant to all them that endure to the end, and " die
in the Lord."

This is so explicitly taught in the New Testament, that, but for
the admission of a philosophical error, it would, probably, have
never been doubted by any persons professing to receive that book,
as of Divine authority. Till, in recent times, the belief in the
materiality of the human soul was chiefly confined to those who
entirely rejected the Christian revelation ; but, when the Socinians
adopted this notion, without wholly rejecting the Scriptures, it was
promptly perceived that the doctrine of an intermediate state, and
the materiality of the soul, could not be maintained together ;(1)
and the most violent and disgraceful criticisms and evasions have,
therefore, by this class of interpreters been resorted to, in order to
save a notion as unphilosophical as it is contrary to the word of
God. Nothing can be more satisfactory than the observations of
Dr. Campbell on this subject.

" Many expressions of Scripture, in the natural and obvious
sense, imply that an intermediate and separate state of the soul is

(1) A few divines, and but few, have also been found, who, still admitting the
essential distinction between body and spirit, have thought that their separation
by death incapacitated the soul for the exercise of its powers. This suspension
they call " the sleep of the soul." With the materialist death causes tho entire
annihilation, for the time, of the thinking property of matter. Bothopinipns arj>;
'Wvever, reflated by tho same scriptural arguments.

192 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

actually to succeed death. Such are the words of the Lord to the
penitent thief upon the cross, Luke xxiii, 43. Stephen's dying
.petition, Acts vii, 59. The comparisons which the apostle Paul
makes in different places, (2 Cor. v, 6, &c ; Phil, i, 21,) between
the enjoyment which true Christians can attain by their continuance
in this world, and that which they enter on at their departure out
of it, and several other passages. Let the words referred to be read
by any judicious person, either in the original or in the common
translation, which is sufficiently exact for this purpose, and let him,
setting aside all theory or system, say, candidly, whether they would
not be understood, by the gross of mankind, as presupposing that
the soul may and will exist separately from the body, and be sus-
ceptible of happiness or misery in that state. If any thing could
add to the native evidence of the expressions, it would be the unna-
tural meanings that are put upon them, in order to disguise that
evidence. What shall we say of the metaphysical distinction intro-
duced for this purpose between absolute and relative time 1 The
apostle Paul, they are sensible, speaks of the saints as admitted to
enjoyment in the presence of God, immediately after death. Now,
to palliate the direct contradiction there is in this to their doctrine,
that the vital principle, which is all they mean by the soul, remains
extinguished between death and the resurrection, they remind us of
the difference there is between absolute or real and relative or appa-
rent time. They admit, that if the apostle be understood as speak-
ing of real time, what is said flatly contradicts their system ; but,
say they, his words must be interpreted as spoken only of apparent
time. He talks, indeed, of entering on a state of enjoyment imme-
diately after death, though there may be many thousands of years
between the one and the other ; for he means only, that when that
state shall commence, however distant, in reality, the time may be,
the person entering upon it will not be sensible of that distance,
and, consequently, there will be to him an apparent coincidence
with the moment of his death. But does the apostle any where give
a hint that this is his meaning 1 or is it what any man would natu-
rally discover from his words 1 That it is exceedingly remote from
the common use of language, I believe hardly any of those, who
favour this scheme, will be partial enough to deny. Did the sacred
penman then mean to put a cheat upon the world, and, by the help
of an equivocal expression, to flatter men with the hope of entering,
the instant they expire, on a state of felicity, when, in fact, they
knew that it would be many ages before it would take place 1 But
were the hypothesis about the extinction of the mind between death
and the resurrection well founded, the apparent coincidence they

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 193

speak of is not so clear as they seem to think it. For my part,
I cannot regard it as an axiom, and I never heard of any who
attempted to demonstrate it. To me it appears merely a corollary
from Mr. Locke's doctrine, which derives our conceptions of time
from the succession of our ideas, which, whether true or false, is a
doctrine to be found only among certain philosophers, and which,
we may reasonably believe, never came into the heads of those to
whom the Gospel, in the apostolic age, was announced.

" I remark that even the curious equivocations (or, perhaps,
more properly, mental reservation) that has been devised for them,
will not, in every case, save the credit of apostolical veracity. The
words of Paul to the Corinthians are, knowing that whilst ice are at
home in the body, we are absent from tlie Lord ; again, we are willing
rather to be absent from the body and present with the Lord. Could
such expressions have been used by him, if he had held it impossi-
ble to be with the Lord, or, indeed, anywhere, without the body ;
and that, whatever the change was which was made by death, he
could not be in the presence of the Lord, till he returned to the
body? Absence from the body, and presence with the Lord, were
never, therefore, more unfortunately combined, than in this illus-
tration. Things are combined here as coincident, which, on the
hypothesis of those gentlemen, are incompatible. If recourse be
had to the original, the expressions in Greek are, if possible, still
stronger. They are, o» sv^fjiouvres sv rw du^an, those who divell in
the body, who are sxSr^avrss atfo <rs Ku^is, at a distance from the Lord.
As, on the contrary, they are Si sx^fj^vrs? sx m tfuparog, those who
have travelled out of the body, who are 01 evSrurnvrsg ifiog rov Ku^iov,
those loho reside, or are present with the Lord. In the passage to the
Philippians, also, the commencement of his presence with the
Lord is represented as coincident, not with his return to the body,
but with his leaving it ; with the dissolution, not with the restora-
tion of the union.

" From the tenor of the New Testament, the sacred writers
appear to proceed on the supposition that the soul and the body are
naturally distinct and separable, and that the soul is susceptible of
pain or pleasure in a state of separation. It were endless to enu-
merate all the places which evince this. The story of the rich man
and Lazarus, Luke xvi, 22, 23. The last words of our Lord
upon the cross, Luke xxiii, 46, and of Stephen, when dying.
Paul's doubts, whether he was in the body or out of the body, when
he was translated to the third heaven and Paradise, 2 Cor. xii, 2,
3, 4. Our Lord's words to Thomas, to satisfy him that he was not
a spirit, Luke xxiv, 39. And, to conclude, the express mention

Vol. III. 25

194 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

of the denial of spirits as one of the errors of the Sadducees. Acts
xxiii, 8, For the Sadducees say there is no resurrection, neither angel
nor spirit, psSe uyys'kov fxsSs m/sufjia. All these are irrefragable evi-
dences of the general opinion on this subject of both Jews and
Christians. By spirit, as distinguished from angel, is evidently
meant the departed spirit of a human being ; for, that man is here,
before his natural death, possessed of a vital and intelligent princi-
ple, which is commonly called his soul or spirit, it was never pre-
tended that they denied." (2)

In this intermediate, but felicitous and glorious state, the disem-
bodied spirits of the righteous will remain in joy and felicity with
Christ, until the general judgment ; when another display of the
gracious effects of our redemption, by Christ, will appear in the
glorious resurrection of their bodies to an immortal life : thus
distinguishing them from the wicked, whose resurrection will be to
" shame and everlasting contempt," or, to what may be emphati-
cally termed, an immortal death.

On this subject no point of discussion, of any importance, arises
among those who admit the truth of Scripture, except as to the
way in which the doctrine of the resurrection of the body is to be
understood ; — whether a resurrection of the substance of the body
be meant, or of some minute and indestructible part of it. The
latter theory has been adopted for the sake of avoiding certain sup-
posed difficulties. It cannot, however, fail to strike every impar-
tial reader of the New Testament, that the doctrine of the resur-
rection is there taught without any nice distinctions. It is always
exhibited as a miraculous work ; and represents the same body
which is laid in the grave as the subject of this change from death
to life, by the power of Christ. Thus, our Lord was raised in the
same body in which he died, and his resurrection is constantly held
forth as the model of ours ; and the apostle Paul expressly says*
" Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like
unto his glorious body." The only passage of Scripture which
appears to favour the notion of the rising of the immortal body from
some indestructible germ, is 1 Cor. xv, 35, &c, " But some men
will say, How are the dead raised up, and with what body do they
come *? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened except
it die ; and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that
shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other
grain," &c. If, however, it had been the intention of the apostle,
holding this view of the case, to meet objections to the doctrine of
the resurrection, grounded upon the difficulties of conceiving how

(2) Diss, vi, Part 2.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 195

the same body, in the popular sense, could be raised up in sub-
stance, we might have expected him to correct this misapprehen-
sion, by declaring, that this was not the Christian doctrine ; but
that some small parts of the body only, bearing as little proportion
to the whole as the germ of a seed to the plant, would be preserved,
and be unfolded into the perfected body at the resurrection. In-
stead of this, he goes on immediately to remind the objector of the
differences which exist between material bodies as they now exist ;
between the plant and the bare or naked grain ; between one plant
and another ; between the flesh of men, of beasts, of fishes, and of
birds ; between celestial and terrestrial bodies ; and between the
lesser and greater celestial luminaries themselves. Still further he
proceeds to state the difference, not between the germ of the body
to be raised, and the body given at the resurrection ; but between
the body itself, understood popularly, which dies, and the body
which shall be raised. " It is sown in corruption, it is raised in
incorruption," which would not be true of the supposed incorrupti-
ble and imperishable germ of this hypothesis ; and can only be
affirmed of the body itself, considered in substance, and in its
present state corruptible. Further, the question put by the objector,
" How are the dead raised up ]" does not refer to the modus agendi
of the resurrection, or the process or manner in which the thing
is to be effected, as the advocates of the germ hypothesis appear
to assume. This is manifest from the answer of the apostle, who
goes on immediately to state, not in what manner the resurrection
is to be effected, but what shall be the state or condition of the
resurrection body, which is no answer at all to the question, if it be
taken in that sense.

The first of the two questions in the passage referred to relates
to the possibility of the resurrection, " How are the dead raised
up ?" the second to the kind of body which they are to take, sup-
posing the fact to be allowed. Both questions, however, imply a
denial of the fact, or, at least, express a strong doubt concern-
ing it. It is thus that tfwj " hoir" in the first question, is taken in
many passages where it is connected with a verb; (3) and the

(3) Gen. xxxix, 9, n<i>j Twinou, How shall I, — how is it possible that I should do
this great wickedness ? — " How, then, can I," say our translators.' Exod. vi, 12,
" Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me ; how, then, shall Pha-
raoh hear me ?" — nuis uaaKovatrm y.ov ♦apaw ; — how is it likely, or possible that Pha-
raoh should hear me? See also verse 30. Judges xvi, 15, "And she said unto
him, n<Dj Xcytis, How canst thou say I love thee ?" 2 Sam. xi, 1 1, may also be con-
sidered in the LXX. 2 Kings x, 4, " But they were exceedingly afraid, and said,
Behold, two kings stood not before him : *a< ruf, how then shall we stand ?" — how
is it possible that we should stand ? Job ix, 2, nwj yap torai iucatos Pporos ; — For

196 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

second question only expresses the general negation or doubt more
particularly, by implying, that the objector could not conceive of
any kind of body being restored to man, which would not be an
evil and imperfection to him. For the very reason why some of
the Christians of that age denied, or strongly doubted, the resur-
rection of the body ; explaining it figuratively, and saying that it
was past already ; was, that they were influenced to this by the
notion of their philosophical schools, that the body was the prison
of the soul, and that the greatest deliverance men could experience
was to be eternally freed from their connexion with matter. Hence
the early philosophising sects in the Christian church, the Gnostics,
Marcionites, &c, denied the resurrection, on the same ground as
the philosophers, and thought it opposed to that perfection which
they hoped to enjoy in another world. Such persons appear to
have been in the church of Corinth as early as the time of St.
Paul, for that in this chapter he answers the objections, not of pa-
gans, but of professing Christians, appears from ver. 12, " How say
some among you, that there is no resurrection of the dead." The
objection, therefore, in the minds of these persons to the doctrine
of the resurrection, did not lie against the doctrine of the raising up
of the substance of the same body, so that, provided this notion
could be dispensed with, they were prepared to admit, that a new
material body might spring from its germ, as a plant from seed.

how shall mortal man be just with, or in the presence of, God ? — how is it possible ?
See what follows ; Psalm lxxii, (lxxiii,) 1 1 ; Tlo>s cyvia b Oco; ; " How doth God know ?"
— how is it possible that he should know ? See the connexion. Jer. viii, 8 ; n<i>$ cpcire,
" how do ye say," — how is it that ye say, — how can ye say, We are wise ? — Ibid.
xxix, 7, (xlvii, 7,) FIwj r1^»xaaci 5 "How can it," — the sword of the Lord, — "be
quiet ?" — Ezek. xxxiii, 10, " If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we
pine away in them, ttuj tyaoptQa ; how should we then live ?" Matt, vii, 4, " Or
how, Trait, wilt thou say to thy brother?" — where Rosenm. observes that iru? has
the force of negation.. Ibid, xii, 26, "If Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against
himself; jrw; ovv faQnaeTai, how shall then," — how can then, — "his kingdom stand?"
See also Luke xi, 18. — Matt, xxiii, 33, " Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, ™s
<pvy>ire, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" "qui fieri potest?" Rosenm.
Mark iv, 40, n«s mc e^rre tcutrw ; " How is it that ye have no faith ?" — Luke i, 34,
may also be adduced. John v, 47, " If ye believe not his writings, to>s — hiotcvbcti ;
how shall ye," — how can ye, — " believe my words ?" Romans iii, 6, " God forbid :
for then, irws xpivtt, how shall God judge the world ?" — how is it possible ? See the
preceding verse. Ibid, viii, 32, Titos— ^apio-erai ; " how shall he not," — how is it pos-
sible but that he should, — " with him also freely give us all things." Ibid, x, 14,
Hois — zmKoKtvovrai, "How then shall they," — how is it possible that they should, —
"call on him in whom they have not believed?" &c. 1 Tim. iii, 5, "For if a man
know not how to rule his own house, irut, how shall he take care of the church of
God?" Heb. ii, 3, "How shall we escape," — how is it possible that we should
escape, — "if we neglect so great salvation?" 1 John iii, 17, nu?, "How dwelleth the
love of God in him ?" — how can it dwell? Comp. ch. iv, 20, where Swarat is added..

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 197

They stumbled at the doctrine in every form, because it involved
the circumstance of the reunion of the spirit with matter, which
they thought an evil. When, therefore, the objector asks, " How
are the dead raised up]" (4) he is to be understood, not as inquir-
ing as to the process, but as to the possibility. The doubt may,
indeed, be taken as an implied negation of the possibility of the
resurrection with reference to God ; and then the apostle, by refer-
ring to the springing up of the grain of corn, when dissolved and
putrified, may be understood to show that the event was not incon-
ceivable, by referring to God's omnipotence, as shown in his daily
providence, which, a priori, would appear as marvellous and incre-
dible. But it is much more probable, that the impossibility implied
in this question refers, not to the power of God, which every
Christian in the church at Corinth must be supposed to have been
taught to conceive of as almighty, and, therefore, adequate to the
production of this effect ; but as relating to the contrariety which
was assumed to exist between the doctrine of the reunion of the
soul with the body, and those hopes of a higher condition in a
future life, which both reason and revelation taught them to form.
The second question, " With what body do they come 1" like the
former, is a question not of inquiry, but of denial, or, at least, of
strong doubt, importing, that no idea could be entertained by the
objector of any material body being made the residence of a disen-
thralled spirit, which could comport with those notions of deliver-
ance from the bondage of corruption by death, which the philoso-
phy of the age had taught, and which Christianity itself did not
discountenance. The questions, though different, come, therefore,
nearly to the same import, and this explains why the apostle chiefly
dwells upon the answer to the latter only, by which, in fact, he
replies to both. The grain cast into the earth even dies and is cor-
rupted, and that which is sown is not " the body which shall be,"
in form and quality, but " naked grain ;" yet into the plant, in its
perfect form, is the same matter transformed. So the flesh of
beasts, birds, fishes, and man, is the same matter, though exhibiting
different qualities. So also bodies celestial are of the same matter
as " bodies terrestrial ;" and the more splendid luminaries of the
heavens are, in substance, the same as those of inferior glory. It
is thus that the apostle reaches his conclusion, and shows, that the
doctrine of our reunion with the body implies in it no imperfection
— nothing contrary to the hopes of liberation " from the burthen of
this flesh ;" because of the high and glorified qualities which God

(4) The present indicative verb is here used, as it is generally throughout this
chapter, for the future.

25*

198 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

is able to give to matter ; of which the superior purity, splendour,
and energy of some material things in this world, in comparison of
others, is a visible demonstration. For after he has given these
instances, he adds, " So is the resurrection of the dead ; it is sown
in corruption, it is raised in incorruption ; it is sown in dishonour,
it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power ;
it is sown a natural (an animal) body ; it is raised a spiritual body,"
so called, " as being accommodated to a spirit, and far excelling
all that is required for the transaction of earthly and terrene
affairs ;"(5) and so intent is the apostle on dissipating all those
gross representations of the resurrection of the body which the
objectors had assumed as the ground of their opposition, and which
they had, probably, in their disputations, placed under the strongest
views, that he guards the true Christian doctrine, on this point, in
the most explicit manner, " Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and
blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God, neither doth corruption
inherit incorruption ;" and, therefore, let no man henceforward
affirm, or assume it in his argument, that we teach any such doc-
trine. This, also, he strengthens by showing, that as to the saints
who are alive at the second coming of Christ, they also shall be in
like manner "changed-," and that "tins corruptible," as to them
also, " shall put on incorruption."

Thus, in the argument, the apostle confines himself wholly to the
possibility of the resurrection of the body in a refined and glorified
state ; but omits all reference to the mode in which the thing will
be effected, as being out of the line of the objector's questions, and
in itself above human thought, and wholly miraculous. It is, how-
ever, clear, that when he speaks of the body, as the subject of this
wondrous " change," he speaks of it popularly, as the same body
in substance, whatever changes in its qualities or figure may be im-
pressed upon it. Great general changes it will experience, as from
corruption to incorruption, from mortality to immortality ; great
changes of a particular kind will also take place, as its being freed
from deformities and defects, and the accidental varieties produced
by climate, aliments, labour, and hereditary diseases. It is also
laid down by our Lord, that " in the resurrection they shall neither
marry nor be given in marriage, but be like to the angels of God ;"
and this also implies a certain change of structure ; and we may
gather from the declaration of the apostle, that though " the sto-
mach" is now adapted " to meats, and meats to the stomach, God
will destroy both it and them ;" that the animal appetite for food

(5) R.OSENMULLER.

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 199

will be removed, and the organ now adapted to that appetite have
no place in the renewed frame. But great as these changes are,
the human form will be retained in its perfection, after the model
of our Lord's " glorious body," and the substance of the matter of
which it is composed will not thereby be affected. That the same
body which was laid in the grave shall arise out of it, is the mani-
fest doctrine of the Scriptures.

The notion of an incorruptible germ, or that of an original and
unchangeable stamen, out of which a new and glorious body, at the
resurrection, is to spring, appears to have been borrowed from the
speculations of some of the Jewish Rabbins, who speak of some
such supposed part in the human frame, under the name luz, to
which they ascribe marvellous properties, and from which the body
was to arise. No allusion is, however, made to any such opinion
by the early fathers, in their defences of the doctrine of the resur-
rection from the dead. On the contrary, they argue in such a
way, as to prove the possibility of the reunion of the scattered parts
of the body ; Avhich sufficiently shows that the germ theory had
not been resorted to, by Christian divines at least, in order to
harmonize the doctrine of the resurrection with philosophy. So
Justin Martyr, in a fragment of his concerning the resurrection,
expressly answers the objection, that it is impossible for the flesh,
after a corruption and perfect dissolution of all its parts, should be
united together again, and contends, " that if the body be not
raised complete, with all its integral parts, it would argue a want
of power in God ;" and although some of the Jews adopted the
notion of the germinating or springing up of the body from some
one indestructible part, yet the most orthodox of their Rabbies con-
tended for the resurrection of the same body. So Maimonides
says, " Men, in the same manner as they before lived, with the
same body shall be restored to life by God, and sent into this life
with the same identity :" and " that nothing can properly be called
a resurrection of the dead, but the return of the very same soul,
into the very same body from which it was separated." (6)

This theory, under its various forms, and whether adopted by
Jews or Christians, was designed, doubtless, to render the doctrine
of a resurrection from the dead less difficult to conceive, and more
acceptable to philosophic minds ; but, Hive most other attempts of
the same kind to bring down the supernatural doctrines of revela-
tion to the level of our conceptions, it escapes none of the original
difficulties, and involves itself in others far more perplexing.

(6) Itambam apud Pocockium in Notis Miscellan. Port. Mos. p. 125.

200 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

For if by this hypothesis it was designed to remove the difficulty
of conceiving how the scattered parts of one body could be pre-
served from becoming integral parts of other bodies, it supposes
that the constant care of Providence is exerted to maintain the in-
corruptibility of those individual germs, or stamina, so as to prevent
their assimilation with each other. Now, if they have this by ori-
ginal quality, then the same quality may just as easily be supposed
to appertain to every particle which composes a human body ; so
that though it be used for food, it shall not be capable of assimila-
tion, in any circumstances, with another human body. But if these
germs, or stamina, have not this quality by their original nature,
they can only be prevented from assimilating Avith each other by
that operation of God which is present to all his works, and which
must always be directed to secure the execution of his own ultimate
designs. If this view be adopted, then, if the resort must at last be
to the superintendence of a Being of infinite power and wisdom,
there is no greater difficulty in supposing that his care to secure
this object shall extend to a million than to a thousand particles of
matter. This is, in fact, the true and rational answer to the objec-
tion that the same piece of matter may happen to be a part of two
or more bodies, as in the instances of men feeding upon animals
which have fed upon men, and of men feeding upon one another.
The question here is one which simply respects the frustrating a
linal purpose of the Almighty by an operation of nature. To sup-
pose that he cannot prevent this, is to deny his power ; to suppose
him inattentive to it, is to suppose him indifferent to his own
designs ; and to assume that he employs care to prevent it, is to
assume nothing greater, nothing in fact so great, as many instances
of control, which are always occurring ; as, for instance, the regu-
lation of the proportion of the sexes in human births, which cannot
be attributed to chance, but must either be referred to superin-
tendence, or to some original law.

Thus these theories afford no relief to the only real difficulty
involved in the doctrine, but leave the whole case still to be resolved
into the almighty power of God. But they involve themselves in
the fatal objection, that they are plainly in opposition to the doc-
trine of the Scriptures. For,

1. There is no resurrection of the body on this hypothesis, be-
cause the germ, or stamina, can in no good sense be called " the
body." If a finger, or even a limb, is not the body, much less can
these minuter parts be entitled to this appellation.

2. There is, on these theories, no resurrection at all. For if
the preserved part be a germ, and the analogy of germination be

SECOND.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 201

adopted ; then we have no longer a resurrection from death, but a
vegetation from a suspended principle of secret life. If the stamina
of Leibnitz be contended for, then the body, into which the soul
enters at the resurrection, with the exception of these minute
stamina, is pi'ovicled for it by the addition and aggregation of new
matter, and we have a creation, not a resurrection.

3. If bodies in either of these modes, are to be framed for the
soul, by the addition of a large mass of new matter, the resurrec-
tion is made substantially the same with the pagan notion of the
metempsychosis ; and if St. Paul, at Athens, preached, not " Jesus
and the resurrection," but Jesus and a transmigration into a new
body, it will be difficult to account for his hearers scoffing at a
doctrine which had received the sanction of several of their own
philosophic authorities.

Another objection to the resurrection of the body has been
drawn from the changes of its substance during life. The answer
to this is, that allowing a frequent and total change of the sub-
stance of the body (which, however, is but an hypothesis) to take
place, it affects not the doctrine of Scripture, which is, that the
body which is laid in the grave shall be raised up. But then, we
are told, that if our bodies have in fact undergone successive
changes during life, the bodies in which we have sinned or per-
formed rewardable actions, may not be, in many instances, the
same bodies as those which will be actually rewarded or punished.
We answer, that rewards and punishments have their relation to
the body, not so much as it is the subject but the instrument of
reward and punishment. It is the soul only which perceives pain
or pleasure, which suffers or enjoys, and is, therefore, the only
rewardable subject. Were we, therefore, to admit such corporeal
mutations as are assumed in this objection, they affect not the case
of our accountability. . The personal identity or sameness of a ra-
tional being, as Mr. Locke has observed, consists in self conscious-
ness : " By this every one is to himself what he calls self, without
considering whether that self be continued in the same or divers
substances. It was by the same self which reflects on an action
done many years ago, that the action was performed." If there
were indeed any weight in this objection, it would affect the pro-
ceedings of human criminal courts in all cases of offences commit-
ted at some distance of time ; but it contradicts the common sense,
because it contradicts the common consciousness and experience
of mankind.

END OF THE SECOND PART.

PART THIRD.

THE MORALS OF CHRISTIANITY.

CHAPTER I.
The Moral Law.

Of the Law of God, as the subject of a Divine and adequately
authenticated revelation, some observations were made in the first
part of this work. That such a law exists, so communicated to
mankind, and contained in the Holy Scriptures ; — that we are
under obligation to obey it as the declared will of our Creator and
Lord ; — that this obligation is grounded upon our natural relation
to him as creatures made by his power, and dependent upon his
bounty, are points which need not, therefore, be again adverted to,
nor is it necessary to dwell upon the circumstances and degrees of
its manifestation to men, under those former dispensations of the
true religion which preceded Christianity. We have exhibited the
leading doctrines of the Scriptures, as they are found in that per-
fected system of revealed religion, which we owe to our Saviour,
and to his apostles, who wrote 'under the inspiration of that Holy
Spirit whom he sent forth " to lead them into all truth ;" and we
shall now find in the discourses of our Lord, and in the apostolical
writings, a system of moral principles, virtues, and duties, equalling
in fulness and perfection that great body of doctrinal truth
which is contained in the New Testament ; and deriving from it
its vital influence and efficacy.

It is, however, to be noticed, that the Morals of the New Testa-
ment are not proposed to us in the form of a regular code. Even
in the books of Moses, which have the legislative form to a great
extent, all the principles and duties which constituted the full
character of " godliness," under that dispensation, are not made
the subjects of formal injunction by particular precepts. They
are partly infolded in general principles, or often take the form of
injunction in an apparently incidental manner, or arc matters of

204 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

obvious inference. A preceding code of traditionary moral law is
also all along supposed in the writings of Moses and the prophets,
as well as a consuetudinary ritual and a doctrinal theology ; both
transmitted from the patriarchs. This, too, is eminently the case
with Christianity. It supposes that all who believed in Christ
admitted the Divine authority of the Old Testament ; and it assumes
the perpetual authority of its morals, as well as the truth of its fun-
damental theology. The constant allusions in the New Testament
to the moral rules of the Jews and patriarchs, either expressly as
precepts, or as the data of argument, sufficiently guard us against
the notion, that what has not in so many words been re-enacted by
Christ and his apostles is of no authority among Christians. In a
great number of instances, however, the form is directly preceptive,
so as to have all the explicitness and force of a regular code of"
law ; and is, as much as a regular code could be, a declaration ol
the sovereign will of Christ, enforced by the sanctions of eternal
life and death.

This, however, is a point on which a few confirmatory observa-
tions may be usefully adduced.

No part of the preceding dispensation, designated generally by
the appellation of " the law," is repealed in the New Testament,
but what is obviously ceremonial, typical, and incapable of coexist-
ing with Christianity. Our Lord, in his discourse with the Samari-
tan woman, declares, that the hour of the abolition of the temple
worship was come ; the Apostle Paul, in the Epistle to the Hebrews,
teaches us that the Levitical services were but shadows, the sub-
stance and end of which is Christ ; and the ancient visible church,
as constituted upon the ground of natural descent from Abraham,
was abolished by the establishment of a spiritual body of believers
to take its place.

No precepts of a purely political nature, that is, which respect
the civil subjection of the Jews to their theocracy, are, therefore,
of any force to us as laws, although they may have, in many cases,
the greatest authority as principles. No ceremonial precepts can
be binding, since they were restrained to a period terminating with
the death and resurrection of Christ ; nor are even the patriarchal
rites of circumcision and the passover obligatory upon Christians,
since we have sufficient evidence, that they were of an adumbra-
tive character, and were laid aside by the first inspired teachers of
Christianity.

With the moral precepts which abound in the Old Testament
the case is very different, as sufficiently appears from the different
and even contrary manner in which they are always spoken of by

tfHIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 205

Christ and his apostles. When our Lord, in his sermon on the
mount, says, " Think not that I am come to destroy the law or the
prophets ; I am not come to destroy the law ; but to fulfil ;" that
is, to confirm or establish it : — the entire scope of his discourse
shows, that he is speaking exclusively of the moral precepts of the
law, eminently so called, and of the moral injunctions of the pro-
phets founded upon them, and to which he thus gives an equal
authority. And in so solemn a manner does he enforce this, that
he adds, doubtless as foreseeing that attempts would be made by
deceiving or deceived men professing his religion to lessen the
authority of the moral law, — " Whosoever, therefore, shall break
one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall
be called the least in the kingdom of heaven;" that is, as St,
Chrysostom interprets, "he shall be the farthest from attaining
heaven and happiness, which imports that he shall not attain
it at all."

In like manner St. Paul, after having strenuously maintained the
doctrine of justification by faith alone, anticipates an objection by
asking, " Do we then make void the law through faith?' and sub-
joins, " God forbid, yea we establish the law :" meaning by " the
law," as the context and his argument shows, the moral and not
the ceremonial law.

After such declarations it is worse than trifling for any to con^
tend, that, in order to establish the authority of the moral law of
the Jews over Christians, it ought to have been formally re-enacted.
To this, however, we may further reply, not only that many import-
ant moral principles and rules found in the Old Testament were
never formally enacted among the Jews, were traditional from an
earlier age, and received at different times the more indirect author
ity of inspired recognition ; but, to put the matter in a stronger
light, that all the leading moral precepts of the Jewish Scriptures
are, in point of fact, proposed in a manner which has the full force
of formal re-enactment, as the laws of the Christian church.- This
argument, from the want of formal re-enactment, has therefore no
Aveight. The summary of the law and the prophets, which is to
love God with all our heart, and to serve him with all our strength,
and to love our neighbour as ourselves, is unquestionably enjoined,
and even re-enacted by the Christian Lawgiver. When our Lord
is explicitly asked by " one who came unto him and said, Good
Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life 1"
The answer given shows that the moral law contained in the Deca-
logue is so in force under the Christian dispensation, that obedience
ro it is necessary to final salvation : — " If thou wilt enter into life,

Vol. III. 2(5

206 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

keep the commandments." And that nothing ceremonial is intended
by this term is manifest from what follows. " He saith unto him?
Which 1 Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder. Thou shalt not
commit adultery. Thou shalt not steal," &c, Matt, xix, 17-19.
Here, also, we have all the force of a formal re-enactment of the
Decalogue, a part of it heing evidently put for the whole. Nor
were it difficult to produce passages from the discourses of Christ
and the writings of the apostles, which enjoin all the precepts of
this law taken separately, by their authority, as indispensable parts
of Christian duty, and that, too, under their original sanctions of
life and death : so that the two circumstances which form the true
character of a law in its highest sense, divine authority and
penal sanctions, are found as truly in the New Testament as in
the Old. It will not, for instance, be contended, that the New
Testament does not enjoin the acknoAvledgment and worship of
one God alone ; nor that it does not prohibit idolatry ; nor that it
does not level its maledictions against false and profane swearing ;
nor that the Apostle Paul does not use the very words of the fifth
commandment preceptively when he says, Eph. vi, 2, " Honour
thy father and mother, which is the first commandment with pro-
mise ;" nor that murder, adultery, theft, false witness, and covet-
ousness, are not all prohibited under pain of exclusion from the
kingdom of God. Thus, then, we have the whole Decalogue
brought into the Christian code of morals by a distinct injunction
of its separate precepts, and by their recognition as of permanent
and unchangeable obligation : the fourth commandment, respect-
ing the Sabbath only, being so far excepted, that its injunction i<
not so expressly marked. This, however, is no exception in fact :
for besides that its original place in the two tables sufficiently dis-
tinguishes it from all positive, ceremonial, and typical precepts,
and gives it a moral character, in respect of its ends, which are,
first, mercy to servants and cattle, and, second, the worship of
Almighty God, undisturbed by worldly interruptions and cares, it
is necessarily included in that " law" which our Lord declares he
came not to destroy, or abrogate ; in that " law" which St. Paul
declares to be " established by faith," and among those " com-
mandments" which our Lord declares must be " kept," if any one
would " enter into life." To this, also, the practice of the apostles
is to be added, who did not cease themselves from keeping one day
in seven holy, nor teach others so to do ; but gave to " the Lord's
day" that eminence and sanctity in the Christian church which
the seventh day had in the Jewish, by consecrating it to holy uses :
an alteration not affecting the precept at all, except in an lines-

i'l-URD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 20*<

sential circumstance, (if indeed in that,) and in which wc may
suppose them to act under Divine suggestion.

Thus, then, we have the obligation of the whole Decalogue as
fully established in the New Testament as in the Old as if it had
been formally re-enacted ; and that no formal re-enactment of it
took place, is itself a presumptive proof that it was never regarded
by the Lawgiver as temporary, which the formality of republication
might have supposed.

It is important to remark, however, that, although the moral laws
of the Mosaic dispensation pass into the Christian code, they stand
there in other and higher circumstances ; so that the New Testa-
ment is a more perfect dispensation of the knowledge of the moral
will of God than the Old. In particular,

1. They are more expressly extended to the heart, as by our
Lord, in his sermon on the mount ; who teaches us that the thought
and inward purpose of any offence is a violation of the law pro-
hibiting its external and visible commission.

2. The principles on which they are founded are carried out in
the New Testament into a greater variety of duties, which, by
embracing more perfectly the social and civil relations of life, are
of a more universal character.

3. There is a much more enlarged injunction of positive and
particular virtues, especially those which constitute the Christian
temper.

4. By all overt acts being inseparably connected with corres-
ponding principles in the heart, in order to constitute acceptable
obedience, which principles suppose the regeneration of the soul
by the Holy Ghost. This moral renovation is, therefore, held out
as necessary to our salvation, and promised as a part of the grace
of our redemption by Christ.

5. By being connected with promises of Divine assistance, which
is peculiar to a law connected with evangelical provisions.

6. By their having a living illustration in the perfect and practi-
cal example of Christ.

7. By the higher sanctions derived from the clearer revelation
of a future state, and the more explicit promises of eternal life, and
threatenings of eternal punishment.

It follows from this, that we have in the Gospel the most com-
plete and perfect revelation of moral law ever given to men ; and a
more exact manifestation of the brightness, perfection, and glory
of that law, under which angels and our progenitors in Paradise
were placed, and which it is at once the delight and interest of the
most perfect and happy beings to obey.

208 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

It has, however, fared with morals as with doctrines, that they
have been often, and by a strange perversity, studied, without any
reference to the authority of the Scriptures. As we have had sys-
tems of natural religion drawn out of the materials furnished
by the Scriptures, and then placed to the sole account of human
reason ; so we have also various systems of morals drawn, as far
as the authors thought fit, from the same source, and put forth
under the title of moral philosophy, implying too often, or, at
least, sanctioning the inference, that the unassisted powers of man
are equally adequate to the discovery of doctrine and duty ; or, at
best, that Christianity but perfects what uninspired men are able not
only to commence, but to carry onward to a considerable approach
to perfection. This observation may be made as to both — -that
whatever is found correct in doctrine, and pure in morals in an-
cient writers or systems, may be traced to indirect revelation ; and
that so far as mere reason has applied itself to discovery in either,
it has generally gone astray. The modern systems of natural
religion and ethics are superior to the ancient, not because the
reason of their framers is superior, but because they have had the
advantage of a light from Christianity, which they have not been
candid enough generally to acknowledge. For those who have
written on such subjects with a view to lower the value of the
Holy Scriptures, the remarks in the first part of this work must
suffice ; but of that class of moral philosophers, who hold the au-
thority of the Sacred Books, and yet sedulously omit all reference
to them, it may be inquired what they propose, by disjoining mo-
rals from Christianity, and considering them as a separate science 'i
Authority they cannot gain, for no obligation to duty can be so
high as the command of God ; nor can that authority be applied
in so direct a manner, as by a revelation of his will : and as for the
perfection of their system, since they discover no duties not already
enjoined in the Scriptures, or grounded upon some general prin-
ciples they contain, they can find no apology, from the additions
they make to our moral knowledge, to put Christianity, on all
such subjects, wholly out of sight.

All attempts to teach morals, independent of Christianity, even
by those who receive it as a Divine revelation, must, notwithstand-
ing the great names which have sanctioned the practice, be con-
sidered as of mischievous tendency, although the design may have
been laudable, and the labour, in some subordinate respects, not
without utility :

1 . Because they silently convey the impression, that human rea-
son, without assistance, is sufficient to discover the full duty of man
towards God and towards his fellow creatures,

JIIIRD.j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 209

2. Because they imply a deficiency in the moral code of our
yeligion, which does not exist ; the fact being that, although these
systems borrow much from Christianity, they do not take in the
whole of its moral principles, and, therefore, so far as they are
accepted, as substitutes, displace what is perfect for what is
imperfect.

3. Because they turn the attention from what is fact, the re-
vealed law of God, with its appropriate sanctions, and place the
obligation to obedience either on fitness, beauty, general interest,
or the natural authority of truth, which are all matters of opinion ;
or, if they ultimately refer it to the will of God, yet they infer -thai
will through various reasonings and speculations, which in them-
selves are still matters of opinion, and as to which men will feel
themselves to be in some degree free.

4. The duties they enjoin are either merely outward in the act.
and so they disconnect them from internal principles and habits,
without which they are not acceptable to God, and but the shadows
of real virtue, however beneficial they may be to men ; or else
they assume that human nature is able to engraft those principles
and habits upon itself, and to practise them without abatement and
interruption ; a notion which is contradicted by those very Scrip-
tures they hold to be of Divine authority.

5. Their separation of the doctrines oi religion from its morals,
leads to an entirely different process of promoting morality among
men to that which the infinite wisdom and goodness of God has
established in the Gospel. They lay down the rule of conduct,
and recommend it from its excellence per se, or its influence upon
individuals and upon society, or perhaps because it is manifested to
be the will of the Supreme Being, indicated from the constitution
of human nature, and the relations of men. But Christianity
rigidly connects its doctrines with its morals. Its doctrine of man's
moral weakness is made use of to lead him to distrust his own
sufficiency ; its doctrine of the atonement shows at once the infi-
nite evil of sin, and encourages men to seek deliverance from its
power. Its doctrine of regeneration by the influence of the Holy
Spirit, implies the entire destruction of the love of evil, and the
direction of the whole affection of the soul to universal virtue. Its
doctrine of prayer opens to man a fellowship with God, invigorat-
ing to every virtue. The example of Christ, the imitation of which
is made obligatory upon us, is in itself a moral system in action,
and in principle ; and the revelation of a future judgment brings
ihe whole weight of the control of future rewards and punishments
to bear upon the motives and actions of men, and is the source ol

26*

MO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

that fear of offending God which is the constant guard of virtue,
when human motives would in a multitude of cases avail nothing.

It may indeed be asked, whether the teaching of morals must
tfien in all cases be kept in connexion with religion 1 and whether
(he philosophy of virtues and of vices, with the lower motives by
which they are urged upon men, may not be usefully investigated 1
We answer, that if the end proposed by this is not altogether spe-
culative, but something practical ; if the case of an immoral world
is taken up by moralists with reference to its cure, or even to its
emendation in any effectual degree, the whole is then resolved into
this, simple question, — whether a weaker instrument shall be pre-
ferred to that which is powerful and effective 1 Certain it is that
die great end of Christianity, so far as its influence upon society
goes, is to moralize mankind ; but its infinitely wise Author ha?
established and authorized but one process for the correction of the
practical evils of the world, and that is, the teaching and enforce-
ment of the whole truth as it stands in his own Revelations ;
and to this only has he promised his special blessing. A distinct
class of ethical Teachers, imitating heathen philosophers in the
principles and modes of moral tuition, is, in a Christian country,
a violent anomaly ; and implies an absurd return to the twilight oi
knowledge after the sun itself has arisen upon the world.

Within proper guards, and in strict connexion with the whoh
Christian system, what is called Moral Philosophy is not, however.
to be undervalued ; and from many of the writers above alluded to
much useful instruction may be collected, which, though of but little
efficacy in itself, may be invigorated by uniting it with the vital
and energetic doctrines of religion, and may thus become directive
to the conduct of the serious Christian. Understanding then by
Moral Philosophy, not that pride of science which borrows the dis-
coveries of the Scriptures and then exhibits itself as their rival, or
affects to supply their deficiences ; but as a modest scrutiny into
the reasons on which the moral precepts of revelation may be
grounded, and a wise and honest application of its moral principles
*o particular cases, it is a branch of science which may be usefully
cultivated, in connexion with Christianity.

With respect to the reasons on which moral precepts rest, we
may make a remark similar to that offered in a former part of this
work, on the doctrines of revelation. Some of those doctrines rest
wholly on the authority of the Revealer ; others are accompanied
with a manifest rational evidence ; and a third class may partially
disclose their rationale to the patient and pious inquirer. Yet the
authority of each class as a subject of faith is the same ; it rests

rillRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 211

upon the character of God and his relations to us ; and that doc-
trine is equally binding which is enjoined on our faith without other
rational evidence than that which proves it to be a part of a reve-
lation from heaven, as that which exercises, and delights our
rational faculties, by a disclosure of the internal evidence of its
truth. When God has permitted us to " turn aside" to see some
" great sight" of manifested wisdom, we are to obey the invitation ;
but still we are always to remember that the authority of a reveal-
ed truth stands on infinitely higher ground than our perception oi
its reasonableness.

So also as to the moral precepts of the Bible, the rational evi-
dence is afforded in different degrees, and it is both allowable and
laudable in us to investigate and collect it ; but still with this cau-
tion, that the authority of such injunctions is not to be regulated bj
our perception of their reasons, although the reasons, when appa-
rent, may be piously applied to commend the authority. The dis-
coveries we may make of fitness or any other quality in a precept
cannot be the highest reason of our obedience ; but it may be a
reason for obeying with accelerated alacrity. The obligation of the
Habbath would be the same were no obvious reasons of mercy and
piety connected with it ; but the influence of the precept upon ouv
interests and that of the community commends the precept to oiu
affections as well as to our sense of duty.

With respect to the application of general precepts, that practical
wisdom which is the result of large and comprehensive observation
iias an important office. The precepts of a universal Revelation
must necessarily be, for the most part, general, because if rules had
been given for each case in detail, then truly, as St. John observes.
" the world could not have contained the books written." TIk
application of these general principles to that variety of cases whicb
arises in human affairs, is the work of the Christian Preacher, and
ihe Christian Moralist. Where there is honesty of mind, ordinarily
there can be no difficulty in this ; and in cases which involve some
difficulty, when the interpretation of the law is made, as it always
ought, to favour the rule ; and when, in doubtful cases, the safer
course is adopted, such is the explicit character of the general prin-
ciples of the Holy Scriptures, that no one can go astray. Thc
Moral Philosophy which treats of exceptions to general rules, is?
always to be watched with jealousy ; and ought to be shunned whefi
it presumes to form rides out of supposed exceptions. This is-
affecting to be wiser than the Lawgiver; and such philosophy
assumes an authority in the control of human conduct to which it has
no title ; and steps in between individuals and their consciences- in

212 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

cases where Almighty God himself has not chosen to relieve them ;
and where they are specially left, as all sometimes are, to " Him
with whom they have to do," without the intervention of any third
party. Systems of Casuistry and Cases of Conscience have hap-
pily gone into general disuse. That they have done more harm
npon the whole than good, and denied more consciences than they
have relieved, cannot be doubted by any one who has largely ex-
amined them. They have passed away just in proportion as the
Scriptures themselves have been circulated through society, and
as that preaching has been most prevalent which enforces the doc-
trine of Supreme Love to God and our Neighbour, as the sum of
t he Law and of the Gospel. They most abounded in the Romish
Church, as best befitting its system of darkness and delusion; (7)
and though works of this kind are found among Protestants in a
better form, they have gradually and happily fallen into neglect.

A few words may here be offered on what has been termed, the
ground of Moral Obligation.

Some writers have placed this in "the eternal and necessary
fitness of things ;" which leaves the matter open to the varying
conclusions which different individuals may draw, as to this eternal
and necessary fitness ; and still further, leaves that very natural
question quite unanswered, — Why is any one obliged to act ac-
cording to the fitness of things 1

Others have referred to a supposed original perception of what
is right and wrong ; a kind of fixed and permanent and unalterable
moral sense, by which the qualities of actions are at once deter-
mined ; and from the supposed universal existence of this percep-
tion, they have argued the obligation to act accordingly. This
scheme, which seems to confound that in human nature to which
an appeal may be made when the understanding is enlightened by
veal truth, with a discriminating and directive principle acting
independently of instruction, is also unsatisfactory. For the moral
sense is, in fact, found under the control of ignorance and error ;
nor does it possess a sensitiveness in all cases in proportion to the
truth received into the understanding. The worst crimes have
often been committed with a conviction of their being right, as in
the case of religious persecutions ; and absence of the habit of
attending to the quality of our actions often renders the abstract
truth laid up in the understanding useless, as to its influence upon
the conscience. But if all that is said of this moral sense were
true, still it would not establish the principle of obligation. That

(7) M. le Feove, preceptor of Louis XIII, not unaptly called Casuistry, " The
art of quibbling with God."

THIRD, j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 218

supposes superior authority ; and should we allow the moral sense
to act uniformly, still how is the obligation to perform what it
approves to be demonstrated, unless some higher consideration be
added to the case 1

More modern moralists have taken the tendency of any course
of action to produce the greatest good upon the whole as the source
of moral obligation ; and with this they often connect the will oi
God, of which they consider this general tendency to be the mani-
festation. It were better, surely, to refer at once to the will oi
God, as revealed by himself without incumbering the subject with
the circuitous and, at best, doubtful process of first considering
what is good upon the whole, and then inferring that this must
needs be the will of a wise and benevolent Being. The objection,
too, holds in this case, that this theory leaves it still a mere matter
of opinion, in which an interested party is to be the judge, whether
an action be upon the whole good ; and gives a rule which would
be with difficulty applied to some cases, and is scarcely at all
applicable to many others which may be supposed.

The only satisfactory answer which the question as to the source
of moral obligation, can receive, is, that it is found in the will or
God. For since the question respects the duty of a created being
with reference to his Creator, nothing can be more conclusive than
that the Creator has an absolute right to the obedience of his crea-
tures ; and that the creature is in duty obliged to obey Him from
whom it not only has received being, but by whom that being is
constantly sustained. It has indeed been said, that even if it be
admitted, that I am obliged to obey the will of God, the question
is still open, " Why am I obliged to obey his will I" and that this
brings us round to the former answer ; because he can only will
what is upon the whole best for his creatures. But this is con-
founding that which may be, and doubtless is, a rule to God in
the commands which he issues, with that which really obliges the
creature. Now, that which in truth obliges the creature is not the
nature of the commands issued by God ; but the relation in which
the creature itself stands to God. If a creature can have no
existence, nor any power or faculty independently of God, it can
have no right to employ its faculties independently of him ; and if
it have no right to employ its faculties in an independent manner,
the right to rule its conduct must rest with the Creator alone ; and
from this results the obligation of the creature to obey.

Such is the principle assumed in the Scriptures, where the crea-
tive and rectoral relations of God are inseparably united, and the
obligation of obedience is made to follow upon the fact of our exist-

214 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

cnce ; and if the will of God, as the source of obligation, be so
obvious a rule, the only remaining question is, whether we shall
receive that will as it is expressly revealed by himself; or, wilfully
forgetting that such a revelation has been made, we shall proceed
to infer it by various processes of induction 1 The answer to this
might have been safely left to the common sense of mankind, had
not the vanity of philosophizing so often interposed to perplex so
plain a point.

We must not here confound the will of God as the source of
moral obligation, with the notion that right and wrong have no
existence but as they are so constituted by the will of God. They
must have their foundation in the reality of things. What moral
rectitude is, and why it obliges, are quite distinct questions. It is
?o the latter only that the preceding observations apply. As to the
former, the following remarks, from a recent intelligent publication,
are very satisfactory : —

" Virtue, as it regards man, is the conformity or harmony of his
affections and actions with the various relations in Avhich he has
been placed, — of which conformity the perfect intellect of God,
guided in its exercise by his infinitely holy nature, is the only infal-
lible judge.

" We sustain various relations to God himself. He is our Cre-
ator,— our Preserver, — our Benefactor, — our Governor. ' He is
the Framer of our bodies, and the Father of our spirits.' He sus-
tains us ' by the word of his power ;' for, as we are necessarily
dependent beings, our continued existence is a kind of prolonged
creation. We owe all that we possess to Him ; and our future
blessings must flow from his kindness. Now there are obviously
certain affections and actions which harmonize or correspond with
these relations. To love and obey God manifestly befit our relation
to him, as that great Being from whom our existence as well as all
our comforts flow. He who showers his blessings upon us ought
to possess our affections ; he who formed us has a right to our
obedience. It is not stated merely, let it be observed, that it is
impossible to contemplate our relation to God without perceiving
that we are morally bound to love and obey him ; (though that is
a truth of great importance ;) for I do not consent to the propriety
of the representation, that virtue depends either upon our percep-
tions or our feelings. There is a real harmony between the relations
in which we stand to God, and the feelings and conduct to which
reference has been made ; and therefore the human mind has been
Ormed capable of perceiving and feeling it.

•' We sustain various relations to each other. God has formed 'of

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 216

one blood all the families of the earth.' Mutual love and brotherly
kindness, the fruit of love, are required by this relation, — they har-
monize or correspond with it. We are children ; we are loved,
and guarded, and supported, and tended with unwearied assiduity
by our parents. Filial affection and filial obedience are demanded
by this relation ; no other state of mind, no other conduct, will
harmonize with it. We are, perhaps, on the other hand, parents.
Instrumentally at least we have imparted existence to our chil-
dren ; they depend on us for protection, support, &c ; and to
render that support, is required by the relation we bear to them.
It is, however, needless to specify the various relations in which
we stand to each other. With reference to all I again say, that
they necessarily involve obligations to certain states of mind, and
certain modes of conduct, as harmonizing with the relations ; and
that rectitude is the conformity of the character and conduct of an
individual with the relations in which he stands to the beings by
whom he is surrounded.

" It is by no means certain to me, that this harmony between
the actions and the relations of a moral agent, is not what we are
to understand by that ' conformity to the fitness of things,' in which
some writers have made the essence of virtue to consist. Agains?
this doctrine, it has been objected, that it is indefinite, if not absurd :
because, as it is alleged, it represents an action as right and fit.
without stating what it is fit for, — an absurdity as great, says the
objector, as it* would be to say that 'the angles at the base of an
isosceles triangle are equal without adding to one another, or to
any other angle.' Dr. Brown also, in arguing against this doctrine,
says, * There must be a principle of moral regard, independent oi
reason, or reason may in vain see a thousand fitnesses, and a thou-
sand truths ; and would be warmed with the same lively emotions
of indignation, against an inaccurate timepiece or an error in
arithmetic calculation, as against the wretch who robbed, by every
fraud that could elude the law, those who had already little of
which they could be deprived, that he might riot a little more luxu-
riously, while the helpless, whom he had plundered, were starving
around him.' Now, why may we not say, in answer to the former
objector, that the conformity of an action with the relations of the
agent, is the fitness for which Clarke contends? And why may
not we reply to Dr. Brown, that, — allowing, as we do, the neces-
sity of that susceptibility of moral emotion for which he contends,—
the emotion of approbation which arises on the contemplation of a
virtuous action, is not the virtue of the action, nor the perception
of its accordance with the relations of the agent, but the accorp-

216 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

ance itself ] * That a being,' says Dewar, 'endowed with cer-
tain powers, is bound to love and obey the Creator and Preserver
of all, is truth, whether I perceive it or no ; and we cannot perceive
it possible that it can ever be reversed.'

" All the relations to which reference has been made, are, in one
sense, arbitrary. Our existence as creatures is to be ascribed to
the mere good pleasure of God. The relations which bind society
together, the conjugal, parental, filial relation, depend entirely upon
the sovereign will of Him who gave us our being ; but the conduct
to which these relations oblige us, is by no means arbitrary. Hav-
ing determined to constitute the relations, He could not but enjoin
upon us the conduct which his word prescribes. He was under no
obligation to create us at all ; but, having given us existence, he
could not fail to command us to love and obey him. There is a
harmony between these relations, and these duties, — a harmony
which is not only perceived by us, — for to state that merely, would
seem to make our perceptions the rule, if not the foundation, of
duty, — but which is perceived by the perfect intellect of God him-
self. And since the relations we sustain were constituted by God.
since he is the Judge of the affections and conduct which harmonize
with these relations, — that which appears right to Him, being right
on that account, — rectitude may be regarded as conformity to the moral
nature of God, the ultimate standard of virtue ."(8)

To the revealed will of God we may now turn for information
on the interesting subject of morals, and we shall find that the
ethics of Christianity have a glory and perfection which philosophy
has never heightened, and which its only true office is to display,
and to keep before the attention of mankind.

CHAPTER II.

The Duties we owe to God.

The duties we owe to God are in Scripture summed up in the
word " Godliness," the foundation of which, and of duties of every
other kind, is that entire

Submission to God, which springs from a due sense of that
relation in which we stand to him, as creatures.

. We have just seen that the right of an absolute sovereignty over

us must, in the reason of the case, exist exclusively in Him that

made us ; and it is the perception and recognition of this, as a

■practical habit of the mind, which renders outward acts of obe-

(S) Payne's Ehrnents of Menial and Moral Science.

hlllRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 21?

dience sincere and religious. The will of God is the only rule to
man, in every thing on which that will has declared itself; and, as
it lays its injunctions upon the heart as well as the life, the rule is
equally in force when it directs our opinions, our motives, and
affections, as when it enjoins or prohibits external acts. We are
his because he made us ; and to this is added the confirmation of
this right by our redemption : " Ye are not your own, but bought
with a price ; wherefore glorify God in your bodies and spirts
which are his." These ideas of absolute right to command on the
part of God, and of absolute obligation to universal obedience on
the part of man, are united in the profession of St. Paul, "Whose
[ am and whom I serve ;" and form the grand fundamental principle
of " godliness" both in the Old and New Testament ; the will of
God being laid down in each, both as the highest reason and the
most powerful motive to obedience. The application of this prin-
ciple so established by the Scriptures will show how greatly superior
is the ground on which Christianity places moral virtue to that of
any other system. For,

1. The will of God, which is the rule of duty, is authenticated by
the whole of that stupendous evidence which proves the Scriptures
to be of divine original.

2. That will at once defines and enforces every branch of inward
and outward purity, rectitude, and benevolence.

3. It annuls by its authority every other rule of conduct con-
trary to itself, whether it arise from custom, or from the example,
persuasion, or opinions of others.

4. It is a rule which admits not of being lowered to the weak
and fallen state of human nature ; but, connecting itself with a
gracious dispensation of supernatural help, it directs the morally
imbecile to that remedy, and holds every one guilty of the violation
of all that he is by nature and habit unable to perform, if that
remedy be neglected.

5. It accommodates not itself to the interests or even safety of
men ; but requires that interest, honour, liberty, and life, should be
surrendered, rather than it should sustain any violation.

6. It admits no exceptions in obedience ; but requires it whole
and entire ; so that outward virtue cannot be taken in the place of
that which has its seat in the heart ; and it allows no acts to be
really virtuous, but those which spring from a willing and sub
missive mind, and are done upon the vital principle of a distinct
recognition of our rightful subjection to God.

Love to God. To serve and obey God on the conviction that
it is right to serve and obey him, is in Christianity joined with that
Vol. III. 27

218 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAR

love to God which gives life and animation to service, and renders
it the means of exalting our pleasures, at the same time that it
accords with our convictions. The supreme love of God is the
chief, therefore, of what have been called our theopathetic affections.
It is the sum and the end of law ; and though lost by us in Adam, is
restored to Us by Christ, When it regards God absolutely, and in
himself, as a Being of infinite and harmonious perfections and moral
beauties, it is that movement of the soul towards him which is pro-
duced by admiration, approval, and delight. When it regards him
relatively, it fixes upon the ceaseless emanations of his goodness to
us in the continuance of the existence which he at first bestowed :
the circumstances which render that existence felicitous ; and.
above all, upon that "great love wherewith he loved us," mani-
fested in the gift of his Son for our redemption, and in saving us by
his grace ; or, in the forcible language of St. Paul, upon " the
exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness to us through Christ
Jesus." Under all these views an unbounded gratitude overflows
the heart which is influenced by this spiritual affection. But the
love of God is more than a sentiment of gratitude. It rejoices in
his perfections and glories, and devoutly contemplates them as the
highest and most interesting subjects of thought ; it keeps the idea
of this supremely-beloved object constantly present to the mind ; it
turns to it with adoring ardour from the business and distractions of
life ; it connects it with every scene of majesty and beauty in nature,
and with every event of general and particular providence ; it brings
the soul into fellowship with God, real and sensible, because vital ;
it moulds the other affections into conformity with what God him-
self wills or prohibits, loves or hates ; it produces an unbounded
desire to please him, and to be accepted of him in all things ; it is
jealous of his honour, unwearied in his service, quick to prompt to
every sacrifice in the cause of his truth and his Church ; and it
renders all such sacrifices, even when carried to the extent of suffer-
ing and death, unreluctant and cheerful. It chooses God as the
chief good of the soul, the enjoyment of which assures its perfect
and eternal interest and happiness. " Whom have I in heaven but
thee 1 and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee," is
the language of every heart, when its love of God is true in prin-
ciple and supreme in degree.

If, then, the will of God is the perfect rule of morals ; and if
supreme and perfect love to God must produce a prompt, an
unwearied, a delightful subjection to his will, or rather, an entire
and most free choice of it as the rule of all our principles, affec-
tions, and actions ; the importance of this affection in securing that

l'HIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 219

obedience to the law of God in which true morality consists, is
manifest; and we clearly perceive the reason why an inspired
writer has affirmed, that " love is the fulfilling of the law." The
necessity of keeping this subject before us under those views in
which it is placed in the Christian system, and of not surrendering
it to mere philosophy, is, however, an important consideration.
With the philosopher the love of God may be the mere approval
of the intellect ; or a sentiment which results from the contempla-
tion of infinite perfection, manifesting itself in acts of power and
goodness. In the Scriptures it is much more than either, and is
produced and maintained by a different process. We are there
taught that " the carnal mind is enmity to God ;" and is not oi
course capable of loving God. Yet this carnal mind may consist
with deep attainments in philosophy, and with strongly impassioned
poetic sentiment. The mere approval of the understanding ; and
the susceptibility of being impressed with feelings of admiration,
awe, and even pleasure, when the character of God is manifested
in his works, as both may be found in the carnal mind which is
enmity to God, are not therefore the love of God. They are prin-
ciples which enter into that love, since it cannot exist without
them ; but they may exist without this affection itself, and be found
in a vicious and unchanged nature. The love of God is a fruit oi
the Holy Spirit ; that is, it is implanted by him only in the souls
which he has regenerated ; and, as that which excites its exercise
is chiefly, and in the first place, a sense of the benefits bestowed
by the grace of God in our redemption, and a well-grounded per-
suasion of our personal interest in those benefits, it necessarily pre-
supposes our personal reconciliation to God through faith in the
atonement of Christ, and that attestation of it to the heart by the
Spirit of Adoption of which we have before spoken. We here see,
then, another proof of the necessary connexion of Christian morals
with Christian doctrine, and how imperfect and deceptive every
system must be which separates them. Love is essential to true
obedience ; for when the Apostle declares love to be " the fulfil-
ling of the law," he declares, in effect, that the law cannot be
fulfilled without love ; and that every action which has not this for
its principle, however virtuous in its show, fails of accomplishing
the precepts which are obligatory upon us. But this love to God
cannot be felt so long as we are sensible of his wrath, and are in
dread of his judgments. These feelings are incompatible with each
other, and we must be assured of his reconciliation to us, before we
are capable of loving him. Thus the very existence of the love ol
Hod implies the doctrines of the atonement, repentance, faith, and

220 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. { PAR 1

the gift of the Spirit of Adoption to believers ; and unless it be
taught in this connexion, and through this process of experience,
it will be exhibited only as a bright and beauteous object to which
man has no access ; or a fictitious and imitative sentimentalism
will be substituted for it, to the delusion of the souls of men,

A third leading duty is,

Trust in God. All creatures are dependent upon God for
being and for well being. Inanimate and irrational beings hold
their existence and the benefits which may accompany it, independ
ently of any conditions to be performed on their part. Rational
creatures are placed under another rule, and their felicity rests-
only upon their obedience. Whether, as to those, intelligences who
have never sinned, specific exercises of trust are required as a dut\
comprehended in their general obedience, we know not. But as to
men, the whole Scripture shows, that faith or trust is a duty of the
first class, and that they " stand only by faith." Whether the
reason of this may be the importance to themselves of being con-
tinually impressed with their dependence upon God, so that the}
may fly to him at all times, and escape the disappointments of sell
confidence, and creature reliances ; or that as all good actually
comes from God, he ought to be recognised as its source, so that
all creatures may glorify him ; or whether other and more secret
reasons may also be included ; the fact, that this duty is solemnl v
enjoined as an essential part of true religion, cannot be doubted.
Nor can the connexion of this habit of devoutly confiding in God
with our peace of mind be overlooked. WTe have so many proofs
of the weakness both of Our intellectual and physical powers, ami
see ourselves so liable to the influence of combinations of circum-
stances which we cannot control, and of accidents which we cannot
resist, that, unless we had assurances of being guided, upheld, and
defended by a Supreme Power, we might become, and that nor
unreasonably, a prey to constant apprehensions, and the sport ol
the most saddening anticipations of the imagination. Our sole
remedy from these would, in fact, only be found in insensibility
and thoughtlessness ; for to a reflecting and awakened mind,
nothing can shut out uneasy fears, but faith in God. In all ages
therefore this has been the resource of devout men : " God is om
refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble ; therefore will
we not fear," &c, Psalm xlvi, 1. " Our fathers trusted in thee, and
thou didst deliver them ; they cried unto thee, and were delivered ;
they trusted in thee, and were not confounded." And from oui
Lord's sermon on the mount it is clear, that one end of his teaching
■vas to deliver men from the piercing anxieties which the perplexi-

THIRD. J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 221

ties of this lite are apt to produce, by encouraging them to confide
in the care and bounty of their " Heavenly Father."

Our trust in God is enjoined in as many respects as he has been
pleased to give us assurances of help, and promises of favour, in
his own word. Beyond that, trust would be presumption, as not
having authority ; and to the full extent in which his gracious pur-
poses towards us are manifested, it becomes a duty. And here too
the same connexion of this duty with the leading doctrines of our
redemption, which we have remarked under the last particular,
also displays itself. If morals be taught independent of religion,
cither affiance in God must be excluded from the list of duties
towards God, or otherwise it will be inculcated without effect. A
man who is conscious of unremitted sins, and who must therefore
regard the administration of the Ruler of the world, as to him puni-
tive and vengeful, can find no ground on which to rest his trust.
All that he can do is to hope that his relations to this Being may in
future become more favourable ; but, for the present, his fears
must prevent the exercise of his faith. What course then lies before
him, but in the first instance to seek the restoration of the favour
of his offended God, in that* method which he has prescribed,
namely, by repentance towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus
Christ 1 Till a scriptural assurance is obtained of that change in
his relations to God which is effected by the free and gracious act
of forgiveness, all the reasons of general trust in the care, benedic-
tion, and guidance oftiod, are vain as to him, because they are
not applicable to his case. But when friendship is restored between
the parties, faith, however unlimited, has the highest reason. It is
then "a sure confidence in the mercy of God through Christ," as
that mercy manifests itself in all the promises which God has been
pleased to make to his children, and in all those condescending-
relations with which he has been pleased to invest himself, that
under such manifestations he might win and secure our reliance.
It is then the confidence not merely of creatures in a beneficent
Creator, or of subjects in a gracious Sovereign, but of children in
a Parent. It respects the supply of every want, temporal and
eternal ; the wise and gracious ordering of our concerns ; the
warding off, or the mitigation of calamities and afflictions ; our
preservation from all that can upon the whole be injurious to us ;
our guidance through life ; our hope in death ; and our future
felicity in another world. This trust is a duty because it is a sub-
ject of command ; and also because, after such demonstrations of
kindness, distrust would imply a dishonourable denial of the love
?nd faithfulness of God, and often also a criminal dependence upon

25*

•}22 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

the creature. It is a habit essential to piety. On that condition wt
" obtain promises," by making them the subjects of prayer ; by its
influence anxieties destructive to that calm contemplative habit ot'
which true religion is both the offspring and the nurse, are expelled
from the heart ; a spiritual character is thus given to man, who
walks as seeing " Him who is invisible ;" and a noble and cheerful
courage is infused into the soul, which elevates it above aH cow-
ardly shrinking from difficulty, suffering, pain, and death, ann
affords a practical exemplification of the exhortation of one who
had tried the value of this grace in a great variety of exigencies :
"Wait upon the Lord, be of good courage, and he shall strengthen
thine heart ; wait, I say, upon the Lord."

The Fear of God is associated with Love, and Trust, in every
part of Holy Scripture ; and is enjoined upon us as another of our
leading duties. .

This, however, is not a servile passion ; for then it could not
consist with Love to God, and with delight and affiance in him.
It is true that " the fear which hath torment ;" that which is
accompanied with painful apprehensions of his displeasure arising
from a just conviction of our personal liability to it, is enjoined
upon the careless and the impious. To produce this, the word of
God fulminates in threatenings, and his judgments march through
the earth, exhibiting terrible examples of vengeance against one
nation or individual for the admonition of others. But that fear of
God which arises from apprehension of personal punishment, is not
designed to be the habit of the mind ; nor is it included in the
frequent phrase, "the fear of the Lord," when that is used to express
the whole of practical religion, or its leading principles. In thai
case its nature is, in part, expressed by the term " Reverence,"
which is a due and humbling sense of the divine Majesty, produce*:
and maintained in a mind regenerated by the Holy Spirit, by
devout meditations upon the perfections of his infinite nature, his
eternity and omniscience, his. constant presence with us in every
place, the depths of his counsels, the might of his power, the
holiness, truth, and justice of his moral character ; and on the mani-
festations of these glories in the works of that mighty visible nature
with which we are surrounded, in the government of angels, devils,
and men, and in the revelations of his inspired word.

With this deeply reverential awe of God, is, however, constantly
joined in Scripture, a persuasion of our conditional liability to his
displeasure. For since all who have obtained his mercy and
favour by Christ, receive those blessings through an atonement,
which itself demonstrates that we are under a righteous adminis

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 223

< ration, and that neither is the Law of God repealed, nor docs hi>
Justice sleep ; and further, since the saving benefits of that atone-
ment are conditional, and we ourselves have the power to turn
aside the benefit of its interposition from us, or to forfeit it when
once received, in whole or in part, it is clear that whilst there is a
full provision for our deliverance from the " spirit of bondage unto
fear •" there is sufficient reason why we ought to be so impressed
with our spiritual dangers, as to produce in us that cautionary fear
of the holiness, justice and power of God, which shall deter us
from offending, and lead us often to view, with a restraining and
salutary dread, those consequences of unfaithfulness and disobe-
dience to which, at least whilst we remain on earth, we are liable.
Powerful, therefore, as are the reasons by which the scriptural
revelation of the mercy and benevolence of God enforces a firm
affiance in him, it exhorts us not to be "high-minded," but to
" fear ;" to " fear" lest we " come short" of the " promise" of
entering " into his rest ;" to be in " the fear of the Lord all the
day long ;" and to pass the whole time of our " sojourning" here
" in fear."

This scriptural view of the Fear of God, as combining both
reverence of the Divine Majesty, and a suitable apprehension of
our conditional liability to his displeasure, is of large practical
influence.

It restrains our faith from degenerating into presumption ; our
love into familiarity ; our joy into carelessness. It nurtures humility,
watchfulness, and the spirit of prayer. It induces a reverent habil
of thinking and speaking of God, and gives solemnity to the exer-
cises of devotion. It presents sin to us under its true aspect, as
dangerous, as well as corrupting to the soul ; as darkening our
prospects in a future life, as well as injurious to our peace in the
pres'ent ; and it gives strength and efficacy to that most important
practical moral principle, the constant reference of our inward
habits of thought and feeling, and our outward actions, to the
approbation of Goel

Upon these internal principles that moral habit and state, which
is often expressed by the term holiness, rests. Separate from
these principles, it can only consist in visible acts, imperfect in
themselves, because not vital, and, however commended by men,
abominable to God who trieth the heart. But when such acts
proceed from these sources, they are proportioned to the strength
and purity of the principle which originates them, except as in
some cases they may be influenced and. deteriorated by an unin-
"<"1 or weak judgment. An entire submission to God; a

IM THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

", perfect love" to him ; firm affiance in his covenant engagements ;
and that fear which abases the spirit before God, and departs even
from " the appearance of evil," when joined with a right under-
standing of the word of God, render " the man of God perfect,'"
and " thoroughly furnish him to every good work."

Besides these inward principles and affections, there are, how-
ever, several other habits and acts, a public performance of which.
as well as their more secret exercises, have been termed by Divines
our external duties towards God ; the term " external" being,
however, so used as not to exclude those exercises of the heart from
which they must all spring if acceptable to God. The first is,

Prayer, which is a solemn addressing of our minds to God, a?
the Fountain of being and happiness, the Ruler of the world, and
the Father of the family of man. It includes in it the acknow-
ledgment of the divine perfections and sovereignty ; thankfulness
for the mercies we have received ; penitential confession of our
sins ; and an earnest entreaty of blessings, both for ourselves and
others. When vocal it is an external act, but supposes the corres-
pondence of the will and affection ; yet it may be .purely mental,
all the acts of which it is composed being often conceived in the
mind, when not clothed in words.

That the practice of prayer is enjoined upon us in Scripture, is
sufficiently proved by a few quotations : " Ask, and it shall be
given you ; seek, and ye shall find ; knock, and it shall be opened,"
Matt, vii, 7. " Watch ye therefore and pray always," Luke xxi, 36.
•• Be careful for nothing ; but, in every thing by prayer and suppli-
cation with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto
God," Phil, iv, 6. " Pray without ceasing," 1 Thess. v, 17. That
prayer necessarily includes earnestness, and that perseverance
which is inspired by strong desire, is evident from the Jews being
so severely reproved for " drawing near to God with their lips,
whilst their hearts were far from him :" — from the general rule oi
our Lord laid down in his conversation with the woman of Sychar :
" God is a Spirit ; and they that worship him, must worship him
in spirit and in truth" John iv, 24, — and, from Romans xii, 12,
" Continuing instant in prayer." Here the term, arpotfxaprepouvrss,
is very energetic, and denotes, as Chrysostom observes, " fervent,
persevering, and earnest prayer." Our Lord also delivered a
parable to teach us that we ought " to pray and not faint ;" and
we have examples of the success of reiterating our petitions, when
for some time they appear disregarded. One of these is afforded in
the case of the woman of Canaan, a first and a second time
repulsed by our Lord; and another occurs in 2 Cor. xii, 8, 0,

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 225

" For this I besought the Lord thrice that it might depart from me ;
and he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee," &c. This
passage also affords an instance of praying distinctly for particular
blessings, a practice which accords also with the direction in Phil,
iv, 6, to make our " requests known unto God," which includes
not only our desires for good generally ; but also those particular
requests which are suggested by special circumstances. Direc-
tions to pray for national and public blessings occur in Psalm cxxii,
(i, " Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, they shall prosper that love
thee :" in Zech. x, 1, "Ask ye of the Lord rain in the time of thr
latter rain ; so the Lord shall make bright clouds," (or lightnings,)
" and give them showers of rain, to every one grass in the field :"
in 1 Tim. ii, 1-3, " I exhort therefore that, first of all, supplica-
tions, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all
men ; for kings, and for all that are in authority, that we may lead
a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty ; for this is
good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour," &c. More
particular intercession for others is also authorized and enjoined :
" Peter was therefore kept in prison ; but prayer was made withouf
ceasing of the Church unto God for him," Acts xii, 5. " Now 1
beseech you, brethren, for the Lord Jesus Christ's sake, and for
the love of the Spirit, that ye strive together with me in your
prayers to God for me ; that I may be delivered from them that
do not believe in Judea," &c, Rom. xv, 30. " Confess your faults
one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed,'"
James v, 1G.

It follows, therefore, from these scriptural passages, that prayer
is a duty ; that it is made a condition of our receiving good at thf
hand of God ; that every case of personal pressure, or need, mav
be made the subject of prayer ; that we are to intercede for all
Immediately connected with us, for the Church, for our country,
and for all mankind ; that both temporal and spiritual blessings
may be the subject of our supplications ; and that these great and
solemn exercises are to be accompanied with grateful thanksgivings
to God as the author of all blessings already bestowed, and the
benevolent object of our hope, as to future interpositions and
supplies. Prayer, in its particular Christian view, is briefly and
well defined in the Westminster Catechism, — " Prayer is the offer-
ing of our desires to God for things agreeable to his will, in the
name of Christ, with confession of our sins, and a thankful acknow-
ledgment of his mercies."

The reason on which this great and efficacious duty rests, has
been a subjret of some debate. On this point, however, we have

226 ' THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

nothing explicitly stated in the Scriptures. From them we learn
only, that God has appointed it ; that he enjoins it to be offered in
faith, that is, faith in Christ, whose atonement is the meritorious
and procuring cause of all the blessings to which our desires can
be directed ; and that prayer so offered is an indispensable condi-
tion of our obtaining the blessings for which we ask. As a matter
of inference, however, we may discover some glimpses of the reason
in the Divine Mind on which its appointment rests. That reason
has sometimes been said to be the moral preparation and state oi
fitness produced in the soul for the reception of the divine mercies
which the act, and, more especially, the habit of prayer, must
induce. Against this stands the strong and, in a scriptural view,
the fatal objection, that an efficiency is thus ascribed to the mere
act of a creature to produce those great, and in many respects,
radical changes in the character of man, which we are taught,
by inspired authority, to refer to the direct influences of the Holy
Spirit. What is it that fits man for forgiveness, but simply repent-
ance 1 yet that is expressly said to be the " gift3 of Christ, and
supposes strong operations of the illuminating and convincing Spirit
of Truth, the Lord and Giver of spiritual life ; and if the mere acts
and habit of prayer had efficiency enough to produce a scriptural
repentance, then every formalist attending Avith ordinary seriousness
to his devotions, must in consequence, become a penitent. Again,
if we pray for spiritual blessings aright, that is, with an earnestness
of desire which arises from a due apprehension of their importance,
and a preference of them to all earthly good, who does not see thai
this implies such a deliverance from the earthly and carnal disposi-
tion which characterizes our degenerate nature, that an agency far
above our own, however we may employ it, must be supposed ; or
else, if our own prayers could be efficient up to this point, we might,
by the continual application of this instrument, complete our regen-
eration, independent of that grace of God, which, after all, this
theory brings in. It may indeed be said that the grace of God
operates by' our prayers to produce in us a state of moral fitness to
receive the blessings we ask. But this gives up the point contended
for, the moral efficiency of prayer ; and refers the efficiency to
another agent working by our prayers as an instrument. Still,
however, it may be affirmed, that the Scriptures nowhere represent
prayer as an instrument for improving our moral state, though in
the hands of divine grace, in any other way than as the means ot
bringing into the soul new supplies of spiritual life and strength.
It is therefore more properly to be considered as a condition of our
"btaining that grace by which such effects arc wrought, than as

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 227

the instrument by which it effects them. In fact, all genuine acts
of prayer depend upon a grace previously bestowed, and from
which alone the disposition and the power to pray proceed. So it
was said of Saul of Tarsus, " Behold he prayeth '" He prayed in
fact then for the first time ; but that was in consequence of the
illumination of his mind as to his spiritual danger effected by the
miracle on the way to Damascus, and the grace of God which
accompanied the miracle. Nor does the miraculous character of
the means by which conviction was produced in his mind, affect
the relevancy of this to ordinary cases. By whatever means God
may be pleased to fasten the conviction of our spiritual danger
upon our minds, and to awaken us out of the long sleep of sin, that
conviction must precede real prayer, and comes from the influence
of his grace, rendering the means of conviction effectual. Thus it
is not the prayer which produces the conviction, but the conviction
which gives birth to the prayer ; and if we pursue the matter into
its subsequent stages, we shall come to the same result. We pray
for what we feel we want ; that is, for something not in our pos-
session ; we obtain this either by impartation from God, to whom
we look up as the only Being able to bestow the good for which
we ask him ; or else we obtain it, according to this theory, by some
moral efficiency being given to the exercise of praying to work it
in us. Now, the latter hypothesis is in many cases manifestly
absurd. We ask for pardon of sin, for instance ; but that is an act
of God done for us, quite distinct from any moral change which
prayer may be said to produce in us, whatever efficiency we may
ascribe to it ; for no such change in us can be pardon, since that
must proceed from the party offended. We ask for increase oi
spiritual strength ; and prayer is the expression of that want. But
if it supply this want by its own moral efficiency, it must supply it
in proportion to its intensity and earnestness ; which intensity and
earnestness can only be called forth by the degree in which the
want is felt, so that the case supposed is contradictory and absurd,
as it makes the sense of want to be in proportion to the supply
which ought to abate or remove it. And if it be urged, that prayer
at least produces in us a fitness for the supply of spiritual strength,
because it is excited by a sense of our wants, the answer is, that
the fitness contended for consists in that sense of want itself, which
must be produced in us by the previous agency of grace, or we
should never pray for supplies. There is, in fact, nothing in prayer
iimply which appears to have any adaptation, as an instrument, to
effect a moral change in man, although it should be supposed to be-
made use of by the influence of the Holy Spirit. The word of

V2S THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

God is properly an instrument, because it contains the doctrine
which that Spirit explains and applies, and the motives to faith and
obedience which he enforces upon the conscience and affections ;
and though prayer brings these truths and motives before us, prayer
cannot properly be said to be an instrument of our regeneration,
because that which is thus brought by prayer to bear upon our
case is the word of God itself introduced into our prayers, which
derive their sole influence in that respect from that circumstance.
Prayer simply is the application of an insufficient to a sufficient
Being for the good which the former cannot otherwise obtain, and
which the latter only can supply ; and as that supply is dependent
upon prayer, and in the nature of the thing consequent, prayer can
in no good sense be said to be the instrument of supplying our
wants, or fitting us for their supply, except relatively, as a mere
condition appointed by the donor.

If we must inquire into the reason of the appointment of prayer,
and it can scarcely be considered as a purely arbitrary institution,
that reason seems to be, the preservation in the minds of men of a
solemn and impressive sense of God's agency in the world, and the
dependence of all creatures upon him. Perfectly pure and glorified
beings, no longer in a state of probation, and therefore exposed to
no temptations, may not need this institution ; but men in their
fallen state are constantly prone to forget God ; to rest in the
agency of second causes ; and to build upon a sufficiency in them-
selves. This is at once a denial to God of the glory which he
rightly claims, and a destructive delusion to creatures, who, in
forsaking God as the object of their constant affiance, trust but in
broken reeds, and attempt to drink from " broken cisterns which
can hold no water." It is then equally in mercy to us, as in respect
to his own honour and acknowledgment, that the Divine Being has
suspendcd so many of his blessings, and those of the highest neces-
sity to us, upon the exercise of prayer ; an act which acknowledges
his uncontrollable agency, and the dependence of all creatures
upon him ; our insufficiency, and his fulness ; and lays the founda-
tion of that habit of gratitude and thanksgiving which is at once so
meliorating to our own feelings, and so conducive to a cheerful
obedience to the will of God. And if this reason for the injunction
of prayer is nowhere in Scripture stated in so many words, it is a.
principle uniformly supposed as the foundation of the whole scheme
of religion which they have revealed.

To this duty objections have been sometimes offered, at which
it may be well at least to glance.

One has been grounded upon a supposed predestination of all

IHIRD.] 1HL0L0GICAL INSTITUTES. 229

things which conic to pass ; and the argument is, that as this esta-
blished predetermination of all tilings cannot be altered, prayer,
which supposes that God will depart from it, is vain and useless.
The answer which a pious Predestinarian would give to this objec-
tion is, That the argument drawn from the predestination of God
lies with the same force against every other human effort, as against
prayer ; and that as God's predetermination to give food to man
does not render the cultivation of the earth useless and imperti-
nent, so neither does the predestination of things shut out the
iiecessity and efficacy of prayer. It would also be urged, that God
has ordained the means as well as the end ; and although he is an
unchangeable Being, it is a part of the unchangeable system which
he has established, that prayer shall be heard and accepted.

Those who have not these views of predestination will answer
the objection differently ; for if the premises of such a predestina-
tion as is assumed by the objection, and conceded in the answer,
be allowed, the answer is unsatisfactory. The Scriptures represent
God, for instance, as purposing to inflict a judgment upon an indi-
vidual or a nation, which purpose is often changed by prayer. In
this case either God's purpose must be denied, and then his threat-
enings are reduced to words without meaning ; or the purpose
must be allowed, in which case either prayer breaks in upon
predestination, if understood absolutely, or it is vain and useless
To the objection so drawn out it is clear that no answer is given
by saying that the means as well as the end are predestinated, since
prayer in such cases is not a means to the end, but an instrument
of thwarting it ; or is a means to one end in opposition to another
end, which, if equally predestinated with the same absoluteness, is
a contradiction.

The true answer is, that although God has absolutely predeter-
mined some things, there are others, which respect his government,
of free and accountable agents, which he has but conditionally
predetermined. The true immutability of God, we have already
showed, (9) consists, not in his adherence to his purposes, but in
his never changing the principles of his administration ; and he may
therefore in perfect accordance with his preordination of things,
and the immutability of his nature, purpose to do, under certain
conditions dependent upon the free agency of man, what he will
not do under others ; and for this reason, that an immutable adhe-
rence to the principles of a wise, just, and gracious government,
requires it. Prayer is in Scripture made one of these conditions ;

(0) Part II, chap. 28.

Vol. III. 28

330 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and if God has established it as one of the principles of his moral
government to accept prayer, in every case in which he has given
us authority to ask, he has not, we may be assured, entangled hi?
actual government of the world with the bonds of such an eternal
predestination of particular events, as either to reduce prayer to a
mere form of words, or not to be able himself, consistently with his
decrees, to answer it, whenever it is encouraged by his express
engagements.

A second objection is, that as God is infinitely wise and good;
his wisdom and justice will lead him to bestow " whatever is fit for
us without praying ; and if any thing be not fit for us, we cannot
obtain it by praying." To this Dr. Paley very well replies, (1) "that
it may be agreeable to perfect wisdom to grant that to our prayers,
which it would not have been agreeable to the same wisdom to have
given us without praying for." This, independent of the question
of the authority of the Scriptures which explicitly enjoin prayer, i«
the best answer which can be given to the objection ; and it is no
small confirmation of it, that it is obvious to every reflecting man.
that for God to withhold favours till asked for, " tends," as the same
writer observes, " to encourage devotion among his rational crea-
tures, and to keep up and circulate a knowledge and sense of their
dependency upon Him."

But it is urged, "God will always do what is best from the mora)
perfection of his nature, whether we pray or not." This objection,
however, supposes that there is but one mode of acting for the best,
and that the Divine will is necessarily determined to that mode
only ; " both which positions," says Paley, " presume a knowledge
of universal nature, much beyond what we are capable of attaining.5"
It is, indeed, a very unsatisfactory mode of speaking, to say, God
will always do what is best ; since we can conceive him capable in
all cases of doing what is still better for the creature, and also that
the creature is capable of receiving more and more from his infinite
fulness for ever. All that can be rationally meant by such a phrase
is, that, in the circumstances of the case, God will always do what is
most consistent with his own wisdom, holiness, and goodness ; but
fhen the disposition to pray, and the act of praying, add a new
circumstance to every case, and often bring many other new cir-
cumstances along with them. It supposes humility, contrition, and
trust, on the part of the creature ; and an acknowledgment of the
power and compassion of God, and of the merit of the atonement
of Christ : all which are manifestly new positions, so to speak. <>'

(l) Moral Philosophy.

IIHRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 231

the circumstances of the creature, which, upon the very principle
of the objection, rationally understood, must be taken into con-
sideration.

But if the efficacy of prayer as to ourselves be granted, its
influence upon the case of others is said to be more difficult to
conceive. This may be allowed without at all affecting the duty.
Those who bow to the authority of the Scriptures, will see, that
the duty of praying for ourselves and for others rests upon the
same Divine appointment ; and to those who ask for the reason of
such intercession in behalf of others, it is sufficient to reply, that
the efficacy of prayer being established in one case, there is the
•eame reason to conclude that our prayers may benefit others, as
any other effort we may use. It can only be by Divine appoint-
ment that one creature is made dependent upon another for an)
advantage, since it was doubtless in the power of the Creator to
have rendered each independent of all but himsolf. Whatever
reason, therefore, might lead him to connect and interweave the
interests of one man with the benevolence of another, will be the
leading reason for that kind of mutual dependence which is implied
in the benefit of mutual prayer. Were it only that a previous sym-
pathy, charity, and good will, are implied in the duty, and must,
indeed, be cultivated in order to it, and be strengthened by it, the
wisdom and benevolence of the institution would, it is presumed,
be apparent to every well constituted mind. That all prayer for
i >thers must proceed upon a less perfect knowledge of them than
we have of ourselves, is certain : that all our petitions must be,
oven in our own mind, more conditional than those which respect
ourselves, though many of these must be subjected to the principles
of a general administration, which we but partially apprehend ; and
that all spiritual influences upon others, when they are the subject
of our prayers, will be understood by us as liable to the control of
their free agency, must also be conceded ; and, therefore, when
others are concerned, our prayers may often be partially or wholly
fruitless. He who believes the Scriptures will, however, be encou-
raged by the declaration, that " the effectual fervent prayer of a
righteous man," for his fellow creatures, " availeth much ;" and he
who demands something beyond mere authoritative declaration, as
he cannot deny that prayer is one of those instruments by which
another may be benefited, must acknowledge that, like the giving
of counsel, it may be of great utility in some cases, although it
should fail in others ; and that as no man can tell how much good
counsel may influence another, or in many cases say whether it
has ultimately failed or not, so it is with prayer. It is a part o!

)332 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARi

the Divine plan, as revealed in his Word, to give many blessings
to man independent of his own prayers, leaving- the subsequent
improvement of them to himself. They are given in honour of thr
intercession of Christ, man's great " Advocate ;" and they are
given, subordinately, in acceptance of the prayers of Christ's
Church, and of righteous individuals. And when many, or few.
devout individuals become thus the instruments of good to commu-
nities, or to whole nations, there is no greater mystery in this than
in the obvious fact, that the happiness or misery of large masses of
mankind is often greatly affected by the wisdom or the errors, thf:
skill or the incompetence, the good or the bad conduct, of a few
persons, and often of one.

The general duty of prayer is usually distributed into four
branches, — Ejaculatory, Private, Social, and Public; each of which
is of such importance as to require a separate consideration.

Ejaculatory Prayer is the term given to those secret and
frequent aspirations of the heart to God for general or particular
blessings, fey which a just sense of our habitual dependence upon
Q*kij £*id of our wants and dangers, may be expressed, at those
intervals when the thoughts can detach themselves from the affairs
of life, though but for a moment, whilst we are still employed in
them. It includes, too, all those short and occasional effusions oi
gratitude, and silent ascriptions of praise, which the remembrance
of God's mercies will excite in a devotional spirit, under the same
circumstances. Both, however, presuppose what Divines have
called, " the spirit of prayer," which springs from a sense of our
dependence upon God, and is a breathing of the desires after
intercourse of thought and affection with Him, accompanied with a
reverential and encouraging sense of his constant presence with us,
The cultivation of this spirit is clearly enjoined upon us as a duty
by the Apostle Paul, who exhorts us to "pray without ceasing,
and in every thing give thanks ;" and also to " set our affections
upon things above ;" — exhortations which imply a holy and devo-
tional frame and temper of mind, and not merely acts of prayer
performed at intervals. The high and unspeakable advantages
of this habit, are, that it induces a watchful and guarded mind ;
prevents religion from deteriorating into form without life ; unites
the soul to God, its light and strength ; induces continual supplies
of Divine influence ; and opposes an effectual barrier, by the
grace thus acquired, against the encroachments of worldly anxie-
ties, and the force of temptations. The existence of this spirit ot
prayer and thanksgiving is one of the grand distinctions between
nominal and real Christians ; and by it the measure of vital and

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 238

effective Christianity enjoyed by any individual may ordinarily be
determined.

Private Prayer. This, as a duty, rests upon the examples of
'.rood men in Scripture ; upon several passages of an injunctive
rharacter in the Old Testament; and, in the New, upon the
express words of our Lord, which, whilst they suppose the prac-
tice of individual prayer to have been generally acknowledged as
obligatory, enjoin that it should be strictly private. " But thou,
■when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, (2) and when thou hast
">b.ut the door, pray to thy Father which is in secret, and thy Father
which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." In this respect,
also, Christ has himself placed us under the obligation of his own
example ; the Evangelists having been inspired to put on record
several instances of his retirement into absolute privacy, that he
might " pray." The reason for this institution of private devotion
appears to have been to incite us to a friendly and confiding inter-
course with God in all those particular cases which most concern
our feelings and our interests ; and it is a most affecting instance
of the condescension and sympathy of God, that we are thus allowed
to use a freedom with him, in " pouring out our hearts," which we
';ould not do with our best and dearest friends. It is also most
worthy of our notice, that when this duty is enjoined upon us by
our Lord, he presents the Divine Being before us under a relation
most of all adapted to inspire that unlimited confidence with which
he would have us to approach him : — " Pray to thy Father which
is in secret." Thus is the dread of his Omniscience, indicated by
Iiis " seeing in secret," and of those other overwhelming attributes
which Omnipresence and Omniscience cannot fail to suggest,
mitigated, or only employed to inspire greater freedom, and a
stronger affiance.

Family Prayer. Paley states the peculiar use of family prayer
1 o consist in its influence upon servants and children, whose atten-
lion may be more easily commanded by this than by public worship.
" The example and authority o( a master and father act, also, in
ihis way with greater force ; and the ardour of devotion is better
.supported, and the sympathy more easily propagated through a
small assembly, connected by the affections of domestic society,
than in the presence of a mixed congregation." There is, doubt-
less, weight in these remarks ; but they are defective, both in nor
stating the obligation of this important duty, and in not fully
exhibiting its advantages.

(2) Eif to rapauv. Kuinoel observes, that the word "answers to the Hebrew
--r"S'. an upper room set apart for retirement and prayer, anion? the Orientals."

28*

234 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [l?ART

The absence of an express precept for family worship has, it is
true, been urged against its obligation even by some who have still
considered it as a prudential and useful ordinance. But the strict
obligation of so important a duty is not to be conceded for a moment,
since it so plainly arises out of the very constitution of a family ;
and is confirmed by the earliest examples of the Church of God.
On the first of these points the following observations, from a very
able and interesting work, (3) are of great weight : —

" The disposition of some men, professing Christianity, to ask
peremptorily for a particular precept in all cases of incumbent mora:
duty, is one which every Christian would do well to examine ; not
only that he may never be troubled with it himself, but that he may
be at no loss in answering such a man, if he is called to converse
with him. The particular duty to which he refers, — say, for ex-
ample, family worship, — is comparatively of small account. His
question itself is indicative not merely of great ignorance ; it is
symptomatic of the want of religious principle. When a man says
ihat he can only be bound to such a duty, a moral duty, by a posi-
tive and papticular precept, I am satisfied that he could not perform
it, in obedience to any precept whatever ; nor could he even now,
though he were to try. The truth is, that this man has no dispo-
sition towards such worship, and he rather requires to be informed
of the grounds of all such obligation.

"The duty of family devotion, therefore, let it be remembered,
ihough it had been minutely enjoined as to both substance and
season, would not, after all, have been founded only on such
injunctions. I want the reader thoroughly to understand the
character of a Christian, the constitution of the family ; and out
of this character and that constitution, he will find certain duties
to arise necessarily ; that is, they are essential to the continuance
and well-being of himself as a Christian parent, and of the consti-
tution over which he is set. In this case there can be no question
as to their obligation, and for a precept there is no necessity. The
Almighty, in his word, has not only said nothing in vain, but nothing
except what is necessary. Now, as to family worship, for a parti-
cular precept I have no wish ; no, not even for the sake of others,
because I am persuaded that the Christian, in his sober senses, will
naturally obey, and no other can.

" To apply, however, this request for a precise precept to some
other branches of family duty: What would be thought of me, were
I to demand an express precept to enforce my obligation to feed.

(3) Anderson On the Domestic Constitution.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 23s

my children, and another to oblige me to clothe them 1 one to
express my obligation to teach them the use of letters, and anothei
to secure my training them to lawful or creditable professions or
employments? 'AH this,' very properly you might reply, " is absurd
in the highest degree ; your obligation rests on much higher ground ;
nay, doth not nature itself teach you in this, and much more than
this 1? ' Very true,' I reply ; ' and is renewed nature, then, not to
teach me far more still ? To what other nature are such words as
these addressed ? — Whatsover things are true, whatsoever things art
honest, ichatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, what-
soever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if then
be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.''

" Independently, however, of all this evidence with any rational
Christian parent, I may confirm and establish his mind on much
higher ground than even that which these pointed examples afford.
To such a parent I might say, 'Without hesitation, you will admit
that your obligations to your family are to be measured now, and
on the day of final account, by your capacity, — as a man by your
natural, as a Christian by your spiritual, capacity 1 and, however
you may feel conscious of falling short daily, that you are under
obligation to honour God to the utmost limit of this capacity? You
will also allow that, standing where you do, you are not now, like a
solitary orphan without relatives, to be regarded only as a single indi-
vidual. God himself, your Creator, your Saviour, and your Judge,
regards you as the head of a family; and, therefore, in possession oi
a sacred trust ; you have the care of souls ? Now if you really do
measure obligation by capacity, then you will also at once allow,
that you must do what you can, that He may, from your family,
have as much honour as possible.

" ' Without hesitation you will also allow that God daily preserve?
you ? And does he not also preserve your family ? But if he pre-
serves, he has a right of property in each and all under your roof
Shall He not, therefore, have from you acknowledgment of this ?
If daily he preserves, shall he not be daily acknowledged? And
if acknowledged at all, how ought he to be so, if not upon your
knees ? And how can they know this, if they do not hear it ?

" ' Without hesitation you will also allow that you are a social
as well as a reasonable being? And often have you, therefore,
! 'It how much the soothing influence of their sweet society has
-astained you under your cares and trials, and grief itself. O !
surely then, as a social being, you owe to them social worslnp ; nor
-houkl you ever forget, that, in ancient days, there teas social v,oi
'hip here before it could be any where else.'"

2&6 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

The same excellent writer has not, in his subsequent argument,
given to the last remark in the above quotation all the force which
it demands ; for that social worship existed before worship more
properly called public, that is, worship in indiscriminate assemblies,
is the point which when followed out, most fully establishes the
obligation. A great part, at least, of the worship of the patriarchal
times was domestic. The worship of God was observed in the
(amilies of Abraham, Jacob, and Job ; nay, the highest species
of worship, the offering of sacrifices, which it could not have
been without Divine appointment. It arose, therefore, out of the
original constitution of a family, that the father and natural head
was invested with a sacred and religious character, and that with
reference to his family ; and if this has never been revoked by
subsequent prohibition ; but on the contrary, if its continuance has
been subsequently recognised ; then the family priesthood con-
tinues in force, and stands on the same ground as several other
religious obligations, which have passed from one dispensation oi
vevealed religion to another, without express re-enactment.

Let us then inquire, whether any such revocation of this office.
as originally vested in the father of a family, took place after the
appointment of a particular order of Priests under the Mosaic
economy. It is true that national sacrifices were offered by the
Aaronical Priests, and perhaps some of those consuetudinan
sacrifices, which, in the patriarchal ages, were offered by the head.*
of families, and had reference specially to the general dispensation
of religion under which every family was equally placed ; yet the
3 tassover was a solemn religious act, the domestic nature of which
is plainly marked, and it was to be an ordinance for ever, and
therefore was not taken out of the hands of the heads of families
by the institution of the Aaronical Priesthood, although the cere-
mony comprehended several direct acts of worship. The solemn
instruction of the family is also in the Law of Moses enjoined upon
ihe father, " Thou shalt teach them diligently to thy children ;w
and he was also directed to teach them the import of the different
festivals, and other commemorative institutions. Thus the original
relation of the father to his family, which existed in the patriarchal
age, is seen still in existence, though changed in some of its circum-
stances by the law. He is still the religious teacher ; still he offers
prayers for them to God ; and still " blesses," — an act which
imports both prayer, praise, and official benediction. So the family
of Jesse had a yearly sacrifice, 1 Sam. xx, 6. So David, although
not a Priest, returned to " bless his household ;" and our Lord
filled the office of the master of a family, as appears from his eating

VHIRU.J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, 237

Hie passover with his disciples, and presiding as such over the
whole rite : And although the passage, " Pour out thy fury upon
the Heathen, and upon the families which call not upon thy name,'*
Jer. x, 25, docs not perhaps decidedly refer to acts of domestic
worship, yet it is probable that the phraseology was influenced by
i hat practice among the pious Jews themselves ; — neither did the
Heathen nationally, nor in their families, acknowledge God. Nor
is it a trifling confirmation of the ancient practice of a formal and
visible domestic religion, that in Paganism, which corrupted the
forms of the true religion, and especially those cf the patriarchal
dispensation, we see the signs of a family as well as a public
idolatry, as exhibited in their private " chambers of imagery," their
household deities ; and the religious ceremonies which it was
incumbent upon the head of every house to perform.

The sacred character and office of the father and master of a
household, passed from Judaism into Christianity ; for here, also,
we find nothing which revokes and repeals it. A duty so well
understood both among Jews and even Heathens, as that the head
of the house ought to influence its religious character, needed no
■special injunction. The father or master who believed was bap-
tized, and all his " house ;" the first religious societies were chiefly
domestic ; and the antiquity of domestic religious services among*
Christians, leaves it unquestionable, that, when the number of
Christians increased so as to require a separate assembly in some
common room or church, the domestic worship was not superseded.
But for the division of verses in the fourth chapter of the Epistle
to the Colossians, it would scarcely have been suspected that the
first and second verses contained two distinct and unconnected
precepts, — " Masters, give unto your servants that which is just
and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven ; con-
tinue in prayer, and watch in the same with thanksgiving;" a
collocation of persons and duties which seems to intimate that the
sense of the Apostle was, that the " servant," the slave, should
partake of the benefit of those continual prayers and daily thanks-
givings which it is enjoined upon the master to offer.

As the obligation to this branch of devotion is passed over by
Paley, so the advantages of family worship are but very imperfectly
stated by him. The offering of prayer to God in a family cannot
but lay the ground of a special regard to its interests and concerns
on the part of Him, who is thus constantly acknowledged ; and
the advantage, therefore, is more than a mere sentimental one :
and more than that of giving effect to the " master's example/'
The blessings of providence and of grace ; defence against evil, or

238 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

peculiar supports under it ; may thus be expected from Him, who
has said, " In all thy ways acknowledge him, and He shall direct
thy paths ;" and that when two or three are met in his name, He
is " in the midst of them." The family is a " church in a house ;"
and its ministrations, as they are acceptable to God, cannot but
be followed by his direct blessing1.

Public Prayer, under which we include the assembling of
ourselves together for every branch of public worship.

The scriptural obligation of this is partly founded upon example,
and partly upon precept; so that no person who admits that
authority, can question this great duty without manifest and
criminal inconsistency. The institution of public worship under
/lie law ; the practice of synagogue worship among the Jews, from
at least the time of Ezra, (4) cannot be questioned; both which
were sanctioned by the practice of our Lord and his Apostles.
The course of the synagogue worship became indeed the model
of that of the Christian Church, it consisted in prayer, reading
and explaining the Scriptures, and singing of psalms ; and thus one
of the most important means of instructing nations, and of spread-
ing and maintaining the influence of morals and religion among a
people, passed from the Jews into all Christian countries.

The preceptive authority for our regular attendance upon public
worship, is either inferential or direct. The command to publish
the Gospel includes the obligation of assembling to hear it ; the
name by which a Christian society is designated in Scripture, is a
Church ; which signifies an " assembly" for the transaction of some
business ; and, in the case of a Christian assembly, the business
must be necessarily spiritual, and include the sacred exercises of
prayer, praise, and hearing the Scriptures. But we have more
direct precepts, although the practice was obviously continued from
Judaism, and was therefore consuetudinary. Some of the Epistles
of Paul are commanded to be read in the Churches. The singing
of psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs, is enjoined as an act of
solemn worship " to the Lord ;" and St. Paul cautions the Hebrews
*hat they "forsake not the assembling of themselves together.'"
The practice of the primitive age is also manifest from the Epistles
of St. Paul. The Lord's Supper was celebrated by the body ol
believers collectively; and this Apostle prescribes to the Corinthians
regulations for the exercises of prayer and prophesyings, " when
they came together in the church," — the assembly. The stated^

(4) Some writers contend that synagogues were as old as the ceremonial law.
That they were ancient is proved from Acts xv, 21, — "Moses of old time hath hi
cyery city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every Sabbath day.'1

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 230

ness and order of these "holy offices" in the primitive Church,
appears also from the Apostolical Epistle of St. Clement : " We
ought also, looking into the depths of the Divine knowledge, to do
all things in order, whatsoever the Lord hath commanded to be
done. We ought to make our oblations, and perform our holy
offices, at their appointed seasons ; for these he hath commanded
to be done, not irregularly or by chance, but at determinate times
and hours ; as he hath likewise ordained by his Supreme Will,
where, and by what persons, they shall be performed ; that so all
filings being done according to his pleasure, may be acceptable
in his sight." This passage is remarkable for urging a Divine
authority for the public services of the Church, by which St,
Clement, no doubt, means the authority of the inspired directions
of the Apostles.

The ends of the institution of public worship are of such obvious
importance, that it must ever be considered as one of the most
condescending and gracious dispensations of God to man. By this
his Church confesses his name before the world ; by this the public
teaching of his word is associated with acts calculated to affect the
mind with that solemnity which is the best preparation for hearing
it to edification. It is thus that the ignorant and vicious are col-
lected together, and instructed and warned ; the invitations oil
mercy are published to the guilty, and the sorrowful and afflicted
are comforted. In these assemblies God, by his Holy Spirit, diffuses
his vital and sanctifying influence, and takes the devout into a fel-
lowship with himself, from which they derive strength to do and to
suffer his will in the various scenes of life, whilst he thus affords
them a foretaste of the deep and hallowed pleasures which are
reserved for them at " his right hand for evermore." Prayers and
intercessions are here heard for national and public interests ; and
whilst the benefit of these exercises descends upon a country, al<
are kept sensible of the dependence of every public and persona!
interest upon God. Praise Calls forth the grateful emotions, and
gives cheerfulness to piety ; and that " instruction in righteous-
ness," which is so perpetually repeated, diffuses the principles oi
morality and religion throughout society ; enlightens and gives
activity to conscience ; raises the standard of morals ; attaches
shame to vice, and praise to virtue ; and thus exerts a powerfully
purifying influence upon mankind. Laws thus receive a force,
which, in other circumstances, they could not acquire, even were
they enacted in as great perfection ; and the administration ol
justice is aided by the strongest possible obligation and sanction
being given to legal oaths. The domestic relations are rendered

240 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PARI

more strong and interesting by the very habit of the attendance of
families upon the sacred services of the sanctuary of the Lord ;
and the rich and the poor meeting together there, and standing on
the same common ground of sinners before God, equally depend-
ent upon him, and equally suing for his mercy, has a powerful,
though often an insensible, influence in humbling the pride which
is nourished by superior rank, and in raising the lower classes
above abjectness of spirit, without injuring their humility. Piety,
benevolence, and patriotism, are equally dependent for their purity
and vigour upon the regular and devout worship of God in the
simplicity of the Christian dispensation.

A few words on liturgies or forms of prayer may here have a
proper place.

The necessity of adhering to the simplicity of the first age of the
Church, as to worship, need scarcely be defended by argument.
If no liberty were intended to be given to accommodate the modes
of worship to the circumstances of different people and times, we
should, no doubt, have had some express directory on the subject
in Scripture ; but in the exercise of this liberty steady regard is to
be paid to the spirit and genius and simple character of Christian-
ity, and a respectful deference to the practice of the Apostles and
their immediate successors. Without these, formality and supersti-
tion, to both of which human nature is very liable, are apt to be
induced ; and when once they enter they increase, as the history
of the Church sufficiently shows, indefinitely, until true religion is
buried beneath the mass of observances which have been introduced
as her aids and handmaids. Our Lord's own words are here directly
applicable and important : " God is a Spirit ; and they that worshij •
him, must worship him in spirit and in truth." The worship must
be adapted to the spiritual nature of God, and to his revealed per
lections. To such a Being the number of prayers, the quantity of
worship so to speak, to which corrupt Churches have attached 60
much importance, can be of no value. As a Spirit, he seeks the
worship of the spirit of man ; and regards nothing external in that
worship but as it is the expression of those emotions of humility,
faith, gratitude, and hope, which are the principles he condescend-
ingly approves in man. " True" worship, we are also taught by
these words, is the worship of the heart ; it springs from humility,
faith, gratitude, and hope ; and its final cause, or end, is to better
man, by bringing upon his aifections the sanctifying and comfort-
ing influence of grace. The modes of worship which best promote
this end, and most effectually call these principles into exercise, are
ihose therefore which best accord with our Lord's rule : and if hi

!HIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 241

the Apostolic age we see this end of worship most directly accom-
plished, and these emotions most vigorously and with greatest
purity excited, the novelties of human invention can add nothing
to the effect, and for that very reason have greatly diminished it.
In the Latin and Greek Churches we see a striking conformity in
the vestments, the processions, the pictures, and images, and other
parts of a complex and gorgeous ceremonial, to the Jewish typical
worship, and to that of the Gentiles, which was an imitation of it
without typical meaning. But it is not even pretended that in these
circumstances it is founded upon primitive practice ; or, if pretend-
ed, this is obviously an impudent assumption.

Liturgies, or forms of Service, do not certainly come under this
censure, except when they contain superstitious acts of devotion
to saints, or are so complicated, numerous, and lengthened, that
the only principle to which they can be referred is the common,
but unworthy notion, that the Divine Being is rendered placable by
continued service ; or that the wearisome exercise of voeal prayers,
continued for long periods, and in painful postures, is a necessary
penance to man, and, as such, acceptable to God. In those Re^
formed Churches of Christendom in which they are used, they have
been greatly abridged, as well as purified from the corruptions oi
the middle ages. In some they are more copious than in others,
whilst many religious societies have rejected their use altogether ;
and in a few they are so used as to afford competent space also for
extempore devotion.

The advocates and opponents of the use of forms of prayer hi
public worship have both run into great extremes, and attempted
generally to prove too much against each other.

If the use of forms of prayer in prose be objected to, their use
in verse ought to be rejected on the same principle ; and extem-
poraneous psalms and hymns must, for consistency's sake, be
required of a Minister, as well as extemporaneous prayers ; or the
practice of singing, as a part of God's worship, must be given up.
Again : If the objection to the use of a form of prayer be not in its
matter ; but merely as it contains petitions not composed by our-
selves, or by the officiating Minister on the occasion ; the same
objection would lie to our using any petitions found in the Psalms
or other devotional parts of Scripture, although adapted to our case,
and expressed in words far more fitting than our own. If we think
precompo'sed prayers incompatible with devotion, we make it
essential to devotion that we should frame our desires into our own
words ; whereas nothing can be more plain, than that whoever has
composed the words, if they correspond with our desires, they

Vol. III. 29

242 1HE0L0GICAL INSTITUTES, [PAIt I

become the prayer of our hearts, and are, as such, acceptable to
God. The objection to petitionary forms composed by others, sup-
poses also that we know the things which it is proper for us to ask
without the assistance of others. This may be sometimes the case ;
but as we must be taught what to pray for by the Holy Scriptures,
so, in proportion as we understand what we are authorized to pray
for by those Scriptures, our prayers become more varied, and dis-
tinct, and comprehensive, and, therefore, edifying. But all helps
to the understanding of the Scriptures, as to what they encourage
us to ask of God, is a help to us in prayer. Thus the exposition of
Christian privileges and blessings from the pulpit, affords us this
assistance ; thus the public extempore prayers we hear offered by
Ministers and enlightened Christians, assist us in the same respect ;
and the written and recorded prayers of the wise and pious in dif-
ferent ages, fulfil the same office, and to so great an extent, that
scarcely any who offer extempore prayer escape falling into phrases
and terms of expression, or even entire petitions, which have been
originally derived from Liturgies. Even in extempore services, the
child accustomed to the modes of precatory expression used by the
parent, and the people to those of their Ministers, imitate them
unconsciously ; finding the desires of their hearts already embodied
in suitable and impressive words.

The objection, therefore, to the use of forms of prayer, when
absolute, is absurd, and involves principles which no one acts upon,
or can act upon. It also disregards example and antiquity. The
High Priest of the Jews pronounced yearly a form of benediction.
The Psalms of David, and other inspired Hebrew Poets, whether
chanted or read makes no difference, were composed for the use
of the sanctuary, and formed a part of the regular devotions of the
people. Forms of prayer were used in the synagogue service of
the Jews, which, though multiplied in subsequent times, so as to
render the service tedious and superstitious, had among them some
that were in use between the return from the Captivity and the
Christian era, and were therefore sanctioned by the practice of
our Lord and his Apostles. (5) John Baptist appears also to have
given a form of prayer to his disciples, in which he was followed
by our Lord. The latter has indeed been questioned, and were it
to be argued that our Lord intended that form of prayer alone to
be used, too much would be proved by the advocates of forms,
On the other hand, although the words, " after this manner pray
ye," intimate that the Lord's Prayer was given as a model of prayer.

(5) PrideaI-x's Connexion. Fol. Edit. vol. i, p. °>04.

1HIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 243

so the words in another Evangelist, "When ye pray, say," as fully
indicate an intention to prescribe a form. It seems, therefore, fair,
to consider the Lord's Prayer as intended both as a model and a
form; and he must be very fastidious who, though he uses it as
the model of his own prayers, by paraphrasing its petitions in his
own words, should scruple to use it in its native simplicity and
force as a form. That its use as a form, though not its exclusive
use, was originally intended by our Lord, appears, I think, very
clearly, from the disciples desiring to be taught to pray, " as John
taught his disciples." If, as it has been alleged, the Jewish Rab-
bies, at so early a period, were in the custom of giving short forms
of prayer to their disciples, to be used in the form given, or to be
enlarged upon by the pupil at his pleasure, this would fully explain
the request of the disciples. However, without laying much stress
upon the antiquity of this practice, we may urge, that if John Bap-
tist gave a form of prayer to his followers, the conduct of our Lord
in teaching his disciples to pray, by what is manifestly a regularly
connected series of petitions, is accordant with their request ; but
if the Baptist only taught what topics ought to be introduced in
prayer, and the disciples of Jesus wished to be instructed in like
manner, it is difficult to account for their request being granted, not
by his giving directions as to the topics of prayer, but by his utter-
ing a regular prayer itself. That our Lord intended that prayer to
be used as adapted to that period of his dispensation ; and that the
petitions in that form are admirably applicable to every period of
Christianity, and may be used profitably ; and that its use implies
a devout respect to the words of Him " who spake as never man
spake ;" are points from which there does not appear any reason-
able ground of dissent

The practice of the primitive Church may also be urged in
favour of Liturgies. Founded as the early worship of Christians
■was, upon the model of the synagogue, the use of short forms of
prayer, or collects, by them, is at least probable. It must indeed
be granted that extended and regular Liturgies were of a later
date ; and that extempore prayers were constantly offered in their
assemblies for public worship. This appears clear enough from
several passages in St. Paul's Epistles, and the writings of the
Fathers ; so that no liturgical service can be so framed as entirely
to shut out, or not to leave convenient space for, extempore
prayer by the Minister without departing from the earliest models.
But the Lord's Prayer appears to have been in frequent use in the
earliest times, and a series of collects ; which seems allowed even
by Lord King, although he proves that the practice for the Minister

244 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

to pray "according to his ability," (6) that is, to use his gifts in
extempore prayer, was a constant part of the public worship in
the first ages.

Much, therefore, is evidently left to wisdom and prudence in a
case where we have no explicit direction in the Scriptures ; and as
a general rule to be modified by circumstances, we may perhaps
with safety affirm, that the best mode of public worship is that
which unites a brief scriptural Liturgy with extempore prayers by
the Minister. This will more clearly appear if we consider the
exceedingly futile character of those objections which have been
reciprocally employed by the opponents and advocates of forms,
when they have carried their views to an extreme.

To public Liturgies it has been objected, that " forms of prayer
composed in one age become unfit for another, by the unavoidable
change of language, circumstances and opinions." To this ii
may be answered, 1. That whatever weight there may be in the
objection, it can only apply to cases where the form is, in all its
parts, made imperative upon the officiating Minister ; or where the
Church imposing it, neglects to accommodate the Liturgy to meet
all such changes, when innocent. 2. That the general language
of no form of prayer among ourselves, has become obsolete in
point of fact ; a few expressions only being, according to modern
notions, uncouth, or unusual. 3. That the petitions they contain
are suited, more or less, to all men at all times, whatever may be
their " circumstances ;" and that as to " opinions," if they so
change in a Church as to become unscriptural, it is an advantage
arising out of a public form, that it is auxiliary to the Scriptures in
bearing testimony against them ; that a natural reverence for
ancient forms tends to preserve their use, after opinions have
become lax ; and that they are sometimes the means of recovering
a Church from error.

Another objection is, that the perpetual repetition of the same
form of words produces weariness and inattentiveness in the con-
gregation. There is some truth in this; but it is often carried
much too far. A devotional mind will not weary in the repetition
of a scriptural and well-arranged Liturgy, if not too long to be
sustained by the infirmity of the body. Whether forms are used,
or extempore prayer be practised, effort and application of mind
are necessary in the hearer to enter into the spirit of the words ;
and each mode is wearisome to the careless and indevout, though
not, we grant, in equal degrees. The objection, as far as it has

(6) This expression occurs in Justin Martyr's Second Apology, whprt h*
particularly describes the mode of primitive worship.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 246

any weight, would be reduced to nothing, were the Liturgy
repeated only at one service on the Sabbath, so that at the others
the Minister might be left at liberty to pray with more direct
reference to the special circumstances of the people, the Church,
and the world.

The general character which all forms of prayer must take, is a
third objection ; but this is not true absolutely of any Liturgy, and
much less of that of the Church of England. All prayer must,
rind ought to be, general, because we ask for blessings which all
others need as much as ourselves ; but that particularity which
goes into the different parts of a Christian's religious experience
ind conflicts, dangers and duties, is found very forcibly and feel-
ingly expressed in that Liturgy. That greater particularity is often
needed than this excellent form of prayer contains, must, however,
he allowed ; and this, as well as prayer suited to occasional circum-
stances, might be supplied by the more frequent use of extempore
prayer, without displacing the Liturgy itself. The objection, there-
fore, has no force, except when extempore prayer is excluded, or
confined within too narrow a limit.

On the other hand, the indiscriminate advocates of Liturgies
have carried their objections to extempore prayer to a very absurd
extreme. Without a Liturgy the folly and enthusiasm of many,
they say, is in danger of producing extravagant or impious addresses
to God ; that a congregation is confused between their attention
to the Minister, and their own devotion, being ignorant of each
petition before they hear it ; and to this they add the labouring
i-ecollection or tumultuous delivery of many extempore speakers.
The first and third of these objections can have force only where
;'oolish, enthusiastic, and incompetent Ministers are employed ;
and so the evil, which can but rarely exist, is easily remedied.
The second objection lay as forcibly against the inspired prayers
of the Scriptures at the time they were first uttered, as against
ex tempore prayers now ; and it would lie against the use of the
collects, and occasional unfamiliar forms of prayer introduced into
the regular Liturgy, in the case of all who are not able to read, or
who happen not to have Prayerbooks. We may also observe,
that if evils of so serious a kind are the necessary results of extem-
pore praying ; if devotion is hindered, and pain and confusion of
mind produced ; and impiety and enthusiasm promoted ; it is rather
singular that extempore prayer should have been so constantly
practised in the primitive Church, and that it should not have been
wholly prohibited to the Clergy on all occasions, in later times.
The facts, however, of our own age prove that there is, to say the

29*

24& THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

least, an equal degree of devotion, an equal absence of confused-
ness of thought in the worshippers, where no Liturgy is used, as
where extempore prayer is unknown. Instances of folly and
enthusiasm are also but few in the ministry of such Churches ; and
when they occur they have a better remedy than entirely to exclude
extempore prayers by Liturgies, and thus to shut out the great
benefits of that mode of worship, for the loss of which no exclusive
form of service can atone.

The whole, we think, comes to this, — that there are advantages
in each mode of worship ; and that, when combined prudently, the
public service of the sanctuary has its most perfect constitution.
Much, however, in the practice of Churches is to be regulated by
due respect to differences of opinion, and even to prejudice, on a
point upon which we are left at liberty by the Scriptures, and which
must therefore be ranked among things prudential. Here, as in
many other things, Christians must give place to each other, and
do all things " in charity."

Praise and thanksgiving are implied in prayer, and included
indeed in our definition of that duty, as given above. But beside
those ascriptions of praise and expressions of gratitude, which are
to be mingled with the precatory part of our devotions, solemn
psalms and hymns of praise, to be sung with the voice, and accom-
panied with the melody of the heart, are of Apostolic injunction,
and form an important and exhilarating part of the worship of God4
whether public or social. It is thus that God is publicly acknow-
ledged as the great source of all good, and the end to which all
good ought again to tend in love and obedience ; and the practice
of stirring up our hearts to a thankful remembrance of His good-
ness, is equally important in its moral influence upon our feelings
now, and as it tends to prepare us for our eternal enjoyment here-
after. " Prayer," says a Divine of the English Church, " awakens
in us a sorrowful sense of wants and imperfections, and confession
induces a sad remembrance of our guilt and miscarriages ; but
thanksgiving has nothing in it but a warm sense of the mightiest
love, and the most endearing goodness, as it is the overflow of a
heart full of love, the free sally and emission of soul, that is capti-
vated and endeared by kindness. To laud and magnify the Lord
is the end for which we were born, and the heaven for which we
were designed, and when we are arrived to such a vigorous sense,
of Divine love as the blessed inhabitants of heaven have attained^,
we shall need no other pleasure or enjoyment to make us for ever
happy, but only to sing eternal praises to God and the Lamb ; the
vigorous relish of whose unspeakable goodness to us will so inflame

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 247

our love, and animate our gratitude, that to eternal ages Ave shall
never be able to refrain from breaking out into new songs of praise,
mid then every new song will create a new pleasure, and ever}
new pleasure create a new song." (7)

CHAPTER III.

The Duties we owe to God. — The Lord's Day.

As we have just been treating of the public worship of Almight}
God, so we may fitly add some remarks upon the consecration oi
one day in seven for that service, that it may be longer continued
than on days in which the business of life calls for our exertions,
and our minds be kept free from its distractions.

The obligation of a Sabbatical institution upon Christians, as
well as the extent of it, have been the subjects of much contro-
versy. Christian Churches themselves have differed ; and the
Theologians of the same Church. Much has been written upon
the subject on each side, and much research and learning employed,
sometimes to darken a very plain subject.

The circumstance, that the observance of a Sabbath is no where..
in so many, words, enjoined upon Christians, by our Lord and his
Apostles, has been assumed as the reason for so great a license oi
criticism and argument as that which has been often indulged in
t o unsettle the strictness of the obligation of this duty. Its obliga-
tion has been represented as standing upon the ground of inference
only, and therefore of human opinion ; and thus the opinion against
Sabbatical institutions has been held up as equally weighty with
the opinion in their favour ; and the liberty which has been claimed.
has been too often hastily concluded to be Christian liberty. This,
however, is travelling much too fast ; for if the case were as much
a matter of inference, as such persons would have it, it does not
follow that every inference is alike good ; or that the opposing
inferences have an equal force of truth, any more than of piety.

The question respects the will of God as to this particular
point, — Whether one day in seven is to be wholly devoted to
religion, exclusive of worldly business and worldly pleasures.
Now, there are but two ways in which the will of God can be
collected from his word; either by some explicit injunction upon
all, or by incidental circumstances. Let us then allow for a
Enpneettf. that we have no such explicit injunction; yet we havf

C7) Dr. Scroti;.

248 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. • [PART

certainly none to the contrary : Let us allow that we have only
for our guidance in inferring the will of God in this particular,
certain circumstances declarative of his will ; yet this important
conclusion is inevitable, that all such indicative circumstances are
in favour of a Sabbatical institution, and that there is not one which
exhibits any thing contrary to it. The seventh day was hallowed
at the close of the creation ; its sanctity was afterwards marked by
the withholding of the manna on that day, and the provision of a
double supply on the sixth, and that previous to the giving of the
law from Sinai : It was then made a part of that great epitome of
religious and moral duty, which God wrote with his own finger on
tables of stone ; it was a part of the public political law of the only
people to whom Almighty'God ever made himself a political Head
and Ruler ; its observance is connected throughout the prophetic
age with the highest promises, its violations with the severest
maledictions ; it was among the Jews in our Lord's time a day ol
solemn religious assembling, and was so observed by Him ; when
changed to the first day of the week, it was the day on which the
first Christians assembled ; it was called, by way of eminence,
" the Lord's day ;" and we have inspired authority to say, that,
both under the Old and New Testament dispensations, it is used as
an expressive type of the heavenly and eternal rest. Now, against
all these circumstances so strongly declarative of the will of God.
as to the observance of a Sabbatical institution, what circumstance
or passage of Scripture can be opposed, as bearing upon it a
contrary indication? Truly not one ; except those passages in St.
Paul, in which he speaks of Jewish Sabbaths, with their Levitical
sites, and of a distinction of days, both of which marked a weak or
a criminal adherence to the abolished ceremonial dispensation ;
but which touch not the Sabbath as a branch of the moral law, or
as it was changed, by the authority of the Apostles, to the first day
of the week.

If, then, we were left to determine the point by inference merely,
jiow powerful is the inference as to what is the will of God with
respect to the keeping of the Sabbath on the one' hand, and how
totally unsupported is the opposite inference on the other !

It may also be observed, that those who will so strenuously insist
upon the absence of an express command as to the Sabbath in the
writings of the Evangelists and Apostles, as explicit as that of the
Decalogue, assume, that the will of God is only obligatory when
manifested in some one mode, which they judge to be most fit.
I>ut this is a monstrous hypothesis ; for however the will of God
may be manifested, if it is with such clearness as to exclude aH

THIRD.1} THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 249

reasonable doubt, it is equally obligatory as when it assumes the
formality of legal promulgation. Thus the Bible is not all in the
form of express and authoritative command ; it teaches by exam-
ples, by proverbs, by songs, by incidental allusions and occurrences;
and yet is, throughout, a manifestation of the will of God as to
morals and religion in their various branches, and if disregarded.
it will be so at every man's peril.

But strong as this ground is, we quit it for a still stronger. It is
wholly a mistake, that the Sabbath, because not re-enacted with
the formality of the Decalogue, is not explicitly enjoined upon
Christians, and that the testimony of Scripture to such an injunction
\s not unequivocal and irrefragable. We shall soon prove that the
Sabbath was appointed at the creation of the world, and conse-
quently for all men, and therefore for Christians ; since there was
never any repeal of the original institution. To this we add, that
if the moral law be the law of Christians, then is the Sabbath as
explicitly enjoined upon them as upon the Jews. But that the
moral law is our law, as well as the law of the Jews, all but Anti-
nomians must acknowledge ; and few, we suppose, will be inclined
to run into the fearful mazes of that error, in order to support lax
notions as to the obligation of the Sabbath, into which, however,
they must be plunged, if they deny the law of the Decalogue to be
binding upon us. That it is so bound upon us, a few passages of
Scripture will prove as well as many.

Our Lord declares, that he came not to destroy the Law and the
Prophets, but to fulfil. Take it, that by the " Law," he meant both
the moral and the ceremonial ; ceremonial law could only be ful-
filled in hiin, by realizing its types ; and moral law, by upholding its
authority. For " the Prophets," they admit of a similar distinction ;
they either enjoin morality, or utter prophecies of Christ ; the latter
of which were fulfilled in the sense of accomplishment, the former
by being sanctioned and enforced. That the observance of the
Sabbath is a part of the moral law, is clear from its being found
in the Decalogue, the doctrine of which our Lord sums up in the
moral duties of loving God and our neighbour ; and for this reason
the injunctions of the Prophets, on the subject of the Sabbath, are
to be regarded as a part of their moral teaching. (8) Some Divines
have, it is true, called the observance of the Sabbath a positive,,
and not a moral precept. If it were so, its obligation is precisely
t he same, in all cases where God himself has not relaxed it ; and
if a positive precept only, it has surely a special eminence given to.
it, by being placed in the list of the Ten Commandments, and being

(8) Sec this stated marc at lav?*, Part iii, dhap. i.

DdO THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

capable, with them, of an epitome which resolves them into the
love of God and our neighbour. (9) The truth seems to be, that it
is a mixed precept, and not wholly positive ; but intimately, perhaps
essentially, connected with several moral principles, of homage to
God, and mercy to men ; with the obligation of religious worship, of
public religious worship, and of undistracied public worship : and
this will account for its collocation in the Decalogue with the
highest duties of religion, and the leading rules of personal and
social morality.

The passage from our Lord's Sermon on the Mount, with Its
corniest, is a sufficiently explicit enforcement of the moral law,
generally, upon his followers ; but when he says, " The Sabbath
was made for man," he clearly refers to its original institution, a?
a universal law, and not to its obligation upon the Jews only, in
consequence of the enactments of the law of Moses. It " was
made for man," not as he may be a Jew, or a Christian ; but as
man, a creature bound to love, worship, and obey his God and
Maker, and on his trial for eternity.

Another explicit proof that the law of the Ten Commandments,
and, consequently, the law of the Sabbath, is obligatory upon
Christians, is found in the answer of the Apostle to an objection
to the doctrine of justification by faith, Rom. iii, 31, "Do we then
make void the law through faith 1" which is equivalent to asking,
Does Christianity teach, that the law is no longer obligatory on
Christians, because it teaches that no man can be justified by it?
To this he answers, in the most solemn form of expression, " God
forbid ; yea, we establish the law." Now, the sense in which the
Apostle uses the term, " the law," in this argument, is indubitably
marked in chap, vii, 7, " I had not known sin but by the law ; for
\ had not known lust, except the laic had said, Thou shalt not
covet :" Which being a plain reference to the tenth command of
the Decalogue, as plainly shows that the Decalogue is " the laio"
of which he speaks. This, then, is the law which is " established"
by the Gospel ; and this can mean nothing else than the establish-
ment and confirmation of its authority, as the rule of all inward
and outward holiness. Whoever, therefore, denies the obligation
of the Sabbath on Christians, denies the obligation of the whole
Decalogue ; and there is no real medium between the acknow-
ledgment of the Divine authority of this sacred institution, as a
universal law, and that gross corruption of Christianity, generally
iesignated Antinomianism.

(9) See Vol. ii, p. 196,

VillRD J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. Zo\

Nor is there any force in the dilemma into which the Anti
Sabbatarians would push us, Avhen they argue, that, if the case be
so, then are we bound to the same circumstantial exactitude ol
obedience as to this command, as to the other precepts of the
Decalogue ; and, therefore, that we are bound to observe the
seventh day, reckoning from Saturday, as the Sabbath-day. But,
as the command is partly positive, and partly moral, it may have
circumstances which are capable of being altered in perfect accord-
ance with the moral principles on which it rests, and the moral ends
which it proposes. Such circumstances are not indeed to be judged
of on our own authority. We must either have such general prin-
ciples for our guidance as have been revealed by God, and cannot
therefore be questioned, or some special authority from which there
can be no just appeal. Now, though there is not on record any
Divine command issued -to the Apostles, to change the Sabbath
from the day on which it was held by the Jews, to the first day o!
the week ; yet, when we see that this was done in the Apostolic
age, and that St. Paul speaks of the Jewish Sabbaths as not being
obligatory upon Christians, whilst he yet contends that the whole
moral law is obligatory upon them ; the fair inference is, that this
change of the day was made by Divine direction. It is at least
more than inference, that the change was made under the sanction
of inspired men; and those men, the appointed rulers in the Church
of Christ ; whose business it was to " set all things in order," which
pertained to its worship and moral government. We may rest well
enough, therefore, satisfied with this, — that as a Sabbath is obliga-
tory upon us, we act under Apostolic authority for observing it on
the first day of the week, and thus commemorate at once the creation
and the redemption of the world.

Thus, even if it were conceded, that the change of the day wa*
made by the agreement of the Apostles, without express directions
from Christ, (which is not probable,) it is certain that it was not
done without express authority confided to them by Christ ; but ii
would not even follow from this change, that they did in reality
make any alteration in -the law of the Sabbath, either as it stood at
the time of its original institution at the close of the creation, or in
the Decalogue of Moses. The same portion of time which consti-
tuted the seventh day from the creation, could not be observed in
all parts of the earth ; and it is not probable, therefore, that the
original law expresses more, than that a seventh day, or one day
in seven, the seventh day after six days of labour, should be thus
appropriated, from whatever point the enumeration might set out.
or the hebdomadal cycle beuin. For if more had been intended.

2o2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAKT

then it would have been necessary to establish a rule for the reck-
oning of days themselves, which has been different in different
nations ; some reckoning from evening to evening, as the Jews
now do ; others from midnight to midnight, &c. So that those
persons in this country and in America, who hold their Sabbath
on Saturday, under the notion of exactly conforming to the Olrl
Testament, and yet calculate the days from midnight to midnight,
have no assurance at all that they do not desecrate a part of the
original Sabbath, which might begin, as the Jewish Sabbath now,
on Friday evening ; and, on the contrary, hallow a portion of a
common day, by extending the Sabbath beyond Saturday evening.
Even if this were ascertained, the differences of latitude and longi-
tude would throw the whole into disorder ; and it is not probable
that a universal law should have been fettered with that circum-
stantial exactness, which would have rendered difficult, and some-
times doubtful, astronomical calculations necessary in order to it?
being obeyed according to the intention of the Lawgiver. Accord
ingly we find, says Mr. Holden, that

" In the original institution it is stated in general terms, that God
blessed and sanctified the seventh day, which must undoubtedly
imply the sanctity of every seventh day ; but not that it is to be
subsequently reckoned from the first demiurgic day. Had this
been included in the command of the Almighty, something, it is
probable, would have been added declaratory of the intention ;
whereas expressions the most undefined are employed ; not a syl-
lable is uttered concerning the order and number of the days ; am!
it cannot reasonably be disputed that the command is truly obeyed
by the separation of every seventh day, from common to sacred
purposes, at whatever given time the cycle may commence. The
difference in the mode of expression here from that which the
sacred historian has used in the first chapter, is very remarkable.
At the conclusion of each division of the work of creation, he says,
' The evening and the morning were the first day,' and so on ; but
at the termination of the whole, he merely calls it the seventh day ;
a diversity of phrase, which, as it would be inconsistent with ever}
idea of inspiration to suppose it undesigned, must have been intend-
ed to denote a day, leaving it to each people as to what manner it
is to be reckoned. The term obviously imports the period of the
earth's rotation round its axis, while it is left undetermined, whether
it shall be counted from evening or morning, from noon or mid-
night. The terms of the law are, ' Remember the Sabbath-day, to
keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work ; but
the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God. — For in six

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. %od

days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them
is, and rested the seventh day ; wherefore the Lord blessed the
Sabbath-day, and hallowed it.' With respect to time, it is here
mentioned in the same indefinite manner as at its primeval institu-
tion, nothing more being expressly required than to observe a day
of sacred rest after every six days of labour. The seventh day is
to be kept holy ; but not a word is said as to what epoch the
commencement of the series is to be referred; nor could the
Hebrews have determined from the Decalogue what day of the
week was to be kept as their Sabbath. The precept is not, Re-
member the seventh day of the week, to keep it holy, but ' Remember
the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy ;' and in the following explication
of these expressions, it is not said that the seventh day of the week
is the Sabbath, but without restriction, 'The seventh day is the
Sabbath of the Lord thy God ;' not the seventh according to any
particular method of computing the septenary cycle ; but, in refer-
ence to the six before mentioned, every seventh day in rotation
after six of labour."(l)

Thus that part of the Jewish law, the Decalogue, which, on the
authority of the New Testament, we have shown to be obligatory
upon Christians, leaves the computation of the hebdomadal cycle
undetermined ; and, after six days of labour, enjoins the seventh
as the Sabbath, to which the Christian practice as exactly conforms
as the Jewish. It is not, however, left to every individual to deter-
mine which day should be his Sabbath, though he should fulfil the
law so far as to abstract the seventh part of his time from labour.
It was ordained for worship, for public worship ; and it is therefore
necessary that the Sabbath should be uniformly observed by a
whole community at the same time. The Divine Legislator of the
Jews interposed for this end, by special direction, as to his people.
The first Sabbath kept in the wilderness was calculated from the.
lirst day in which the manna fell ; and with no apparent reference
to the creation of the world. By Apostolic authority, it is now
(ixed to be held on the first day of the week ; and thus one of the
great ends for which it was established, that it should be a day oi
" holy convocation," is secured.

The above observations proceed upon the ground, that the
Sabbath, according to the fair interpretation of the words of Moses,
was instituted upon the creation of the world. But we have had
Divines of considerable eminence in the English Church, who
have attempted to disprove this. The reason of the zeal displayed
by some of them on this question may be easily explained.

( I ) Holpen On the Sabbath.

Vol. III. 30

254 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

All the Churches of the Reformation did not indeed agree in
their views of the Sabbath ; but the Reformers of England and
Scotland generally adopted the strict and scriptural view ; and
after them the Puritans. The opponents of the Puritans, in their
controversies with them, and especially after the Restoration,
associated a strict observance of the Sabbath with hypocrisy and
disaffection ; and no small degree of ingenuity and learning was
employed to prove, that, in the intervals of public worship, pleasure
or business might be lawfully pursued ; and that this Christian
festival stands on entirely different grounds from that of the Jewish
Sabbath. The appointment of a Sabbath for man, at the close of
the creation, was unfriendly to this notion ; and an effort therefore
was made to explain away the testimony of Moses in the book oi
Genesis, by alleging that the Sabbath is there mentioned by prolepsis
or anticipation. Of the arguments of this class of Divines, Paley
availed himself in his " Moral Philosophy," and has become the
most popular authority on this side of the question.

Paley's argument is well summed up, and satisfactorily answered*
in the able work which has been above quoted.

"Among those who have held that the Pentateuchal record,
above cited, is proleptical, and that the Sabbath is to be considered
a part of the peculiar laws of the Jewish polity, no one has dis-
played more ability than Dr. Paley. Others on the same side
have exhibited far more extensive learning, and have exercised
much more patient research ; but for acuteness of intellect, for
coolness of judgment, and a habit of perspicacious reasoning, he
has been rarely, if ever, excelled. The arguments which he has
approved, must be allowed to be the chief strength of the cause ;
and, as he is at once the most judicious and most popular of its
advocates, all that he has advanced demands a careful and candid
examination. The doctrine which he maintains is, that the Sab-
bath was not instituted at the creation ; that it was designed for
the Jews only ; that the assembling upon the first day of the week
for the purpose of public worship, is a law of Christianity, of Divine
appointment ; but that the resting on it longer than is necessary
for attendance on these assemblies, is an ordinance of human
institution ; binding, nevertheless, upon the conscience of every
individual of a country in which a weekly Sabbath is established,
for the sake of the beneficial purposes which the public and regular
observance of it promotes, and recommended perhaps, in some
degree, to the Divine approbation, by the resemblance it bears to
what God was pleased to make a solemn part of the law which he
delivered to the people of Israel, and by its subserviency to many

VKIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 255

of the same uses. Such is the doctrine of this very able writer in
his Moral and Political Philosophy ; a doctrine which places the
►Sabbath on the footing of civil laws, recommended by their expe-
diency, and which, being sanctioned by so high an authority, has
probably given great encouragement to the lax notions concerning
fhe Sabbath which unhappily prevail.

" Dr. Paley's principal argument is, that the first institution ot
the Sabbath took place during the sojourning of the Jews in the
wilderness. Upon the complaint of the people for want of food,
Ood was pleased to provide for their relief by a miraculous supply
of manna, which was found every morning upon the ground about
the camp : ' And they gathered it every morning, every mail
according to his eating ; and when the sun waxed hot, it melted,
And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as
much bread, two omers for one man ; and all the rulers of the
congregation came and told Moses. And he said unto them, This
is that which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy
Sabbath unto the Lord : Bake that which ye will bake to-day, and
seethe that ye will seethe ; and that which remaineth over lay up
tor you, to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till
the morning, as Moses bade ; and it did not stink, (as it had done
before, when some of them left it till the morning,) neither was
^here any worm therein. And Moses said, Eat that to-day ; for
to-day is a Sabbath unto the Lord ; to-day ye shall not find it in the
iicld. Six days ye shall gather it ; but on the seventh day, which
is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none. And it came to pass,
•that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to
gather, and they found none. And the Lord said unto Moses,
How long refuse ye to keep my commandments, and my laws?
See, for tfiat the Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he
giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days ; abide ye every
man in his place ; let no man go out of his place on the seventh
day. So the people rested on the seventh day.'

" From this passage, Dr. Paley infers that the Sabbath was first
instituted in the wilderness ; but to preclude the possibility of mis-
representing his argument, I will quote his own words : ' Now, in
my opinion, the transaction in the wilderness above recited, was
the first actual institution of the Sabbath. For if the Sabbath had
been instituted at the time of the creation, as the words in Genesis
may seem at first sight to import ; and if it had been observed all
along from that time to the departure of the Jews out of Egypt, a
oeriod of about two thousand five hundred years ; it appears unac-
countable that no mention of it, no occasion of even the obscurest

i56 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

allusion to it, should occur, either in the general history of the
world before the call of Abraham, which contains, we admit, only
a few memoirs of its early ages, and those extremely abridged ; or,
which is more to be wondered at, in that of the lives of the first
three Jewish patriarchs, which, in many parts of the account, is
sufficiently circumstantial and domestic. Nor is there, in the
passage above quoted from the sixteenth chapter of Exodus, any
intimation that the Sabbath, when appointed to be observed, wa*
only the revival of an ancient institution, which had been neglected,
forgotten, or suspended ; nor is any such neglect imputed either
to the inhabitants of the old world, or to any part of the family of
Noah ; nor, lastly, is any permission recorded to dispense with the
institution during the captivity of the Jews in Egypt, or on any
other public emergency.'

" As to the first part of this reasoning, if it were granted that in
the history of the patriarchal ages no mention is made of the Sab-
bath, nor even the obscurest allusion to it, it would be unfair to
conclude that it was not appointed previous to the departure of
the children of Israel from Egypt. If instituted at the creation,
the memory of it might have been forgotten in the lapse of time,
and the growing corruption of the world ; or, what is more proba-
ble, it might have been observed by the patriarchs, though no
mention is made of it in the narrative of their lives, which, however
circumstantial in some particulars, is, upon the whole, very brief
and compendious. There are omissions in the sacred history
much more extraordinary. Excepting Jacob's supplication at
Bethel, scarcely a single allusion to prayer is to be found in all the
Pentateuch ; yet, considering the eminent piety of the worthies
recorded in it, we cannot doubt the frequency of their devotional
exercises. Circumcision being the sign of God's covenant with
Abraham, was beyond all question punctually observed by the
Israelites, yet, from their settlement in Canaan, no particular
instance is recorded of it till the circumcision of Christ, compre-
hending a period of about one thousand five hundred years. No
express mention of the Sabbath occurs in the books of Joshua.
Judges, Ruth, the first and second of Samuel, or the first of Kings.
though it was, doubtless, regularly observed all the time included
in these histories. In the second book of Kings, and the first and
second of Chronicles, it is mentioned only twelve times, and some
of them are merely repetitions of the same instance. If the Sab-
bath is so seldom spoken of in this long historical series, it can be
nothing wonderful if it should not be mentioned in the summar)
account of the patriarchal ages.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 25?

"But though the Sabbath is not expressly mentioned in the
history of the antediluvian and patriarchal ages, the observance
of it seems to be intimated by the division of time into weeks. In
relating the catastrophe of the flood, the historian informs us, that
Noah, at the end of forty days, opened the window of the ark ;
• and he stayed yet other seven days, and again he sent forth the
dove out of the ark ; and the dove came in to him in the evening,
and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf, pluckt off. So Noah
knew that the waters were abated from off the earth. And he
stayed yet other seven days, and sent forth the dove, which returned
not again unto him any more.' The term ' week' is used by Laban
in reference to the nuptials of Leah, when he says, ' Fulfil her
week, and we will give thee this also, for the service which thou
shalt serve with me yet seven other years.' A week of days is
here plainly signified, the same portion of time which, in succeed-
ing ages, was set apart for nuptial festivities, as appears from the
book of Esther, where the marriage feast of Vashti lasted seven
days, and more particularly from the account of Samson's mar-
riage feast. Joseph and his brethren mourned for their father
Jacob seven days.

" That the computation of time by weeks obtained from the
most remote antiquity, appears from the traditionary and written
records of all nations, the numerous and undeniable testimonies of
which have been so often collected and displayed, that it would
be worse than useless to repeat them.

" Combining all these testimonies together, they fully establish
the primitive custom of measuring time by the division of weeks ;
and prevailing as it did among nations separated by distance*
having no mutual intercourse, and wholly distinct in manners, it
must have originated from one common source, which cannot
reasonably be supposed any other than the memory of the creation
preserved in the Noahic family, and handed down to their posteri-
ties. The computation by days, months, and years, arises from
obvious causes, the revolution of the moon, and the annual and
diurnal revolutions of the sun ; but the division of time by periods
of seven days, has no foundation in any natural or visible septenary
change ; it must, therefore, have originated from some positive
appointment, or some tradition anterior to the dispersion of man-
kind, which cannot well be any other than the memory of the
creation and primeval blessing of the seventh day.

" Dr. Paley's next argument is, that ' there is not in the six-
teenth chapter of Exodus any intimation that the Sabbath, when
.ippointcd to he observed, was only the revival of an ancient

30*

258 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

institution which had been neglected, forgotten, or suspended.'
The contrary, however, seems the more natural inference from
the narrative. It is mentioned exactly in the way an historian
would, who had occasion to speak of a well-known institution.
For instance, when the people were astonished at the double
supply of manna on the sixth day, Moses observes, ' This is that
which the Lord hath said, To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sab-
bath unto the Lord ;' which, as far as we know, was never said
previously to this transaction, but at the close of the creation.
This, surely, is the language of a man referring to a matter with
which the people were already acquainted, and recalling it to their
remembrance. In the fifth verse, God promises on the sixth day
twice as much as they gather daily. For this no reason is given,
which seems to imply that it was already known to the children
of Israel. Such a promise, without some cause being assigned for
so extraordinary a circumstance, would have been strange indeed :
and if the reason had been, that the seventh day was now for the
first time to be appointed a festival, in which no work was to be
done, would not the author have stated this circumstance 1 Again,
it is said, ' Six days ye shall gather it ; but on the seventh day,
which is the Sabbath, in it there shall be none ;' and ' for that the
Lord hath given you the Sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the
sixth clay the bread of two days.' Here the Sabbath is spoken of
as an ordinance with which the people were familiar. A double-
quantity of manna was given on the sixth day, because the follow-
ing day, as they well knew, was the Sabbath, in which God rested
from his work, and which was to be kept as a day of rest, and
holy to the Lord. It is likewise mentioned incidentally, as it were,
in the recital of the miraculous supply of manna, without any
notice of its being enjoined upon that occasion for the first time ;
which would be a very surprising circumstance, had it been thf
original establishment of the Sabbath. In short, the entire phrase-
ology in the account of this remarkable transaction accords with
the supposition, and with it alone, that the Sabbath had been long
established, and was well known to the Israelites.

"That no neglect of the Sabbath is 'imputed either to the
inhabitants of the old world, or to any of the family of Noah,' is
very true ; but, so far from there being any proof of such negli-
gence, there is, on the contrary, as we have seen, much reason for
believing that it was duly observed by the pious Sethites of the old
world, and after the deluge, by the virtuous line of Shem. True,
likewise, it is, that there is not ' any permission recorded to dis-
pense with the institution during the captivity of the Jews in Egypt,

THIRD. j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 259

or on any other public emergency.' But where is tbc evidence
that such a permission would be consistent with the Divine wisdom?
And if not, none such would either be given or recorded. At any
rate, it is difficult to see how the silence of Scripture, concerning
such a circumstance, can furnish an argument in vindication of the
opinion, that the Sabbath was first appointed in the wilderness.
To allege it far this purpose, is just as inconclusive as it would be
to argue that the Sabbath was instituted subsequent to the return
of the Jews from Babylonia, because neither the observance of it,
nor any permission to dispense with it, during the captivity, is
recorded in Scripture.

" The passage in the second chapter of Genesis is next adduced
by Dr. Paley, and he pronounces it not inconsistent with his
opinion ; ' for as the seventh day was erected into a Sabbath on
account of God's resting upon that day from the work of creation,
it was natural enough in the historian, when he had related the
history of the creation, and of God's ceasing from it on the seventh
day, to add, ' and God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it,
because that on it he had rested from all his work which God had
created and made ;' although the blessing and sanctification, that
is, the religious distinction and appropriation of that day, were not
actually made till many ages afterwards. The words do not assert,
that God then ' blessed' and ' sanctified' the seventh day, but that
he blessed and sanctified it for that reason ; and if any ask, why
the Sabbath, or sanctification of the seventh day, was then men-
tioned, if it were not then appointed, the answer is at hand, the
order of connexion, and not of time, introduced the mention of the
Sabbath in the history of the subject which it was ordained to
commemorate.'

" That the Hebrew historian, in the passage here referred to,
uses a prolepsis or anticipation, and alludes to the Mosaical insti-
tution of the Sabbath, is maintained by some of the ancient Fathers,
by Waehner, Heidegger, Beausobre, by Le Clerc, Rosenmuller,
Geddes, Dawson, and other commentators, and by the general
stream of those writers who regard the Sabbath as peculiar to the
Jews. Yet this opinion is built upon the assumption, that the book
of Genesis was not written till after the giving of the law, which
may be the fact, but of which most unquestionably there is no
proof. But waiving this consideration, it is scarcely possible to con-
ceive a greater violence to the sacred text, than is otfered by this
interpretation. It attributes to the inspired author the absurd
assertion, that God rested on the seventh day from all his works
which he had made, and therefore about two thousand five him-

360 THEOLOGICAL. INSTITUTES. [PABI

dred years after, God blessed and sanctified the seventh day. It
?nay be as well imagined that God had finished his work on the
seventh day, but rested on some other seventh day, as that he
rested the day following the work of creation, and afterward?
blessed and sanctified another. Not the slightest evidence appears
tor believing that Moses followed ' the order of connexion, and not
of time,' for no reasonable motive can be assigned for then intro-
ducing the mention of it, if it was not then appointed. The design
of the sacred historian clearly is, to give a faithful account of the
origin of the world, and both the resting on the seventh day, and the
blessing it, have too close a connexion to be separated : If the one
took place immediately after the work of creation was concluded,
so did the other. To the account of the production of the universe,
the whole narrative is confined ; there is no intimation of subsequent
events, nor the most distant allusion to Jewish ceremonies ; and it
would be most astonishing if the writer deserted his grand object
to mention one of the Hebrew ordinances which was not appointed
Jill ages afterwards.

" But according to Dr. Geddes, the opinion of a prolepsis derives
some confirmation from the orignal Hebrew, which he renders*
1 On the sixth day God completed all the work which he had to do ;
and on the seventh day, ceased from doing any of his works
God, therefore, blessed the seventh day, and made it holy, because
on it he ceased from all his works, which he had ordained to do.'
This version, he says, is ' in the supposition that the writer refers
to the Jewish Sabbath :' of course it was designedly adapted to an
hypothesis ; but, notwithstanding this suspicious circumstance, it is
not easy to determine how it differs in sense from the received
translation, as it leaves the question entirely undecided when this
blessing and sanctification took place. The proposed version,
however, is opposed by those in the Polyglott, and by the gene-
rality of translators, who render the particle van at the beginning
of the third verse, as a copulative, not as an illative ; and it is sur^
prising how a sound Hebrew scholar can translate it otherwise.
In short, nothing can be more violent and unnatural than the
proleptical interpretation ; and if we add, that it rests upon the
unproved assumption, that the record in question was written after
the delivery of the law, it must appear so devoid of critical support,
as not to require a moment's hesitation in rejecting it." (2)

So satisfactorily does it appear that the institution of the Sabbath
is historically narrated in Genesis ; and it follows from thence, that

(2) Holde'n On the SaUalh.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 20 1

the law of the Sabbath is universal, and not peculiar to the Jews.
God blessed and sanctified it, not certainly for himself, but for his
creatures ; that it might be a day of special blessing to them, and
be set apart, not only from unholy acts, for they are forbidden on
every day ; but from common uses. It was thus stamped with a
hallowed character from the commencement, and in works of a
hallowed character ought it therefore to be employed.

The obligation of a Sabbatical observance upon Christians being
thus established, the inquiry which naturally follows, is, In what
manner is this great festival, at once so ancient and so venerable,,
and intended to commemorate events so illustrious and so import-
ant to mankind, to be celebrated ? Many have spoken of the
difficulty of settling rules of this kind ; but this will oridinarily
vanish, if we consent to be guided fully by the principles of
•Scripture.

We allow that it requires judgment, and prudence, and charity,
and, above all, a mind well disposed to the spiritual employment of
the Sabbath, to make a right application of the law. But this is
the case with other precepts also ; such, for instance, as the loving
our neighbour as ourselves : with respect to which we seldom hear
any complaint of difficulty in the application. But, even if some
want of special direction should be felt, this can only affect minor
details ; and probably the matter has been so left by the Lawgiver,
to "try us, and prove us, and to know what is in our heart.'*
Something may have been reserved, in this case, for the exercise
of spontaneous obedience ; for that generous construction of the
precept which will be dictated by devotion and gratitude ; and for
the operation of a feeling of indignant shame, that the only day
which God has reserved for himself, should be grudged to him,
and trenched upon by every petty excuse of convenience, interest,
or sloth, and pared down, and negociated for, in the spirit of one
who seeks to overreach another. Of this we may be assured, that
he who is most anxious to find exceptions to the general rule, will,
in most cases, be a defaulter upon even his own estimate of the
general duty.

The only real difficulties with which men have entangled them-
selves, have arisen from the want of clear and decided views of
the law of the Sabbath as it is a matter of express revelation.
There are two extremes, either of which must be fertile of per-
plexity. The first is, to regard the Sabbath as a prudential
institution, adopted by the primitive Church, and resting upon civil
and ecclesiastical authority ; a notion which has been above refuted.
For if this theory bo adopted, it is impossible to find satisfactory

262 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

rules, either in the Old or New Testament, applicahle to the sub-
ject ; and we may therefore cease to wonder at that variety of
opinions, and those vacillations between duty and license, which
have been found in different Churches, and among their theologi-
cal writers. The difficulty of establishing any rule at all, to which
conscience is strictly amenable, is then evident, and indeed entirely
insuperable ; and men in vain attempt to make a partial Sabbath
by their own authority, when they reject " the day which the Lord
hath made." If, on the other hand, a proper distinction is not
preserved between the moral law of the Jews, which re-enacts
the still more ancient institution of the Sabbath, (a law we have
seen to be obligatory upon all Christians, to the end of time,) and
the political and ceremonial law of that people, which contains
particular rules as to the observance of the Sabbath ; fixing both
the day on which it was to be held, viz. the seventh of the week,
and issuing certain prohibitions not applicable to all people ; which
branch of the Mosaic Law was brought to an end by Christ, — diffi-
culties will arise from this quarter. One difficulty will respect the
day ; another the hour of the diurnal circle from which the Sab-
bath must commence. Other difficulties will arise from the incon-
venience or impossibility of accommodating the Judaical precepts
to countries and manners totally dissimilar ; and others, from the
degree of civil delinquency and punitiveness with which violations
of the Sabbath ought to be marked in a Christian state. The kin-
dling of fires, for instance, in their dwellings was forbidden to the
Jews ; but for extending this to harsher climates, there is no
authority. This rule would make the Sabbath a day of bodilj
suffering, and, in some cases, of danger to health, which is incon-
sistent with that merciful and festival character which the Sabbath
was designed every where to bear. The same observation may
apply to the cooking of victuals, which was also prohibited to the
Jews by express command. To the gathering of sticks on the Sab-
bath the penalty of death was assigned, on one occasion, for reasons
probably arising out of the Theocratical government of the Jews ,
but surely this is no precedent for making the violation of the
Sabbath a capital crime in the code of a Christian country.

Between the Decalogue, and the political and ceremonial law*
which followed, there is a marked distinction, They were given at
7 wo different times, and in a different manner; and, above all, the
former is referred to in the New Testament, as of perpetual obli-
gation ; the other as peculiar, and as abolished by Christ. It does
not follow, however, from this, that those precepts in the Levitical
^Qde. which relate to the Sabbath, are of no use to us, Thev show

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 2C3

lis how the general law was carried into its detail of application by
the great Legislator, who condescended to be at once a civil and
an ecclesiastical Governor of a chosen people ; and though they
are not in all respects binding upon us, in their full form, they all
embody general interpretations of the fourth command of the De-
calogue, to which, as far as they are applicable to a people otherwise
circumstanced, respect is reverently and devoutly to be had. The
prohibition to buy and sell on the Sabbath is as applicable to us a?
to the Jews ; so is that against travelling on the Sabbath, except
for purposes of religion, which was allowed to them also. If we
may lawfully kindle fires in our dwellings, yet we may learn from
the law peculiar to the Jews, to keep domestic services under re-
straint ; if we may cook victuals for necessity and comfort, we are to
be restrained from feasting ; if violations of the Sabbath are not to
be made capital crimes by Christian governors, the enforcement of
a decent external observance of the rest of the Sabbath is a lawful
use of power, and a part of the duty of a Christian magistrate.

But the rules by which the observance of the Sabbath is clearly
explained, will be found in abundant copiousness and evidence in
the original command ; in the Decalogue ; in incidental passages
of Scripture, which refer not so much to the political law of the
Jews, as to the universal moral code ; and in the discourses and
acts of Christ, and his Apostles : so that, independent of the
Levitical code, we have abundant guidance. It is a day of rest
from worldly pursuits ; a day sanctified, that is, set apart for hoi}
uses, which are the proper and the only lawful occupations of the
day ; it is a day of public worship, or, as it is expressed in the
Mosaic law, " of holy convocation," or assembly ; — a day for the
exercise of mercy to man and beast ; — a day for the devout com-
memoration, by religious acts and meditations, of the creation and
redemption of the world ; and, consequently, for the cultivation ol
that spirit which is suitable to such exercises, by laying aside all
worldly cares and pleasures ; to which holy exercises there is to be
a full appropriation of the seventh part of our time ; necessary sleep,
and engagements of real necessity, as explained by our Saviour,
only being excluded.

Works of charity and mercy were not excluded by the rigoui
of the Mosaic Law, much less by the Christian dispensation.
The rule of doing good on the Sabbath day has, however, some-
times been interpreted with too much laxity, without considering
that such acts form no part of the reason for which that day was
sanctified, and that they are therefore to be grounded upon the
necessity of immediate exertion. The secularly connected witb

264 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

certain public Charities has often been pushed beyond this rule
of necessity, and as such has become unlawful.

The reason generally given for this, is, that men cannot be found
to give time on the week day to the management of such Charities :
and they will never be found, whilst the rule is brought down to
convenience. Men's principles are to be raised, and not the com-
mand lowered. And when Ministers perscveringly do their duty,
and but a few conscientious persons support them, the whole will
be found practicable and easy. Charities are pressed either upon
our feelings or our interests, and sometimes on both ; and when
they become really urgent, time will be found for their manage-
ment, without "robbing God," and laying down that most debasing
of all principles, that our sacrifices are to cost us nothing. The
teaching of writing in Sunday schools has been pleaded for on the
same assumed ground of necessity ; but in all well and religiously
conducted institutions of this kind, it has been found quite practi-
cable to accomplish the object in a lawful manner ; and even if it
had not, there was no obligation binding as to that practice, equal
to that which binds us to obey the law of God. It is a work which
comes not under any of our Lord's exceptions : it may be a bene-
volent thing ; but it has in it no character of mercy, either to the
bodies or to* the souls of men.

As to amusements and recreations, which, when "innocent"
that is, we suppose, not "immoral," are sometimes pleaded for
by persons who advocate the serious observance of the Lord's
day, but a few words are necessary. If to public worship we arc
to add a more than ordinary attention to the duties of the family
and the closet, which all such persons allow, then there is little
time for recreation and amusement ; and if there were, the heart
which is truly impressed with duties so sacred, and has entered
into their spirit, can have no relish for them. Against every tempt-
ation of this kind, the words of the pious Archbishop Dawes may
serve as a salutary admonition : —

" Dost thou require of me, O Lord, but one day in seven for
thy more especial service, when as all my times, all my days, are
thy due tribute, and shall I grudge thee that one day] Have I
but one day in the week, a peculiar season of nurturing and train-
ing up my soul for heavenly happiness, and shall I think the whole
of this too much, and judge my duties at an end, when the public-
offices of the Church are only ended 1 Ah ! where, in such a case,
is my zeal, my sincerity, my constancy, and perseverance of holy
obedience % Where my love unto, my delight and relish in, pious
performances ? Would those that are thus but half Christians be

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 365

content to be half saved 1 Would those who are thus not far from
the kingdom of heaven, be willing to be utterly excluded thence
for arriving no nearer to a due observance of the Lord's day 1 Am
I so afraid of sabbatizing with the Jews, that I carelessly omit keep-
ing the day as a good Christian 1 Where can be the harm of over-
doing in God's worship, suppose I could overdo 1 But when my
Saviour has told me, after I have done all, I am still an unprofitable
servant, where is the hazard, where the possibility, of doing too
much ; whereas in doing too little, in falling short of performing
a due obedience on the Sabbath, I may also fall short of eter-
nal life ?"

CHAPTER IV.

Morals ; — Duties to our Neighbour.

When our duty to others is summed up in the general epitome
of the second table, "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself;"
although love must be so taken as to include many other princi-
ples and acts, yet we are thereby taught the source from which
they truly spring, when performed evangelically, and also that
universal charity is to be the habitual and reigning affection of
the heart, in all our relations to our fellow creatures.

This affection is to be considered in its source.

That source is a regenerated state of mind. We have shown
that the love of God springs from the gift of the Holy Ghost to
those who are justified by faith in Christ, and that every sentiment
which, in any other circumstances, assumes this designation, is
imperfect or simulated. We make the same remark as to the Jove
of our neighbour. It is an imperfect or simulated sentiment, if it
flow not from the love of God, the sure mark of a regenerate
nature. We here also see the superior character of Christian mo-
rals, and of morals when kept in connexion, as they ought always
to be, with the doctrines of the Gospel, and their operation in the
heart. There may, indeed, be a degree of natural benevolence ;
the indirect influence of a benevolent nature may counteract the
selfish and the malevolent feelings ; and education, when well
directed, will come in to the aid of nature. Yet the principle, as a
religious one, and in its full operation, can only result from a
•supernatural change of our nature, because that only can subdue

Vol. III. 31

26Q THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PAfc1?

those affections which counteract benevolence and charity in their
efficient and habitual manifestations.
This affection is also to be considered in respect of what it

EXCLUDES.

It excludes all anger beyond that degree of resentment which a
culpable action in another may call forth, in order to mark the
sense we entertain of its evil, and to impress that evil upon the
offender, so that we may lead him to repent of it, and forsake it.
This seems the proper rule by which to distinguish lawful anger
from that which is contrary to charity, and therefore malevolent
and sinful. It excludes implacability ; for if we do not promptly
and generously forgive others their trespasses, this is deemed to be
so great a violation of that law of love which ought to bind men
together, that our heavenly Father will not forgive us. It excludes
all revenge ; so that we are to exact no punishment of another for
offences against ourselves : and though it be lawful to call in the
penalties of the laws for crimes against society, yet this is never to
be done on the principle of private revenge ; but on the public
ground^ that law and government are ordained of God, which pro-
duces a case that comes under the inspired rule, " Vengeance is
mine ; I will repay, saith the Lord." It excludes all prejudice ; by
which is meant a harsh construction of men's motives and charac-
ters upon surmise, or partial knowledge of the facts, accompanied
with an inclination to form an ill opinion of them in the absence ot
proper evidence. This appears to be what the Apostle Paul means,
when he says, " Charity thinketh no evil." It excludes all censo-
riousness or evil speaking, when the end is not the correction of the
offender, or when a declaration of the truth as to one person is not
required by our love and duty to another ; for whenever the end is
merely to lower a person in the estimation of others, it is resolvable
solely into a splenetic and immoral feeling. It excludes all those
aggressions, whether petty or more weighty, which may be made
upon the interests of another, when the law of the case, or even
the abstract right, might not be against our claim. These are
always complex cases, and can but occasionally occur ; but the
rule which binds us to do unto others as we would they should do
unto us, binds us to act upon the benevolent view of the case ; and
to forego the rigidness of right. Finally, it excludes, as limitations
to its exercise, all those artificial distinctions which have been cre-
ated by men, or by providential arrangements, or by accidental
circumstances. Men of all nations, of all colours, of all conditions,
are the objects of the unlimited precept, " Thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself." Kind feelings produced by natural instincts.

VHIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 2Q"t

by intercourse, by country, may call the love of our neighbour into
warmer exercise as to individuals or classes of men, or these may
be considered as distinct and special, though similar affections
superadded to this universal charity ; but as to all men, this charity
is an efficient affection, excluding all ill will, and all injury.

But its active expression remains to be considered.

It is not a merely negative affection ; but it brings forth rich
and varied fruit. It produces a feeling of delight in the happiness
of others, and thus destroys envy ; it is the source of sympathy and
compassion; it opens the hand in liberality for the supply of the
wants of others ; it gives cheerfulness to every service undertaken
in the cause of others ; it resists the wrong which may be inflicted
upon them ; and it will run hazards of health and life for their
sakes. It has special respect to the spiritual interests and salvation
of men ; and thus it instructs, persuades, reproves the ignorant and
vicious ; counsels the simple ; comforts the doubting and perplexed ;
and rejoices in those gifts and graces of others, by which society
may be enlightened and purified. The zeal of Apostles, the patience
of Martyrs, the travels and labours of Evangelists in the first ages,
were all animated by this affection ; and the earnestness of Preach-
ers in all ages, and the more private labours of Christians for the
benefit of the souls of men, with the operations of those voluntary
associations which send forth Missionaries to the Heathen, or dis-
tribute Bibles and Tracts, or conduct Schools, are all its visible
expressions before the world. A principle of philanthropy may be
conceived to exist independent of the influence of active and effi-
cient Christianity ; but it has always expended itself either in good
wishes, or, at most, in feeble efforts, chiefly directed to the mitiga-
tion of a little temporary external evil. Except in connexion with
religion, and that the religion of the heart, wrought and maintained
there, by the acknowledged influences of the Holy Spirit, the love
of mankind has never exhibited itself under such views and acts as
those we have just referred to. It has never been found in cha-
racters naturally selfish and obdurate ; has never disposed men to
make great and painful sacrifices for others ; never sympathized
with spiritual wretchedness ; never been called forth into its high-
est exercises by considerations drawn from the immortal relations
of man to eternity ; never originated large plans for the illumination
and moral culture of society ; never fixed upon the grand object to
which it is now bending the hearts, the interests, and hopes of the
universal Church, the conversion of the world. Philanthropy, in
systems of mere ethics, like their love of God, is a greatly inferior
principle to that which is enjoined by Christianity, and infused b\

268 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

its influence ; — another proof of the folly of separating morals from
revealed truth, and of the necessity of cultivating them upon evan-
gelical principles.

The same conclusion will be established, if we consider those
works of mercy which the principle of universal philanthropy
will dictate, and which form a large portion of our " duty to our
neighbour." It is more the design of this part of the present work,
to exhibit the peculiar nature and perfection of the morals of
Christianity, than to consider moral duties in detail ; and, there-
fore, it is only necessary to assume what is obvious to all, that the
exercise of practical mercy to the needy and miserable, is a moral
duty clearly revealed, including also the application of a part of
our property to benefit mankind in other respects, as we have
opportunity. But let us ask, under what rules can the quantum
of our exertions in doing good to others be determined, except by
the authority of revealed religion'? It is clear that there is an
antagonist principle of selfishness in man, which counteracts our
charities; and that the demands of personal gratification, and ol
family interests, and of show and expense in our modes of living.
are apt to take up so large a share of what remains after our neces-
sities, and the lawful demands of station, and a prudent provision
for old age and for our families after our decease, are met, that a
very small portion is wont to be considered as lawfully disposable,
under all these considerations, for purposes of general beneficence.
If we have no rules or principles, it is clear that the most limited
efforts may pass for very meritorious acts ; or that they will be left
to be measured only by the different degrees of natural compassion
in man, or by some immoral principle, such as the love of human
praise. There is nothing in any mere system of morals to direct
in such cases ; certainly nothing to compel either the principles or
the heart. Here then we shall see also in how different a predica-
ment this interesting branch of morality stands, when kept in close
and inseparable connexion with Christianity. It is true, that we
have no specific rule as to the quantum of our givings in the Scrip-
tures ; and the reason of this is not inapparent. Such a rule must
have been branched out into an inconvenient number of detailed
directions to meet every particular case ; it must have respected
the different and changing states of society and civilization ; it
must have controlled men's savings as well as givings, because
the latter are dependent upon them ; it must have prescribed
modes of dress, and modes of living : all which would have left
cases still partially touched or wholly unprovided for, and the
multiplicity of rules might have been a trap to our consciences.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 269

rather than the means of directing them. There is also a more
general reason for this omission. The exercise of mercy is a work
o( the affections ; it must have, therefore, something free and spon-
taneous in it ; and it was designed to be voluntary, that the moral
effect produced upon society might be to bind men together in a
softer bond, and to call forth reciprocally good affections. To this
the stern character of particular laws would have been inimical.
Christianity teaches mercy, by general principles, which at once
sufficiently direct and leave to the heart the free play of its
affections.

The general law is express and unequivocal : " As ye have
opportunity do good unto all men, and especially to them that
are of the household of faith." " To do good and to communicate
forget not, for with such sacrifices God is well pleased." A most
important and influential principle, to be found in no mere system
of ethics, is also contained in the revelation of a particular relation
in which we all stand to God, and on which we must be judged at
the last day. We are " stewards," " servants," to whom the great
Master has committed his "goods," to be used according to his
directions. We have nothing, therefore, of our own, no right in
property, except under the conditions on which it is committed to
us ; and we must give an account for our use of it, according to
the rule. A rule of proportion is also in various passages of Scrip-
ture expressly laid down . "Where little is given, little is required ;
where much is given, much is required." " For if there be first a
willing mind, it is accepted according to what a man hath, and not
according to what he hath not." It is a further rule, that our cha-
rities should be both cheerful and abundant. " Sec that ye abound
in this grace also," " not grudgingly, or of necessity, for God loveth
a cheerful giver." These general rules and principles being laid
down, the appeal is made to the heart, and men are left to the
influence of the spiritual and grateful affections excited there.
All the venerable examples of Scripture are brought to bear upon
ihe free and liberal exercises of beneficence, crowned with the
example of our Saviour : " Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that, though he was rich, yet for your sakes he became
poor, that ye through his poverty might become rich." An appeal
is made to man's gratitude for the blessings of Providence to him-
self, and he is enjoined to give " as the Lord hath prospered him."
Our fellow creatures are constantly presented to us under tender
relations, as our " brethren ;" or, more particularly, as " of the
household of faith." Special promises are made of God's favour and
lilessing, as the reward of such acts in the present life : "And God

31*

270 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

is able to make all grace abound toward you, that ye, always hav-
ing all sufficiency in all things, may abound to every good work ;"
and finally, although every notion of merit is excluded, yet the
rewards of eternity are represented as to be graciously dispensed,
so as specially to distinguish and honour every " work of faith,"
and "labour of love." Under so powerful an authority, so explicit
a general directory, and so effectual an excitement, is this branch ol
morality placed by the Gospel.

As our religion enjoins charity, so also it prescribes justice.
as a mutual dependence has been established among men, so also
there are mutual rights, in the rendering of which to each other,
justice, when considered as a social virtue, consists.

Various definitions and descriptions of justice are found among
moralists and jurists, of different degrees of importance and utilit}
to those who write, and to those who study, formal treatises on its
collective or separate branches. The distribution of justiee into
Ethical, Economical, and Political, is more suited to our purpose,
and is sufficiently comprehensive. The First considers all mankind
as on a level ; the Second regards them as associated into families,
under the several relations of husband and wife, parents and
children, masters and servants ; and the Third comprehends them
as united into public states, and obliged to certain duties, either as
magistrates or people. On all these the rules of conduct in
Scripture are explicit and forcible.

Ethical Justice, as it considers mankind as on a level, chiefly
therefore respects what are usually called men's natural rights,
which are briefly summed up in three, — life, property, and liberty,

The natural right to Life is guarded by the precept, " Thou
*halt not kill ;" and it is also limited by the more ancient injunction
to the sons of Noah, " Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall
his blood be shed." In a state of society, indeed, this right may
be further limited by a government, and capital punishments be
extended to other crimes, (as we see in the Mosaic law,) provided
the law be equally binding on all offenders, and rest upon the
necessity of the case, as determined by the good of the whole
community ; and also that in every country professing Christianity,
the merciful as well as the righteous character of that religion be
suffered to impress itself upon its legislation. But against all
individual authority the life of man is absolutely secured ; and
not only so, but anger, which is the first principle of violence, and
which proceeds first to malignity and revenge, and then to personal
injuries, is prohibited, under the penalty of the Divine wrath; a
'ofry proof of the superior character of the Christian rule of justicr.

iHIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 271

In Properly, lawfully acquired, that is, acquired without injury
to others, every man has also a natural right. This right also may
be restrained in society, without injustice, seeing it is but the price
which every man pays for protection, and other advantages of the
social state ; but here also the necessity of the case, resting upon
the benefit of the community, is to be the rule of this modification
of the natural claim. The law too must lie equally upon all, cceteris
paribus; and every individual whose right of property is thu?
interfered with must have his due share of the common advantage.
Against individual aggression the right of property is secured by
the Divine law, " Thou shalt not steal ;" and by another law which
carries the restraint up to the very principle of justice in the heart,
" Thou shalt not covet ;" covetousness being that corrupt affection
from which injuries done to others in their property arise. The
Christian injunction, to be " content with such things as we have,"
is another important security. The rule which binds rulers and
governments in their interferences with this natural right oi
property, comes under the head of political justice.

Liberty is another natural right, which by individual authority.
at least, cannot be interfered with. Hence " man stealing," the
object of which is to reduce another to slavery, by obtaining forci-
ble possession of his person, and compelling his labour, is ranked
with crimes of the greatest magnitude in the New Testament ;
and against it the special vengeance of God is threatened. By the
Jewish law also, it was punished with death. How far the natural
right which every man has to his own liberty may, like the natural
light to property, be restrained by public authority, is a point on
which different opinions have been held. Prisoners of war were
formerly considered to be absolute captives, the right of which
claim is involved in the question of the right of war. Where one
can be justified, so may the other ; since a surrender of the person
in war is the commutation of liberty for life.* In the more
humane practice of modern warfare, an exchange of prisoners is
effected ; but even this supposes an acquired right on each side in
the prisoners, and a commutation by an exchange. Should the
progeny of such prisoners of Avar, doomed, as by ancient custom..

* Montesquieu says, " it is false that killing in war is lawful, unless in a case of
absolute necessity : but when a man has made another his slave, he cannot be said
to have been under a necessity of taking away his life, since he actually did not
lake it away. War gives no other right over prisoners than to disable them from
doing any farther harm, by securing their persons." — And " if a prisoner of war is-
not to be reduced to slavery, much less are his children." This reason, therefore,
with others, assigned by the civilians in justification of slavery, he concludes il
" Spm7 o/£au?s, Book xv, ch, ii. — American Editors.

2X2 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to perpetual servitude, be also kept in slavery, and the purchase
of slaves also be practised, the question which then arises is one
which tries the whole case of slavery, as far as public law is
concerned. Among the patriarchs there was a mild species of
domestic servitude, distinct from that of captives of war. Among
the Jews, a Hebrew might be sold for debt, or sell himself when
poor, but only till the year of release. After that, his continuation
in a state of slavery was perfectly voluntary. The Jews might,
however, hold foreigners as slaves for life. Michaelis has well
observed, that, by the restrictions of his law, Moses remarkably
mitigated the rigours of slavery. " This is, as it were, the spirit ol
his laws respecting it. He appears to have regarded it as a hard-
ship, and to have disapproved of its severities. Hence we find him,
in Deut. xxiii, 15, 16, ordaining that no foreign servant, who
sought for refuge among the Israelites, should be delivered up to
his master." (3) This view of the case, we may add, will probably
afford the reason why slavery was at all allowed under the Jewish
dispensation. The general state of society in the surrounding
nations might perhaps render it a necessary evil ; but in othei
countries it existed in forms harsh and oppressive, whilst the mer-
ciful nature of the Mosaic Institute impressed upon it a mild and
mitigated character, in recognition of man's natural rights, and as
an example to other countries. And to show how great a contrast
with our modern colonial slavery, the case of slaves among the
Jews presented, we may remark, that all foreign slaves were
circumcised, and therefore initiated into the true religion ; that
they had the full and strict advantage of the Sabbath confirmed to
them by express statute ; that they had access to the solemn
religious festivals of the Jews, and partook of the feasts made upon
the offerings ; that they could possess property, as appears from
Lev. xxv, 49, and 2 Sam. ix, 10; and that all the fruits which
grew spontaneously during the Sabbatical year were given to
them, and to the indigent. Michaelis has also showed, that not
only was the ox not muzzled when treading out the corn, but that
the slaves and day labourers might eat without restraint of the
fruits they were gathering in their master's service, and drink of
the wine they pressed from the wine press. (4) The Jewish law-
may therefore be considered not so much as controlling the natural
light which man has to liberty, and so authorizing the infraction
of that right under certain circumstances, but as coming in to
ycgulate and to soften a state of things already existing, and grown

(3) QomiWitarles on the Lcncs of Moses, (4) Ibid. Art, ljjfo

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 273

into general practice. All, therefore, that can be fairly inferred
from the existence of slavery under that law, is, that a legislature,
in certain cases, may be justified in mitigating, rather than abolish-
ing, that evil. But even here, since the Legislator was in fact
God, whose right to dispose of his creatures cannot be questioned,
and since also the nations neighbouring to the Jews were under a
malediction because of their idolatries, the Jewish law can be no
rule to a Christian state ; and all arguments drawn from it in favour
of perpetual slavery, suppose that a mere earthly legislature is
invested with the powers and prerogatives of the Divine Legislator
of the Jews, which of course vitiates the whole reasoning.

As to the existence of slavery in Christian states, every govern-
ment, as soon as it professes to be Christian, binds itself to be
regulated by the principles of the New Testament ; and though a
part of its subjects should at that time be in a state of servitude,
and their sudden emancipation might be obviously an injury to
society at large, it is bound to show that its spirit and tendency is
as inimical to slavery as is the Christianity which it professes. All
the injustice and oppression against which it can guard that con-
dition, and all the mitigating regulations it can adopt, are obligatory
upon it ; and since also every Christian slave is enjoined by
Apostolic authority to choose freedom, when it is possible to attain
it, as being a better state, and more befitting a Christian man, so
is every Christian master bound, by the principle of loving his
neighbour, and more especially his " brother in Christ," as himself,
to promote his passing into that better and more Christian state.
To the instruction of the slaves in religion would every such
Christian government also be bound, and still farther to adopt
measures for the final extinction of slavery ; the rule of its pro-
ceeding in this case being the accomplishment of this object as
soon as is compatible with the real welfare of the enslaved portion
of its subjects themselves, and not the consideration of the losses
which might be sustained by their proprietors, which, however,
ought to be compensated by other means, as far as they are just,
and equitably estimated.

If this be the mode of proceeding clearly pointed out by Chris-
tianity to a State on its first becoming Christian, when previously,
and for ages, the practice of slavery had grown up with it ; how
much more forcibly does it impose its obligation upon nations
involved in the guilt of the modern African slavery ! They pro-
fessed Christianity when they commenced the practice. They
entered upon a traffic which ab initio was, upon their own princi-
ples, unjust and cruel They had no rights of war to plead against

274 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

the natural rights of the first captives ; who were in fact stolen, or
purchased from the stealers, knowing them to be so. The govern-
ments themselves never acquired any right of property in the parents ;
they have none in their descendants, and can acquire none ; as the
thief who steals cattle cannot, should he feed and defend them,
acquire any right of property, either in them or the stock they may
produce, although he should be at the charge of rearing them.
These governments not having a right of property in their colonial
slaves, could not transfer any right of property in them to their
present masters, for it could not give what it never had ; nor, by
its connivance at the robberies and purchases of stolen human
beings alter the essential injustice of the transaction. All such
governments are therefore clearly bound, as they fear God and
dread his displeasure, to restore all their slaves to the condition of
free men. Restoration to their friends and country is now out of
the question ; they are bound to protect them where they are, and
have the right to exact their obedience to good laws in return ; but
property in them they cannot obtain, their natural right to liberty
is untouched and inviolable. The manner in which this right is to
be restored, we grant, is in the power of such governments to
determine, provided that proceeding be regulated by the principles
above laid down, — First, that the emancipation be sincerely deter-
mined upon, at some time future : Secondly, that it be not delayed
beyond the period which the general interest of the slaves themselves
prescribes, and which is to be judged of benevolently, and without
any bias of judgment, giving the advantage of every doubt to the
injured party : Thirdly, that all possible means be adopted to ren-
der freedom a good to them. It is only under such circumstances
that the continuance of slavery among us can cease to be a national
sin, calling down, as it has done, and must do until a process of
emancipation be honestly commenced, the just displeasure of God.
What compensations may be justly claimed from the governments,
fhat is, the public of those countries who have entangled themselves
in this species of unjust dealing, by those who have purchased men
and women whom no one had the right to sell, and no one had the
right to buy, is a perfectly distinct question, and ought not to turn
repentance and justice out of their course, or delay their opera-
tions for a moment. Perhaps, such is the unfruitful nature of all
wrong, that it may be found, that, as free labourers, the slaves
would be of equal or more value to those who employ them, than
at present. If otherwise, as in some degree " all have sinned,"
the real loss ought to be borne by all, when that loss is fairly and
impartially ascertained ; but of which loss, the slave interest, if we

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 275

may so call it, ought in justice to bear more than an equal share,
as having had the greatest gain.*

The rules of Christian justice thus secure the three great natural
rights of man ; but it may be inquired whether he has himself the
power of surrendering them at his own option 1

And First, with respect to Life.

Since government is an institution of God, it seems obligatory
upon all men to live in a social state ; and, if so, to each is con-
ceded the right of putting his life to hazard, when called upon by
his government to defend that state from domestic rebellion or
foreign war. So also we have the power to hazard our lives to
save a fellow creature from perishing. In times of persecution for
religion, we are enjoined by our Lord to flee from one city to
another ; but when flight is cut off, we have the power to surren-
der life rather than betray our allegiance to Christ. According to
the Apostle's rule, " we ought to lay down our lives for the bre-
thren ;" that is, for the Church and the cause of religion. In this
case, and in some others, accompanied with danger to life, when
a plain rule of duty is seen to be binding upon us, we are not only
at liberty to take the risk, but are bound to do it ; since it is more
our duty to obey God than to take care of our health and life.
These instances of devotion have been by some writers called
■'suicides of duty," a phrase which may well be dispensed with,
although the sentiment implied in it is correct.

On suicide, properly so called, that is, self murder, our modem
moralists have added little to what is advanced by the ethical writers
of Greece and Rome, to prove its unlawfulness; for, though suieide
was much practised in those ancient states, and sometimes com-
mended, especially by the Stoics, it was occasionally condemned.
" We men," says Plato, " are all by the appointment of God in a
certain prison or custody, which we ought not to break out of, or
run away." So likewise Cicero : " God, the supreme Governor of
all things, forbids us to depart hence without his order. All pious
men ought to have patience to continue in the body, as long as God
shall please who sent us hither ; and not force themselves out of the
world before he calls for them, lest they be found deserters of the
station appointed them by God."

This is the reasoning which has generally satisfied our moralists
on this subject, with the exception of some infidel sophists, and two

* The above paragraphs, under the last head, were obviously written with a
view to States in which Christianity, as a system, is formally established by law-,
and in which the acts of the government arc officially baSed on this principle
— American Editor?.

376 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

or three writers of paradoxes in the Established Church, who have
defended suicide, or affected to do so. Paley has added some other
considerations, drawn from his doctrine of general tendency, and
from the duties which are deserted, the injuries brought upon
others, &c ; but the whole only shows, that merely ethical reason-
ing furnishes but a feeble barrier against this offence against God.
against society, and against ourselves, independent of the Holy
Scriptures. There the prohibitions of a divine law lie directly
against this act, and also the whole spirit of that economy under
which we are placed by Almighty God.

It is very true, that, in the Old Testament history, we have a
few instances of suicide among the Jews, which were not marked
by any penal visitation, as among modern nations, upon the remains
of the deceased ; such as the denial of honourable sepulture, &c.
But this arose from the absence of all penalty in such cases in the
Mosaic law. In this there was great reason ; for the subject him-
self is by his own direful act put beyond the reach of human
visitation ; and every dishonour done to the inanimate corse is
only punishment inflicted upon the innocent survivors, who, in
most cases, have a large measure of suffering already entailed
upon them. This was probably the humane reason for the silence
of the Mosaic law as to the punishment of suicide.

But, as the Law of the two Tables is of general moral obligation,
although a part also of the municipal law of the Jews ; as it con-
cerned them as creatures, as well as subjects of the theocracy ; it
takes cognizance of acts not merely as prejudicial to society, but
as offensive to God, and in opposition to his will as the ruler of the
world. The precept, therefore, "Thou shalt not kill," must be
taken to forbid, not only murder properly so called, which is a
crime against society, to be reached by human penalties, but also
self destruction, which, though a crime also in a lower degree
against society, no human penalties can visit, but is left, since the
offender is out of the reach of man, wholly to the retribution of
God. The absence of all post mortem penalties against suicide in
the Mosaic law, is no proof, therefore, that it is not included in the
prohibition, " Thou shalt not kill," any more than the absence of
all penalties in the same law against a covetous disposition, prove-
any thing against the precept, " Thou shalt not covet," being inter-
preted to extend to the heart of man, although violences, frhefts.
and other instances of covetousness, in action only, are restrained
in the Mosaic law by positive penalties. Some have urged it, how-
ever, as a great absurdity, to allege this commandment as a prohi-
bition of suicide. "When a Christian moralist," says Dr. Whately.

UIIRD.j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 27 "i

"is called on for a direct scriptural precept against suicide, instead
of replying that the Bible is not meant for a complete code of lam;
but for a system of motives and principles, the answer frequently
given is, ' Thou shalt do no murder.' Suicide, if any one consi-
ders the nature, and not the name of it, (self murder,) evidently
wants the essential characteristic of murder, viz. the hurt and injury
done to one's neighbour, in depriving him of life, as well as to others
by the insecurity they are in consequence liable to feel." (5) All this
might be correct enough, but for one error into which the write1
lias fallen, — that of assuming that the precept is, " Thou shalt do
no murder ;" for if that were the term used in the strict sense, we
need not be told that suicide is not murder, which is only saying,
that the killing one's self is not the killing another. The authorized
translation uses the word " kill,'" " thou shalt not kill," as better
rendering the Hebrew word, which has a similar latitude of mean-
ing, and is used to express fortuitous homicide, and the act of
depriving of life generally, as well as murder, properly so called.
That the prohibition respects the killing of others with criminal
intent, all agree, and Moses describes (3) the circumstances which
make that killing so criminal as to be punishable with death ; but
that he included the different kinds of homicide within the prohibi-
tion, is equally certain, because the Mosaic law takes cognizance
of homicide, and provides for the due examination of its circum-
stances by the Judges, and recognises the custom of the Goel, or
avenging of blood, and provides cities of refuge for the homicide :
a provision which, however merciful, left the incautious manslayev
subject to risks and inconveniences which had the nature of penal-
ties. So tender was this law of the life of man ! Moses, however,
as a legislator, applying this great moral table of laws to practical
legislation, could not extend the penalties under this prohibition
farther than to these two cases, because in cases of suicide the
offender is out cf the reach of human power ; but, as we see the
precept extended beyond the case of murder with criminal inten-
tion, to homicide, and that the word used in the prohibition, "Thou
shalt not kill" is so indefinite as to comprehend every act by which
man is deprived of life, when it has no authority from God ; it has
been very properly extended by Divines and scriptural Moralists,
not only to homicide, but from that to suicide. This, indeed,
appears to be its import, that it prohibits the taking away of human
life in all cases, without authority from God, which authority he
has lodged with human governments, the " powers ordained by

(5) Elements of Logic. (6) Numbers i, 35.

Vol. III. 32

278 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

him" for the regulation of mankind, in what relates to the peace
and welfare of society ; and, whenever the life of man is taken
away, except in cases sanctioned by human governments, proceed-
ing upon the rules and principles of the word of God, then the
precept, " Thou shalt not kill," is directly violated. Dr. Whately,
in the passage above adverted to, objects to suicide being called
self murder, because this criminal act has not the qualities of that
by which the life of another is intentionally and maliciously taken
away ; but if the deliberate and intentional deprivation of another
of life, without authority from the divine law, and from human
laws established upon them, be that which, in fact, constitutes
"murder," then is suicide entitled to be branded with the same
odious appellation. The circumstances must, of necessity, differ ;
but the act itself has essentially the same criminality, though not
in the same degree, — it is the taking away of the life of a human
being, without the authority of God, the maker and proprietor
of all, and therefore in opposition to, and defiance of, his authority.
That suicide has very deservedly received the morally descriptive
appellation of self murder, will also appear from the reason given,
in the first prohibition against murder, for making this species of
violence a capital crime. In the precepts delivered to the sons of
Noah, and, therefore, through them, to all their descendants, that
is, to all mankind, that against murder is thus delivered, (7) "Whoso
sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the
image of God made he man" There is in this reason a manifest
reference to the dignity put upon human nature, by its being
endowed with a rational and immortal spirit. The crime of mur-
der is made to lie, therefore, not merely in the putting to death
the animal part of man's nature, for this is merged in a higher
consideration, which seems to be, the indignity done to the noblest
of the works of God ; and particularly, the value of life to an
immortal being, accountable in another state for the actions done
in this, and which ought, for this very reason, to be specially
guarded, since death introduces him into changeless and eternal
relations, which were not to lie at the mercy of human passions.
Such moralists as the writer above quoted, would restrain the
essential characteristics of an act of murder to the " hurt done to
a neighbour in depriving him of life," and the " insecurity" inflicted
upon society ; but in this ancient and universal lav/, it is made
eminently to consist in contempt of the image of God in man, and
its interference with man's immortal interests and relations as a

(7) Genesis ix, 6.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 279

deathless spirit ; and if so, then suicide bears upon it these deep
and awful characteristics of murder. It is much more wisely said
by Bishop Kidder, in his remarks upon this passage, that the reason
given, — " for in the image of God made he man," — is a farther
aggravation of the sin of murder. It is a great trespass upon God.
as it destroys his likeness ; and self murder, upon this account, is
forbidden as well as the killing of others.

Whatever weight may be due to the considerations urged by
the moralists above quoted against this crime, — and every motive
which may deter men from listening to the first temptation to so
direful an act, is important, — yet the guards of Christianity must
be acknowledged to be of a more powerful kind. For the prin-
ciples of our religion cannot be understood without our perceiving,
that, of almost all other crimes, wilful suicide ought most to be
dreaded. It is a sin against God's authority. He is "the God ol
our life ;" in " his hand our breath is ;" and we usurp his sovereignty
when we presume to dispose of it. As resulting from the pressure
of mortifications of spirit, or the troubles of life, it becomes a sin,
as arraigning his providential wisdom and goodness. It implies
either an atheistic denial of God's government, or a rebellious
opposition to his permissive acts or direct appointments ; it cannot
be committed, therefore, when the mind is sound, but in the
absence of all the Christian virtues, of humility, self denial, patience,
and the fear and love of God, and only under the influence of
pride, worldliness, forgetfulness of God, and contempt of him. It
hides from the mind the realities of a future judgment, or it defies
them ; and it is consummated by the character of ' wvpardonableness,
because it places the criminal at once beyond the reach of mercy.

If no man has the right, then, to dispose of his own life by
suicide, he has no right to hazard it in duels. The silence of the
pulpits in those quarters where only the warning voice of the
Christian Preacher can be heard by that class of persons most
addicted to this crime, is exceedingly disgraceful ; for there can
be little doubt that the palliating views of this practice taken by
some ethical writers of celebrity, together with the loose reasonings
of men of the world, have, from this neglect, exercised much
influence upon many minds ; and the consequence has been that
hundreds, in this professedly Christian country, have fallen victims
to false notions of honour, and to imperfect notions of the obliga-
tions of their religion. Paley has the credit of dealing with this
vice with greater decision than many of our moralists. He classes
it very justly with murder. " Murder is forbidden ; and wherever
human life is deliberately taken away, otherwise than by public

280 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [FART

authority, there is murder." (8) " If unauthorized laws of honoui
be allowed to create exceptions to divine prohibitions, there is an
end to all morality, as founded in the will of the Deity ; and the
obligation of every duty may, at one time or other, be discharged
by the caprice and fluctuations of fashion." (9) The fact is, that
we must either renounce Christianity, or try all cases by its rule.
The question of the ' lawfulness of duelling is thus promptly dis-
posed of. If I have received a personal injury, I am bound to
forgive it, unless it be of such a nature that it becomes a duty to
punish it by due course of law ; but even then not in the spirit ol
revenge, but out of respect to the peace and welfare of society.
If I have given offence, I am bound to acknowledge it, and to
make reparation ; and if my adversary will not be satisfied, and
insists upon my staking my life against his own, no considerations
of reputation or disgrace, the good or ill opinion of men, who form
their judgments in utter disregard to the laws of God, can have
any more weight in this, than in any other case of immorality.
The sin of duelling unites, in fact, the two crimes of suicide and oi
murder. He who falls in a duel is guilty of suicide, by voluntarily
exposing himself to be slain ; he by whom he falls is guilty of
murder, as having shed man's blood without authority. Nay, the
guilt of the two crimes unites in the same person. He who falls is
a suicide in fact, and the murderer of another in intention ; he b\
whom he falls is a murderer in fact, and so far a suicide as to have
put his own life into imminent peril, in contempt of God's authority
over him. He has contemned the " image of God in man," both
in himself and in his brother. And where duels are not fatal on
either side, the whole guilt is chargeable upon the parties, as a sin
purposed in the heart, although, in that case, there is space left
for repentance.

Life, then, is not disposable at the option of man, nor is Pro-
perty itself, without respect to the rules of the divine law ; and
here, too, we shall perceive the feebleness of the considerations
urged, in merely moral systems, to restrain prodigal and wasteful
expenditure, hazardous speculations, and even the obvious evil of
gambling. Many weighty arguments, we grant, may be drawn
against all these from the claims of children, and near relations,
whose interests we are bound to regard, and whom we can have
no right to expose even to the chance of being involved in the
same ruin with ourselves. But these reasons can have little sway
with those who fancy that they can keep within the verge of

(8) Moral and Political Philosophy. (9) Ibid.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 281

extreme danger, and who will plead their "natural right" to do
what they will with their own. In cases, too, where there may be
no children or dependent relatives, the individual would feel less
disposed to acknowledge the force of this class of reasons, or think
them quite inapplicable to his case. But Christianity enjoins
" moderation" of the desires, and temperance in the gratification
of the appetites, and in the show and splendour of life, even where
a state of opulence can command them. It has its admonitions
against the " love of money ;" against " willing to be rich," excepi
as "the Lord may prosper a man" in the usual track and course
of honest industry, — authoritative cautions which lie directly against
hazardous speculations ; and it warns such as despise them of the
consequent " temptations" and spiritual " snares," destructive to
habits of piety, and ultimately to the soul, into which they must
fall, — considerations of vast moment, but peculiar to itself, and
quite out of the range of those moral systems which have no
respect to its authority. Against gambling, in its most innocent
forms, it sets its injunction, " Redeeming the time ;" and in its
more aggravated cases, it opposes to it not only the above con-
siderations, as it springs from an unhallowed " love of money f
but the whole of that spirit and temper which it makes to be
obligatory upon us, and which those evil and often diabolical
excitements, produced by this habit, so fearfully violate. Above
all, it makes property a trust, to be employed under the rules pre-
scribed by Him who, as Sovereign Proprietor, has deposited it with
us, which rules require its use certainly ; (for the covetous are
excluded from the kingdom of God ;) but its use, first, for the sup-
ply of our wants, according to our station, with moderation ; then,
as a provision for children, and dependent relatives ; finally, for
purposes of charity and religion, in which "grace," as before
slated, it requires us " to abound ;" — and it enforces all these by
placing us under the responsibility of accounting to God himself,
in person, for the abuse or neglect of this trust, at the General
Judgment.

With respect to the Third natural right, that of Liberty, it is
a question which can seldom or never occur in the present state
of society, whether a man is free to part with it for a valuable
consideration. Under the law of Moses, this was certainly allowed ;
but a Christian man stands on different ground. To a Pagan he
would not be at liberty to enslave himself, because he is not at
liberty to put to hazard his soul's interests, which might be inter-
fered with by the control given to a Pagan over his time and
conduct. To a Christian he could not be at liberty to alienate

32*

282 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- [PART

himself, because, the spirit of Christianity being opposed to slavery,
the one is not at liberty to buy, nor the other to sell, for reasons
before given. I conclude, therefore, that no man can lawfully
divest himself absolutely of his personal liberty, for any consider-
ation whatever.

To the natural rights of life, property, and liberty, may be added
the right of Conscience.

By this is meant the right which a man has to profess his own
opinions on subjects of religion, and to worship God in the mode
which he deems most acceptable to him. Whether this, however,
be strictly a natural right, like the three above mentioned, may
be a subject of dispute, for then it would be universal, which is,
perhaps, carrying the point too far. The matter may best be
determined by considering the ground of that right, which differs
much from the others we have mentioned. The right to life
results both from the appointment of God, and the absence of a
superior or countervailing right in another to deprive us of it, until,
at least, we forfeit that right to some third party, by some voluntary
act of our own. This also applies to the rights of property and
liberty. The right of professing particular religious opinions, and
practising a particular mode of worship, can only rest upon a con-
viction that these are duties enjoined upon us by God. For since
religion is a matter which concerns man and God, a man musi
know that it is obligatory upon him as a duty, and under fear ol
God's displeasure, to profess his opinions openly, and to practise
some particular mode of worship.

To apply this to the case of persons all sincerely receiving the
Bible as a revelation from God. Unquestionably it is a part of
that revelation, that those who receive its doctrines should profess
and attempt to propagate them ; nor can they profess them in am
other way than they interpret the meaning of the book which con-
tains them. Equally clear is it, that the worship of God is enjoined
upon man, and that publicly, and in collective bodies. From these
circumstances, therefore, it results, that it is a duly which man
owes to God to profess and to endeavour to propagate his honest
views of the meaning of the Scriptures, and to worship God in the
mode which he sincerely conceives is made obligatory upon him,
by the same sacred volume. It is from this duty that the right oi
conscience flows, and from this alone ; and it thus becomes a right
of that nature which no earthly power has any authority to obstruct,
because it can have no power to alter or to destroy the obligations
which Almighty God, the Supreme Governor, has laid upon his.
creatures.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTE?. 283

It does not, however, follow from this statement, that human
governments, professing to be regulated themselves by the princi-
ples of Christianity, have no authority to take cognizance of the
manner in which this right of conscience is exercised. They arc
" ordained of God" to uphold their subjects in the exercise of their
just rights respectively, and that without partiality. If, therefore,
under a plea of conscience, one sect should interfere to obstruct
others in a peaceable profession of their opinions, and a peaceable
exercise of their worship ; or should exercise its own so as to be
vexatiously intrusive upon others, and in defiance of some rival
sect ; as for instance, in a Protestant country, if Roman Catholics
were to carry the objects of their idolatry about the streets, instead
of contenting themselves with worshipping in their own way, in
their own chapels. In all such cases the government might be
bound, in respect of the rights of other classes of its subjects, to
interfere by restraint, nor would it then trespass upon the rights of
conscience, justly interpreted. Again, since " the powers that be
are ordained of God," for " a terror to evil doers, and a praise to
them that do well ;" which evil doing and well doing are to be
interpreted according to the common sense and agreement ot
mankind, and plainly refer to moral actions only ; should any seel
or individual, ignorantly, fanatically, or corruptly, so interpret the
Scriptures as to suppose themselves free from moral obligation,
and then proceed to practise their tenets by any such acts as vio-
late the laws of well-ordered society, or by admitting indecencies
into their modes of worship, as some fanatics in former times who
used to strip themselves naked in their assemblies ; here too a
government would have the right to disregard the plea of con-
science if set up, and to restrain such acts, and the teachers oi
them, as pernicious to society. But if the opinions professed b}
any sect, however erroneous they may be, and however zealousl)
a sound and faithful Christian might be called by a sense of duty
to denounce them as involving a corrupt conscience, or no con-
science at all, and as dangerous or fatal to the salvation of those
that hold them, do not interfere with the peace, the morals, and
good order of society ; it is not within the province of a govern-
ment to animadvert upon them by force of law ; since it was not
established to judge of men's sincerity in religion, nor of the
tendency of opinions as they affect their salvation, but only to
uphold the morals and good order of the community. So, like-
wise, what has been called by some worship, has been sometimes
marked with great excesses of enthusiasm, and with even ridiculous
follies ; but if the peace of others, and the morals of society, are

384 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

not thereby endangered, it is not the part of the magistracy to
interfere, at least by authority.

In cases, however, where political opinions are connected with
religious notions, and the plea of conscience is set up as an
'•'unalienable right," to sanction their propagation, a government
may be justified in interposing, not indeed on the ground that it
judges the conscience to be erring and corrupt, but for its own
just support when endangered by such opinions. Sects of religious
republicans have sometimes appeared under a monarchical govern-
ment,— the Fifth Monarchy Fanatics, for instance, who, according
to their interpretation of the kingdom of Christ, regarded the
existence of all earthly monarchies as inimical to it, and, believing
that the period of its establishment was come, thought it impiety
to acknowledge any earthly sovereign, as being contrary to their
allegiance to Christ. When such notions are confined to a few
persons, it is wise in a government to leave them to their own
absurdities as their most potent cure ; but should a fanaticism of
this kind seize upon a multitude, and render them restless and
seditious, the State would be justifiable in restraining them by
force, although a mistaken conscience might be mixed up with the
error. We may therefore conclude, that as to religious sects, the
plea of conscience does not take their conduct out of the cogni-
zance of the civil magistrate when the peace, the morality, and
safety of society are infringed upon ; but that otherwise, the rights
of conscience are inviolable, even when it is obviously erroneous,
and, religiously considered, as to the individual dangerous. The
case then is one which is to be dealt with by instruction, and moral
suasion. It belongs to public instructers, and to all well-informed
persons, to correct an ignorant and perverse conscience, by
friendly and compassionate admonition ; and the power of the
magistrate is only lawfully interposed, when the effect complained
of so falls upon society as to infringe upon the rights of others, or
upon the public morals and peace ; — but even then the facts ought
to be obvious, and not constructive.

The case of those who reject the revelation of the Scripture?
must be considered on its own merits.

Simple Deism, in a Christian country, may lay a foundation for
such a plea of conscience as the State ought to admit, although it
should be rejected by a sound theologian. The Deist derives his
religion by inference from what he supposes discoverable of the
attributes and will of God from nature, and the course of the
Divine Government. Should he conclude that among such indi-
cations of the will of God there are those which make it bis duty

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 285

to profess his opinions, to attack the evidences of our Divine
Revelation as of insufficient proof, and to worship God in a
manner more agreeable to his system, it would be too delicate an
interference of a government with a question of conscience, to be
allowed to make itself the judge whether any such conviction
could be conscientiously entertained ; although by Divines, in
their character of public instructers, this would properly be denied.
Absolutely to shut out, by penal laws, all discussion on the
evidences of Divine Revelation, would probably make secret
infidels in such numbers as would more than counterbalance the
advantage which would be gained, and that by the suspicion which
it would excite. But this principle would not extend to the pro-
tection of any doctrine directly subversive of justice, chastity, or
humanity ; for then society would be attacked, and the natural as
well as civil rights of man invaded. Nor can opprobrious and
blasphemous attacks upon Christianity be covered by a plea of
conscience and right, since these are not necessary to argument.
It is evident that conscience, in the most liberal construction of the
term, cannot be pleaded in their behalf; and they are not innocent
even as to society.

To those systems which deny the immortality of the soul, and*
consequently, a state of future retribution, and which assume any
of the forms of Atheism, no toleration can, consistently with duty,
be extended by a Christian government. The reasons of this excep-
tion are, 1. That the very basis of its jurisprudence, which is founded
upon a belief in God, the sanctity of oaths, and a future state, is
assaulted by such doctrines, and that it cannot co-exist with them :

2. That they are subversive of the morals of the people : and

3. That no conscience can be pleaded by their votaries for the
avowal of such tenets. When the existence of a God and his
moral government are denied, no conscience can exist, to require
the publication of such tenets ; for this cannot be a duty imposed
upon them by God. since they deny his existence. No right of
conscience is therefore violated when they are restrained by civil
penalties. Such persons cannot have the advantages of society,
without submitting to the principles on which it is founded ; and
as they profess to believe that they are not accountable beings,
their silence cannot be a guilt to them ; they give up the argument
drawn from conscience, and from its rights, which have no exist-
ence at all but as founded upon revealed dutv.

The second branch of Justice we have denominated Economi-
cal : it respects those relations which grow out of the existence o!
men in families.

28t) THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

The first is that of Husband and Wife, and arises out of the
institution of Marriage.

The foundation of the marriage union is the will of God that the
human race should " increase and multiply," but only through a
chaste and restricted conjunction of one man and one woman,
united by their free vows in a bond made by the Divine law indis-
soluble, except by death or by adultery. The will of God as to
marriage is, however, general, and is not so expressed as to lay an
imperative obligation to marry upon every one, in all circumstances.
There was no need of the law being directed to each individual as
such, since the instincts of nature, and the affection of love planted
in human beings, were sufficient to guarantee its general observance.
The very bond of marriage too being the preference founded upon
love, rendered the act one in which choice and feeling were to have
great influence ; nor could a prudent regard to circumstances be
excluded. Cases were possible in which such a preference as is
essential to the felicity and advantages of that state might not be
excited, nor the due degree of affection to warrant the union called
forth. There might be cases in which circumstances might be ini-
mical to the full discharge of some of the duties of that state ; as
the comfortable maintenance of a wife, and a proper provision for
children. Some individuals would also be called by providence to
duties in the church and in the world, which might better be per-
formed in a single and unfettered life ; and seasons of persecution,
as we are taught by St. Paul, have rendered it an act of Christian
prudence to abstain even from this honourable estate. The general
rule, however, is in favour of marriage ; and all exceptions seem to
require justification on some principle grounded upon an equal or
a paramount obligation.

One intention of marriage in its original institution was, the pro-
duction of the greatest number of healthy children ; and that it
secures this object, is proved from the universal fact, that popu-
lation increases more, and is of better quality, where marriage
is established and its sacred laws are observed, than where the
intercourse of the sexes is promiscuous. A second end was the
establishment of the interesting and influential relations of acknow-
ledged children and parents, from which the most endearing,
meliorating, and pure affections result, and which could not exist
without marriage. It is indeed scarcely possible even to sketch
the numerous and important effects of this sacred institution,
which at once displays, in the most affecting manner, the Divine
benevolence and the Divine wisdom. It secures the preservation
and tender nurture of children, by concentrating an affection upoa

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. -JS7

them, whicli is dissipated and lost wherever fornication prevails
It creates conjugal tenderness, filial piety, the attachment of bro
thers and sisters, and of collateral relations. It softens the feelings,
and increases the benevolence of society at large, by bringing all
these affections to operate powerfully within each of those domestic
and family circles of which society is composed. It excites industry
and economy; and secures the communication of moral knowledge,
and the inculcation of civility, and early habits of submission to
authority, by which men are fitted to become the subjects of a
public government, and without which, perhaps, no government
could be sustained but by brute force, or, it may be, not sustained
at all. These are some of the innumerable benefits by which mar-
riage promotes human happiness, and the peace and strength of
the community at large.

The institution of marriage not only excludes the promiscuous
intercourse of the sexes, but polygamy also ; a practice almost
equally fatal to the kind affections, to education, to morals, and to
purity. The argument of our Lord with the Pharisees, on tin
subject of divorce, Matt, xix, assumes it as even acknowledged bv
the Jews, that marriage was not only of Divine institution, but thai
it consisted in the union of two only, — " they twain shall be one
flesh." This was the law of marriage given at first, not to Adam
and Eve only, but prospectively to all their descendants. The first
instance of polygamy was that of Lamech, and this has no sanction
from the Scripture ; which may be observed of other instances in
the Old Testament. They were opposed to the original law, and
in all cases appear to have been punished with many afflictive
visitations. The Mosaic law, although polygamy appears to have
been practised under it, gives no direct countenance to the prac-
tice ; which intimates that, as in the case of divorce, the connivance
was not intended to displace the original institution. Hence, in the
language of the Old Testament, as well as of the New, the terms
husband and wife in the singular number continually occur ; and
a passage in the prophet Malachi is so remarkable, as to warrant
the conclusion, that among the pious Jews, the original law was
never wholly out of sight. "Yet ye say, Wherefore 1 Because the
Lord hath been witness between thee, and the wife of thy youth.
against whom thou hast dealt treacherously, yet she is thy compa-
nion, and the wife of thy covenant. And did not he make one, /"
— (one woman) — " Yet had he the residue of the spirit V' — (and
therefore could have made more than one) — "And wherefore
one1?" "That he might seek a godly seed," is the answer, whicli
strongly shows how closely connected in the prophet's mind wer*

288 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

the circumstances of piety in the offspring and the restraint of
marriage to one wife only ; for he thus glances at one of the obvious
evils of polygamy, its deteriorating moral influence upon children.
If, however, in some instances the practice of the Jews fell short
of the strictness of the original law of marriage, that law is now
fully restored by Christ. In a discourse with the Pharisees, he
not only re-enacts that law, but guards against its evasion by the
practice of divorce ; and asserts the marriage union to be indisso-
luble by any thing but adultery. The argument of our Lord in
this discourse is, indeed, equally conclusive against polygamy and
against the practice of divorce; for "if," says Dr. Paley, "whoever
putteth away his wife and marrieth another committeth adultery,
he who marrieth another, the first wife being living, is no less
guilty of adultery ; because the adultery does not consist in the
repudiation of the first wife ; for, however cruel and unjust that
may be, it is not adultery ; but in entering into a second marriage,
during the legal existence and obligation of the first."

Nature itself comes in also as a confirmation of this original law.
In births, there is a small surplusage of males over females; which,
being reduced by the more precarious life of males, and by the acci-
dents to which more than females they are exposed from wars and
dangerous employments, brings the number of males and females
to a par, and shows that in the order of providence a man ought
to have but one wife ; and that where polygamy is not allowed,
every woman may have a husband. This equality, too, is found in
all countries ; although some licentious writers have attempted to
deny it upon unsound evidence.

Another end of marriage was, the prevention of fornication ;
and as this is done, not only by providing for a lawful gratification
of the sexual appetite ; but more especially by that mutual affec-
tion upon which marriages, when contracted according to the will
of God, are founded, this conjunction necessarily requires that
degree of love between the contracting parties which produces n
preference of each other above every man or woman in the world.
Wherever this degree of affection does not exist, it may therefore
be concluded that the rite of marriage is profaned, and the great-
est security for the accomplishment of its moral ends weakened
or destroyed. Interest, compliance with the views of family
connexions, caprice, or corporal attractions, it may be therefore
concluded, are not in themselves lawful grounds of marriage, as
tending, without affection, to frustrate the intention of God in its
institution ; to which end all are bound to subject themselves. On
the other hand, since love is often a delusive and sickly affection.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 289

exceedingly temporary and uncertain, when it is unconnected with
judgment and prudence ; and also because marriages are for the
most part contracted by the young and inexperienced, whose pas-
sions are then strongest when their judgments are most immature ;
in no step in life is the counsel of others more necessary, and in
no case ought it to be sought with greater docility than in this. A
proper respect to the circumstances of age, fitness, &c, ought never
to be superseded by the plea of mere affection ; although no cir-
cumstances can justify marriage without that degree of affection
which produces an absolute preference.

Whether marriage be a civil or a religious contract has been a
subject of dispute. The truth seems to be that it is both. It has
its engagements to men, and its vows to God. A Christian State
recognises marriage as a branch of public morality, and a source
of civil peace and strength. It is connected with the peace of
society by assigning one woman to one man, and the State pro-
tects him, therefore, in her exclusive possession. Christianity, by
allowing divorce in the event of adultery, supposes, also, that the
crime must be proved by proper evidence before the civil magis-
trate ; and lest divorce should be the result of unfounded suspicion,
or be made a cover for license, the decision of the case could safely
lie lodged nowhere else. Marriage, too, as placing one human being-
more completely under the power of another than any other rela-
tion, requires laws for the protection of those who are thus so
exposed to injury. The distribution of society into families, also,
can only be an instrument for promoting the order of the commu-
nity, by the cognizance which the law takes of the head of a family,
and by making him responsible, to a certain extent, for the conduct
of those under his influence. Questions of property are also involved
in marriage and its issue. The law must, therefore, for these and
many other weighty reasons, be cognizant of marriage ; must pre-
scribe various regulations respecting it ; require publicity of the
contract ; and guard some of the great injunctions of religion
in the matter by penalties. In no well ordered state can mar-
riage, therefore, be so exclusively left to religion as to shut out
The cognizance and control of the State. But then those who
would have the whole matter to lie between the parties themselves,
and the civil magistrate, appear wholly to forget that marriage is a
solemn religious act, in which vows are made to God by both per-
sons, who, when the rite is properly understood, engage to abide
by all those laws with which he has guarded the institution ; to
love and cherish each other ; and to remain faithful to each other
until death. For if, at least, they profess belief in Christianity,

Vol. III. 33

290 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

whatever duties are laid upon husbands and wives in Holy Scrip-
ture, they engage to obey, by the very act of their contracting
marriage. The question, then, is whether such vows to God as
are necessarily involved in marriage, are to be left between the
parties and God privately, or whether they ought to be publicly
made before his Ministers and the Church. On this the Scriptures
are silent; but though Michaelis has showed (1) that the Priests
under the law were not appointed to celebrate marriage ; yet in
the practice of the modern Jews, it is a religious ceremony, the
chief Rabbi of the synagogue being present, and prayers being
appointed for the occasion. (2) This renders it probable that the
character of the ceremony under the law, from the most ancient
times, was a religious one. The more direct connexion of marriage
with religion in Christian States, by assigning its celebration to the
Ministers of religion, appears to be a very beneficial custom, and
one which the State has a right to enjoin. For since the welfare
and morals of society are so much interested in the performance of
the mutual duties of the married state ; and since those duties have
a religious as well as a civil character, it is most proper that some
provision should be made for explaining those duties ; and for this
a standing form of marriage is best adapted. By acts of religion,
also, they are more solemnly impressed upon the parties. When
this is prescribed in any State, it becomes a Christian cheerfully,
and even thankfully, to comply with a custom of so important a
tendency, as matter of conscientious subjection to lawful authority,
although no scriptural precept can be pleaded for it. That the
ceremony should be confined to the Clergy of an Established
Church is a different consideratiDn. We are inclined to think that
the religious effect would be greater, were the Ministers of each
religious body to be authorized by the State to celebrate marriages
among their own people, due provision being made for the regular
and secure registry of them, and to prevent the civil laws respect-
ing marriage from being evaded.

When this important contract is once made, then certain rights
are acquired by the parties mutually, who are also bound by reci-
procal duties, in the fulfilment of which the practical " righteous-
ness" of each consists. Here, also, the superior character of the
morals of the New Testament, as well as their higher authority, is
illustrated. It may, indeed, be within the scope of mere moralists
to show that fidelity, and affection, and all the courtesies necessary
to maintain affection, are rationally obligatory upon those who are

(1) Commentaries on the Laxcs o/DJoses. (2) Allen's .Modem Judaism.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 291

connected by the nuptial bond ; but in Christianity that fidelity is
guarded by the express law, " Thou shalt not commit adultery ;,:
and by our Lord's exposition of the spirit of that law, which forbids
the indulgence of loose thoughts and desires, and places the purity
of the heart under the guardianship of that hallowed fear which
his authority tends to inspire. Affection, too, is made a matter of
diligent cultivation upon considerations, and by a standard, peculiar
to our religion. Husbands are placed in a relation to their wives3
similar to that which Christ bears to his Church, and his example
is thus made their rule : As Christ " gave himself," his life, " for
the Church," Eph. v, 25, so are they to hazard life for their wives.
As Christ saves his Church, so is it the bounden duty of husbands,
to endeavour, by every possible means, to promote the religious
edification and salvation of their wives. The connexion is thus
exalted into a religious one ; and when love which knows no
abatement, protection at the hazard of life, and a tender and con-
stant solicitude for the salvation of a wife, are thus enjoined, the
greatest possible security is established for the exercise of kindness
and fidelity. The oneness of this union is also more forcibly stated
in Scripture than any where beside : " They twain shall be one
flesh." " So ought men to love their wives as their mm bodies ; he
that loveth his wife loveth himself. For no man ever yet hated his
own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the
Church." Precept and illustration can go no higher than this;
and nothing evidently is wanting either of direction or authority to
raise the state of marriage into the highest, most endearing, and
sanctified relation in which two human beings can stand to each
other. The duties of wives are reciprocal to those of husbands.
The outline in the Note below (3) comprises both: it presents a

(3) PARTICULAR DUTIES OF WIVES. PARTICULAR DUTIES OF HUSBANDS.

Xtibjection, the gcnerall head of all wives Wisdom and love, the gencrall heads of

duties. all husl;:ir,ds duties.

Acknowledgment of an husbands supe- Acknowledgment, of a wives neere con-

rioritie. junction and fellowship with her hus-
band.

A due estecme of her owne husband as A good esteeme of his own wife as the

the best for her, and worthy of honour best for him, and worthy of love on hi?

on her part. part.

An inward wive-like fear. An inward intire affection.

An outward reverend carriage towards An outward amiable carriage towards

her husband, which consisteth in a his wife, which consisteth in an hus-

wive-like sobrietie, mildnesse, curtis- band-like gravity, mildnesse, courteous

sic, and modestie in apparel, acceptance of her curtissic, and allow-
ing her to wear fit apparel.

292

THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTED.

[PARI

series of obligations which are obviously drawn from the New
Testament ; but which nothing except that could furnish. The
extract is made from an old writer, and, although expressed in

Reverend speech to and of her husband.
Obedience.

Forbearing to do without, or against her
husband's consent, such things as he
hath power to order, as, to dispose and
order the common goods of the familie,
and the allowance for it, or children,
servants, cattell, guests, journies, &c.

A ready yielding to what her husband
would have done. This is manifested
by a willingnesse to dwell where he
wili, to come when he calls, and to do
what he requireth.

A patient bearing of any reproofe, and a
ready redressing of that for which she
is justly reproved.

Contentment with her husbands present
estate.

Such a subjection as may stand with her
subjection to Christ.

Such a subjection as the Church yieldeth
to Christ, which is sincere, pure, cheer-
full, constant, for conscience sake.

Mild and loving speech to and of his
wife.

A wise maintaining his authority, and
forbearing to exact all that is in his
power.

A ready yielding to his wives request,
and giving a generall consent and liber-
tie unto her to order the affaires of the
house, children, servants, &c. And a
free allowing her something to bestow
as she seeth occasion.

A forbearing to exact more than his wife
is willing to doe, or to force her to dwell
where it is not meet, or to enjoyne her
to do things that are- unmeet in them-
selves, or against her mind.

A wise ordering of reproofe, not using it
without just and weighty cause, and
then privately, and meekly.

A provident care for his wife, according
to his abilities.

A forbearing to exact any thing which
stands not with a good conscience.

Such a love as Christ beareth to the
Church, and man to himselfe, which
is first free, in deed and truth, pure,
chaste, constant.

AEERRATIONS OF WIVES FROM THEIB
PARTICULAR DUTIES.

ABERRATIONS OF HUSBANDS FROM THEIR
PARTICULAR DUTIES.

Ambition, the generall ground of the

aberrations of wives.
A conceit that wives are their husbands

equals.
V conceit that she could better subject

herselfe to any other man than to her

own husband.
An inward despising of her husband.

Unreverend behaviour towards her hus-
band, manifested by lightnesse, sullen-
nesse, scomefulnesse, and vanity in her
attire.

f Jnreverend speech to and of her hus-
band.

A stout standing on her owne will.

A peremptory undertaking to do things
as she list, without and against her
husbands consent, This is manifested

Want of wisdome and love, the generall
grounds of the aberrations of husbands.
Too mean account of wives.

A preposterous conceit of his owne wife
to be the worst of all, and that he could
love any but her.

A stoical) disposition, without all heat
of affection.

An unbeseeming carriage towards his
wife, manifested by his baseness, ty-
rannicail usage of her, loftinesse, rash-
nesse, and niggardlinesse.

Harsh, proud, and bitter speeches to and
of his wife.

Losing of his authority.

Too much strictnesse over his wife. This
is manifested by restraining her from
doing any thing without particular and

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 29o

homely phrase, will be admired for discrimination and compre-
hensiveness.

The Duties of Children is a branch of Christian morality
which receives both illustration and authority in a very remarkable
and peculiar manner from the Scriptures. " Honour thy father and
thy mother," is a precept which occupies a place in those Tables
of Law which were written at first by the finger of God ; and
is, as the Apostle Paul notes, " the first commandment with pro-
mise." The meaning of the term honour is comprehensive, and
imports, as appears from various passages in which it occurs, reve-
rence, affection, and grateful obedience. It expresses at once a
principle and a feeling, each of which must influence the practice ;
one binding obedience upon the conscience, the other rendering it
the free effusion of the heart ; one securing the great points of
duty, and the other giving rise to a thousand tender sentiments and
courtesies which mutually meliorate the temper, and open one of
the richest sources of domestic felicity.

The honouring of parents is likewise enforced in Scripture, by
a temporal promise. This is not peculiar to the Law ; for when
the Apostle refers to this "as the first commandment with promise,"
and adds, w that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest live
long on the earth," Eph. vi, 3, 4, he clearly intimates that this
promise is carried forward into the Christian dispensation ; and
though it is undoubtedly modified by the circumstances of an

by privy purloyning his goods, taking expresse consent, taking too strict
allowance, ordering children, servants, account of her, and allowing her no
and cattell, feasting strangers, making more than is needfull for her owne pri-
journies and vows, as herselfe listeth. vate use.
An obstinate standing upon her owne Too lordly a standing upon the highest
will, making her husband dwell where step of his authority: being too frc-
she will, and refusing to goe when he quent, insolent, and peremptory, in
calls, or to doe any thing upon his commanding; things frivolous, unmeet,
command. and against his wifes minde and con-

science.
Disdaine at reproofe : giving word for Rashnesse and bitternesse in reproving :
word : and waxing worse for being and that too frequently, on slight oc-
reproved. casions, and disgracefully before chil-

dren, servants, and strangers.
Discontent at her husbands estate. A carelesse neglect of his wife, and nig-

gardly dealing with her, and that in
her weaknesse.
Such a pleasing of her husband as offend- A commanding of unlawfull things.

eth Christ.
Such a subjection as is most unlike to Such a disposition as is most unlike to
the Church's, viz. fained, forced, fickle, Christ's, and to that which a man
&c. beareth to himselfe, viz. compliment,

impure, for by respects, inconstant, &c.

33*

294 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

economy which is not so much founded upon temporal promises
as the Law, it retains its full force as a general declaration oi'
special favour on the part of God. This duty also derives a most
influential and affecting illustration from the conduct of our Lord,
who was himself an instance of subjection to parents ; of the kind-
est behaviour to them ; and who, amidst his agonies on the cross,
commended his weeping mother to the special regard of the beloved
disciple, John, charging him with her care and support as a " son,"
in his own stead. In no system of mere ethics, certainly, is this
great duty, on which so much of human interest and felicity depends,
and which exerts so much influence upon society, thus illustrated,
and thus enforced.

The duties of children may be thus sketched.

Love, which is founded upon esteem and reverence, comprise?
gratitude also ; no small degree of which is obligatory upon every
child for the unwearied cares, labours, and kindness of parental
affection. In the few unhappy instances in which esteem for a
parent can have little place, gratitude, at least, ought to remain ;
nor can any case arise in which the obligation of filial love can
be cancelled.

Reverence, which consists in that honourable esteem of parents
which children ought to cherish in their hearts, and from which
springs on the one hand the desire to please, and on the other the
i'ear to offend. The fear of a child is, however, opposed to the fear
of a slave ; the latter has respect chiefly to the punishment which
may be inflicted ; but the other being mixed with love, and the
desire to be loved, has respect to the offence which may be taken
by a parent, his grief, and his displeasure. Hence the fear of God.
as a grace of the Spirit in the regenerate, is compared to the fear
of children. This reverential regard due to parents has its external
expression in all honour and civility, whether in words or actions.
The behaviour is to be submissive, the speech respectful, reproof
is to be borne by them with meekness, and the impatience of parents
sustained in silence. Children are bound to close their eyes as much
as possible upon the failings and infirmities of the authors of their
being, and always to speak of them honourably among themselves,
and in the presence of others. " The hearts of all men go along
with Noah in laying punishment upon Ham for his unnatural and
profane derision, and love the memory of those sons that would not
see themselves, nor suffer others to be the witnesses of the miscar-
riages of their father." In the duty of " honouring" parents, is
also included their support when in necessity. This appears from
our Lord's application of this commandment of the Law in his

iHIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 29J

reproof of the Pharisees, who, if they had made a vow of their pro-
perty, thought it then lawful to withhold assistance from their
parents, Matt, xv, 4-6.

To affection and reverence, is to be added,

Obedience, which is universal : " Children, obey your parents
in all things;" with only one restriction, which respects the con-
sciences of children, when at age to judge for themselves. The
Apostle therefore adds, " in tJie Lord." That this limits the obe-
dience of children to the lawful commands of parents, is clear also
from our Lord's words, " If any love father or mother more than
me he is not worthy of me." God is to be loved and obeyed above
all. In all lawful things the rule is absolute ; and the obedience,
like that we owe to God, ought to be cheerful and unwearied.
Should it chance to cross our inclinations, this will be no excuse
for hesitancy, much less, for refusal.

One of the principal cases in which this principle is often most
severely tried, is that of marriage. The general rule clearly is, that
neither son nor daughter ought to marry against the command ot
a father, with whom the prime authority of the family is lodged ;
nor even without the consent of the mother, should the father be
willing, if she can lind any weighty reason for her objection ; for,
although the authority of the mother is subordinate and secondary,
yet is she entitled to obedience from the child. There is, however,
a considerable difference between marrying at the command of a
parent, and marrying against his prohibition. In the first case,
children are more at liberty than in the other ; yet even here, the
wishes of parents in this respect are to be taken into most serious
consideration, with a preponderating desire to yield to them : but
if a child feels that his affections still refuse to run in the course of
the parents' wishes ; if he is conscious that he cannot love his
intended wife "as himself," as "his own flesh;" he is prohibited
by a higher rule, which presents an insuperable barrier to his com-
pliance. In this case the child is at liberty to refuse, if it is done
deliberately, and expressed with modesty and proper regret at not
being able to comply, for the reasons stated ; and every parent
ought to dispense freely with the claim of obedience. But to marry
in opposition to a parent's express prohibition, is a very grave case
The general rule lies directly against this act of disobedience, as
against all others, and the violation of it is therefore sin. And what,
blessing can be expected to follow such marriages 1 or rather, what
curse may not be feared to follow them 1 The law of God is trans-
gressed, and the image of his authority in parents is despised. Those
exceptions to this rule which can be justified, are very few.

290 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

In no case but where the parties have attained the full legal age
of twenty-one years, ought an exception to be even considered ;
but it may perhaps be allowed, 1, When the sole objection of the
parent is the marriage of his child with a person fearing God.
3. When the sole reason given is, a wish to keep a child unmarried
from caprice, interest, or other motive, which no parent has a right
to require, when the child is of legal age. 3. When the objections
are simply those of prejudice, wirhout reasonable ground ; but in
this case, the child ought not to assume to be the sole judge of the
parent's reasons ; and would not be at liberty to act, unless sup-
ported by the opinion of impartial and judicious friends, whose
advice and mediation ought to be asked, in order that, in so deli-
cate an affair, he or she may proceed with a clear conscience.

The persuading a daughter to elope from her parents' house,
where the motive is no other than the wilful following of personal
affection, which spurns at parental control and authority, must,
therefore, be considered as a great crime. It induces the daughter
to commit a very criminal act of disobedience ; and, on the part oi
the man, it is a worse kind of felony than stealing the property of
another. "For children are much more properly a man's own
than his goods, and the more highly to be esteemed, by how much
reasonable creatures are to be preferred before senseless things." (4)
The Duties of Parents are exhibited with equal clearness
in the Scriptures, and contain a body of most important practical
instructions.

The first duty is Love, which, although a natural instinct, is yet
to be cultivated and nourished by Christians under a sense of duty,
and by frequent meditation upon all those important and interest-
ing relations in which religion has placed them and their offspring.
The duty of sustentation and care, therefore, under the most
trying circumstances, is imperative upon parents ; for, though this
is not directly enjoined, it. is supposed necessarily to follow from
that parental love which the Scriptures inculcate ; and also, because
the denial of either to infants would destroy them, and thus the
unnatural parent would be involved in the crime of murder.

To this follows Instruction, care for the mind succeeding the
nourishment and care of the body. This relates to the providing
such an education for children as is suited to their condition, and
by which they may be fitted +o gain a reputable livelihood when
they are of age to apply themselves to business. But it specially
relates to their instruction in the doctrines of holy writ. This i?

(4) Gouge On Relative Duties,

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 297

clearly what the Apostle Paul means, Eph. vi, 4, by directing;
parents to " bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the
Lord." A parent is considered in Scripture as a Priest in his
own family, which is a view of this relation not to be found in
ethical writers, or deducible from any principles from which they
would infer parental duties, independently of revelation ; and from
this it derives a most exalted character. The offices of sacrifice,
intercession, and religious instruction, were all performed by the
Patriarchs ; and, as we have already seen, although, under the
Law, the offering of sacrifices was restrained to the appointed
Priesthood, yet was it still the duty of the head of the family to
bring his sacrifices for immolation in the prescribed manner ; and
so far was the institution of public teachers from being designed to
supersede the father's office, that the heads of the Jewish families
are specially enjoined to teach the law to their children diligently,
and daily, Deut. vi, 7. Under the same view does Christianity
regard the heads of its families, as Priests in their houses, offering
spiritual gifts and sacrifices, and as the religious instructers of their
children. Hence it is, in the passage above quoted, that "fathers"
are commanded "to bring up their children in the nurture and
admonition of the Lord ;" or, in other words, in the knowledge of
the doctrines, duties, motives, and hopes of the Christian religion.
This is a work, therefore, which belongs to the very office of a
father as the Priest of his household, and cannot be neglected by
him, but at his own, and his children's peril. Nor is it to be
occasionally and cursorily performed, but so that the object ma)
be attained, namely, that they may "know the Scriptures from
their childhood," and have stored their minds with their laws, and
doctrines, and promises, as their guide in future life ; a work
which will require, at least, as much attention from the Christian
as from the Jewish parent, who was commanded on this wise, —
" Thou shalt teach them diligently to thy children, and thou shalr
talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walk-
est by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.':
The practice of the Jews in this respect, appears to have been
adopted by the Christians of the primitive Churches, which were
composed of both Jewish and Gentile converts in almost every
place; and from them it is probable that the early customs of
teaching children to commit portions of Scripture to memory,
to repeat prayers night and morning, and to approach their
parents for their blessing, might be derived. The last pleasing
and impressive form, which contains a recognition of the do-
mestic Priesthood, as inherent in the head of any family, has

298 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

in this country grown of late into disuse, which is much to be
regretted.

It is also essential to the proper discharge of the parental duty
of instructing children, that every means should be used to render
what is taught influential upon the heart and conduct. It is, there-
fore, solemnly imperative upon parents to be " holy in all manner
of conversation, and godliness," and thus to enforce truth by
example. It concerns them, as much as Ministers, to be anxious
for the success of their labours ; and recognising the same prin-
ciple, that " God giveth the increase," to be abundant in prayers
for the gift of the Holy Spirit to their children. Both as a means
of grace, and in recognition of God's covenant of mercy with them
and their seed after them, it behoves them also to bring their chil-
dren to baptism in their infancy ; to explain to them the baptismal
covenant when they are able to understand it; and to habituate
them from early years io the observance of the Sabbath, and to
regular attendance on the public worship of God.

The Government of children, is another great branch of
parental duty, in which both the parents are bound cordially to
unite. Like all other kinds of government appointed by God, the
end is the good of those subject to it ; and it therefore excludes all
caprice, vexation, and tyranny. In the case of parents, it is emi-
nently a government of love, and therefore, although it includes
strictness, it necessarily excludes severity. The mild and benevo-
lent character of our Divine religion displays itself here, as in every
other instance where the heat of temper, the possession of power,
or the ebullitions of passion, might be turned against the weak and
unprotected. The civil laws of those countries in which Christian-
ity was first promulgated, gave great power to parents over their
children, (5) which, in the unfeeling spirit of Paganism, was often
harshly, and even cruelly, used. On the contrary, St. Paul enjoins,
" And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath," meaning
plainly, by a rigorous severity, an overbearing and tyrannical be-
haviour, tending to exasperate angry passions in them. So again,
11 Fathers, provoke not your children, lest they be discouraged,"
discouraged from all attempts at pleasing, as regarding it an impos-
sible task, " and be unfitted to pass through the world with advan-
tage, when their spirits have been unreasonably broken under an
oppressive yoke, in the earliest years of their life."(6) But though
the parental government is founded upon kindness, and can nevei
be separated from it, when rightly understood and exercised, it is

(5) By the old Roman law, the father had the power of life and death, as to his
.hildren, (6) Doddridge On Colossiana iii, 21.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 290

Still government, and is a trust committed by God to the parent,
which must be faithfully discharged. Corporal correction is not
only allowed, but is made a duty in Scripture, where other means
would be ineffectual. Yet it may be laid down as a certain
principle, that, where the authority of a parent is exercised with
constancy and discretion, and enforced by gravity, kindness, and
character, this will seldom be found necessary ; nor, when the
steady resolution of the parent to inflict it when it is demanded by
the case, is once known to the child, will it need often to be
repeated. Parental government is also concerned in forming the
manners of children ; in inculcating civility, order, cleanliness,
industry, and economy; in repressing extravagant desires and gra-
tifications in dress and amusements ; and in habituating the will to
a ready submission to authority. It must be so supreme, whatever
the age of children may be, as to control the whole order and habits
of the family, and to exclude all licentiousness, riot, and unbecom-
ing amusements from the house, lest the curse of Eli should fall
upon those who imitate his example in not reproving evil with
sufficient earnestness, and not restraining it by the effectual exercise
of authority.

Another duty of parents is the comfortable settlement of then
children in the world, as far as their ability extends. This include*
the discreet choosing of a calling, by which their children may
" provide things honest in the sight of all men ;" taking especial
care, however, that their moral safety shall be consulted in the
choice, — a consideration which too many disregard, under tin
influence of carelessness, or a vain ambition. The "laying up
for children" is also sanctioned both by nature, and by our reli-
gion ; but this is not so to be understood as that the comforts of a
parent, according to his rank in life, should be abridged ; nor tha<
it should interfere with those charities which Christianity has made
his personal duty.

The next of these reciprocal duties, are those of servant and

MASTER.

This is a relation which will continue to the end of time
Equality of condition is alike contrary to the nature of things,
and to the appointment of God. Some must toil, and others
direct ; some command, and others obey ; nor is this order con-
trary to the real interest of the multitude, as at first sight it might
appear. The acquisition of wealth by a few affords more abundant,
employment to the many ; and in a well ordered, thriving, and
industrious State, except in seasons of peculiar distress, it is evident,
that the comforts of the lower classes are greater than could he

300 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

attained were the land equally divided among them, and so left to
their own cultivation that no one should be the servant of another.
To preserve such a state of things would be impossible ; and could
it be done, no arts but of the rudest kind, no manufactures, and no
commerce, could exist. The very first attempt to introduce these
would necessarily create the two classes of workmen and employ-
ers ; of the many who labour with the hands, and the few who
labour with the mind, in directing the operations; and thus the
equality would be destroyed.

It is not, however, to be denied, that through the bad principles
and violent passions of man, the relations of servant and master
have been a source of great evil and misery. The more, therefore,
is that religion to be valued, which, since these relations must exist,
restrains the evil that is incident to them, and shows how they may
be made sources of mutual benevolence and happiness. Wherever
the practical influence of religion has not been felt, servants have
generally been more or less treated with contempt, contumely,
harshness, and oppression. They, on the contrary, are, from their
natural corruption, inclined to resent authority, to indulge selfish-
ness, and to commit fraud, either by withholding the just quantum
of labour, or by direct theft. From the conflict of these evils in
servants and in masters, too often result suspicion, cunning, over-
reaching, malignant passions, contemptuous and irritating speeches,
the loss of principle in the servant, and of kind and equitable feeling
on the part of the master.

The direct manner in which the precepts of the New Testament
tend to remedy these evils, cannot but be remarked. Government
in masters, as well as in fathers, is an appointment of God, though
differing in circumstances ; and it is, therefore, to be honoured.
"Let as many servants as are under the yoke, count their own
masters worthy of all honour;" a direction which enjoins both
respectful thoughts, and humility and propriety of external demea-
nour towards them. Obedience to their commands in all things
lawful is next enforced ; which obedience is to be grounded on
principle and conscience; on "singleness of heart, as unto Christ;"
thus serving a master with the same sincerity, the same desire to do
the appointed work well, as is required of us by Christ. This ser-
vice is also to be cheerful, and not wrung out merely by a sense of
duty : " Not with eye service, as men pleasers ;" not having respect
simply to the approbation of the master, but "as the servants of
Christ," making profession of his religion, "doing the will of God,"
in this branch of duty, " from the heart," with alacrity and good
feeling. The duties of servants, stated in these brief precepts, might

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 301

easily be shown to comprehend every particular which can be
justly required of persons in this station ; and the whole is enforced
by a sanction which could have no place but in a revelation from
God, — " knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the
same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free,"
Eph. vi, 5. In other words, even the common duties of servants,
when faithfully, cheerfully, and piously performed, are by Chris-
tianity made rewardable actions : " Of the Lord ye shall receive
a reward."

The duties of servants and masters are, however, strictly reci-
procal. Hence the Apostle continues his injunctions as to the right
discharge of these relations, by saying, immediately after he had
prescribed the conduct of servants, " And ye, masters, do the same
things unto them ;" that is, act towards them upon the same
equitable, conscientious, and benevolent principles, as you exact
from them. He then grounds his rules, as to masters, upon the
great and influential principle, " Knowing that your Master is in
heaven ;" that you are under authority, and are accountable to
him for your conduct to your servants. Thus masters are put
under the eye of God, who not only maintains their authority,
when properly exercised, by making their servants accountable
for any contempt of it, and for every other failure of duty, but
also holds the master himself responsible for its just and mild
exercise. A solemn and religious aspect is thus at once given to
a relation, which by many is considered as one merely of interest.
When the Apostle enjoins it on masters to " forbear threatening,"
he inculcates the treatment of servants with kindness of manner,
with humanity, and good nature ; and, by consequence also, the
cultivation of that benevolent feeling towards persons in this con-
dition, which in all rightly influenced minds, will how from the
consideration of their equality with themselves in the sight of God ;
their equal share in the benefits of redemption ; their relation to
us as brethren in Christ, if they are " partakers of like precious
faith ;" and their title to the common inheritance of heaven, where
all those temporary distinctions on which human vanity is so apt
to fasten, shall be done away. There will also not be wanting in
such minds, a consideration of the service rendered ; (for the
benefit is mutual ;) and a feeling of gratitude for service faithfully
performed, although it is compensated by wages or hire.

To benevolent sentiment the Apostle, however, adds the prin-
ciples of justice and equity : " Masters, give to your servants that
which is just and equal, knowing that ye also have a Master in
heaven," who i8 the avenger of injustice. The terms just and equal,

Vol. III. 34

302 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

though terms of near affinity, have a somewhat different significa-
tion. To give that which is just to a servant, is to deal with him
according to an agreement made ; but to give him what is equal,
is to deal fairly and honestly with him, and to return what is his
due in reason and conscience, even when there are circumstances
in the case which strict law would not oblige us to take into the
account. " Justice makes our contracts the measure of our deal-
ings with others, and equity our consciences." (1) Equity here may
also have respect particularly to that important rule which obliges
us to do to others what we would, in the same circumstances, have
them to do to us. This rule of equity has a large range in the
treatment of servants. It excludes all arbitrary and tyrannical
government ; it teaches masters to respect the strength and capa-
city of their servants ; it represses rage and passion, contumely and
insult ; and it directs that their labour shall not be so extended as
not to leave proper time for rest, for attendance on God's worship,
and, at proper seasons, for recreation.

The religious duties of masters are also of great importance.
Under the Old Testament the servants of a house partook of
the common benefit of the true religion, as appears from the case
of the servants of Abraham, who were all brought into the cove-
nant of circumcision ; and from the early prohibition of idolatrous
practices in families, and, consequently, the maintenance of the
common worship of God. The same consecration of whole fami-
lies to God we see in the New Testament; in the baptism of
" houses," and the existence of domestic Churches. The practice
of inculcating the true religion upon servants, passed from the
Jews to the first Christians, and followed indeed from the consci-
entious employment of the master's influence in favour of piety ; a
point to which we shall again advert.

From all this arises the duty of instructing servants in the-
principles of religion ; of teaching them to read, and furnishing
them with the Scriptures ; of having them present at family wor-
ship ; and of conversing with them faithfully and affectionately
respecting their best interests. In particular, it is to be observed,
that servants have by the law of God a right to the Sabbath, of
which no master can, without sin, deprive them. They are entitled
under that law to rest on that day; and that not only for the recrea-
tion of their strength and spirits, but, especially, to enable them to
attend public worship, and to read the Scriptures, and pray in
private. Against this duty all those offend who employ servants
in works of gain ; and also those who do not so arrange the affairs

(7) Fleetwood's Relative Duties.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 303

of their households, that domestic servants may be as little occupied
as possible with the affairs of the house, in order that they may be
able religiously to use a day which is made as much theirs as their
masters', by the express letter of the law of God ; nor can the
blessing of God be expected to rest upon families where this
shocking indifference to the religious interests of domestics, and
this open disregard of the Divine command, prevail. A Jewish
strictness in some particulars is not bound upon Christians : as for
example, the prohibition against lighting fires. These were parts
of the municipal, not the moral law of the Jews ; and they have
respect to a people living in a certain climate, and in peculiar cir-
cumstances. But even these prohibitions are of use as teaching us
self denial, and that in all cases we ought to keep within the rules
of necessity. Unnecessary occupations are clearly forbidden even
when they do not come under the description of work for gain ;
and when they are avoided, there will be sufficient leisure for every
part of a family to enjoy the Sabbath as a day of rest, and as a day
of undistracted devotion. We may here also advert to that heavy
national offence which still hangs upon us, the denying to the great
majority of our bond slaves in the West Indies, those Sabbath
rights which are secured to them by the very religion we profess.
Neither as a day of rest, nor as a day of worship, is this sacred day
granted to them ; and for this our insolent and contemptuous de-
fiance of God's holy law, we must be held accountable. This is a
consideration which ought to induce that part of the community
who retain any fear of God, to be unwearied in their applications
to the legislature until this great reproach, this weight of offence
against religion and humanity, shall be taken away from us.

The employment of influence for the religious benefit of servants,
forms another part of the duty of every Christian master. This
appears to be obligatory upon the general principle, that every
thing which can be used by us to promote the will of God, and to
benefit others, is a " talent" committed to us, which we are required
by our Lord to " occupy." It is greatly to be feared, that this duty
is much neglected among professedly religious masters ; that even
domestic servants are suffered to live in a state of spiritual danger,
without any means being regularly and affectionately used to bring
them to the practical knowledge of the truth ; means which, if used
with judgment and perseverance, and enforced by the natural influ-
ence of a superior, might pi-ove in many instances both corrective
and saving. But if this duty be much neglected in households, it
is much more disregarded as to that class of servants who are
employed as day labourers by the farmer, as journeymen by the

304 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

master artisan, and as workmen by the manufacturer. More or
less the master comes into immediate connexion with this class of
servants ; and although they are not so directly under his control
as those of his household, nor within reach of the same instruction,
yet is he bound to discountenance vice among them ; to recom-
mend their attendance on public worship ; to see that their children
are sent to schools ; to provide religious help for them when sick ;
to prefer sober and religious men to others ; and to pay them their
wages in due time for market, and so early on the Saturday, or
on the Friday, that their families may not be obstructed in their
preparations for attending the house of God on the Lord's day
morning. If the religious character and bias of the master were
thus felt by his whole establishment, and a due regard paid uni-
formly to justice and benevolence in the treatment of all in his
employ, not only would great moral good be the result, but there
would be reason to hope that the relation between employers
and their workmen, which, in consequence of frequent disputes
respecting wages and combinations, has been rendered suspicious
and vexatious, would assume a character of mutual confidence
and reciprocal good will.

Political Justice respects chiefly the relation of Subjeei
and Sovereign, a delicate branch of morals in a religious system
introduced into the world under such circumstances as Chris-
tianity, and which in its wisdom it has resolved into general prin-
ciples of easy application, in ordinary circumstances. With equal
wisdom it has left extraordinary emergencies unprovided for by
special directions ; though even in such cases the path of duty is
not without light reflected upon it from the whole genius and spirit
of the institution.

On the origin of power, and other questions of government,
endless controversies have been held, and very different theories
adopted, which, so happily is the world exchanging government
by force for government by public opinion, have now lost much of
their interest, and require not, therefore, a particular examination.

On this branch of morals, as on the others we have already
considered, the Scriptures throw a light peculiar to themselves ;
and the theory of government which they contain will be found
perfectly accordant with the experience of the present and best
age of the world as to practical government, and exhibits a per-
fect harmony with that still more improved civil condition which
it must ultimately assume in consequence of the diffusion of know-
ledge, freedom, and virtue.

The leading doctrine of Scripture is, that government is an

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 305

ordinance of God. It was manifestly his will that men should
live in society ; this cannot be doubted. The very laws he has
given to men prescribing their relative duties, assume the perma-
nent existence of social relations, and therefore place them under
regulation. From this fact the Divine appointment of government
flows as a necessary consequence. A society cannot exist without
rules or laws ; and it therefore follows that such laws must be
upheld by enforcement. Hence an executive power in some form
must arise, to guard, to judge, to reward, to punish. For if there
were no executors of laws, the laws would become a dead letter,
which would be the same thing as having none at all ; and where
there are no laws, there can be no society. But we are not left to
inference. In the first ages of the world government was paternal,
and the power of government was vested in parents by the express
appointment of God. Among the Jews, rulers, judges, kings, were
also appointed by God himself; and as for all other nations, the
New Testament expressly declares, that " the powers which be are
ordained of God."

The origin of power is not, therefore, from man, but from God.
It is not left as a matter of choice to men, whether they will sub-
mit to be governed or not; it is God's appointment that they
should be subject to those powers whom he, in his government of
the world, has placed over them, in all things for which he has
instituted government, that is, that it should be " a terror to evil
doers, and a praise to them that do well." Nor are they at
liberty "to resist the power," when employed in accomplishing
such legitimate ends of government ; nor to deny the right, nor
to refuse the means, even when they have the power to do so,
by which the supreme power may restrain evil, and enforce
truth, righteousness, and peace. Every supreme power, we may
therefore conclude, is invested with full and unalienable authority
to govern well ; and the people of every state are bound, by the
institution of God, cheerfully and thankfully to submit to be so
governed.

There can, therefore, be no such compact between any parties
as shall originate the right of government, or the duty of being
governed ; nor can any compact annul, in the least, the rightful
authority of the supreme power to govern efficiently for the full
accomplishment of the ends for which government was divinely
appointed ; nor can it place any limit upon the duty of subjects to
be governed accordingly.

We may conclude, therefore, with Paley and others, that what
is called " the social compact," the theory of Locke and his fol-

34*

306 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

lowers on government, is a pure fiction. In point of fact, men
never did originate government by mutual agreement ; and men
are all born under some government, and become its subjects,
without having any terms of compact proposed to them, or giving
any consent to understood terms, or being conscious at all that
their assent is necessary to convey the right to govern them, or to
impose upon themselves the obligation of subjection. The absurdi-
ties which Paley has pointed out as necessarily following from the
theory of the social compact, appear to be sufficiently well founded ;
but the fatal objection is, that it makes government a mere creation
of man, whereas Scripture makes it an ordinance of God : it sup-
poses no obligation anterior to human consent ; whereas the
appointment of God constitutes the obligation, and is wholly inde-
pendent of human choice and arrangement.

The matter of government, however, does not appear to be
left so loose as it is represented by the author of the Moral and
Political Philosophy.

The ground of the subject's obligation which he assigns is,
" the will of God as collected from expediency." We prefer to
assign the will of God as announced in the public law of the
Scriptures ; and which manifestly establishes two points as general
rules : 1. The positive obligation of men to submit to govern-
ment : 2. Their obligation to yield obedience, in all things lawful,
to the governments under which they live, as appointed by God
in the order of his providence, — " the powers that be," the powers
which actually exist, " are ordained of God." From these two
principles it will follow, that in the case of any number of men
and women being thrown together in some desert part of the world,
it would be their duty to marry, to institute paternal government
in their families, and to submit to a common government, in
obedience to the declared will of God : and in the case of persons
born under any established government, that they are required
to yield submission to it as an ordinance of God, "a power"
already appointed, and under which they are placed in the order
of Divine providence.

Evident, however, as these principles are, they can never be
pleaded in favour of oppression and wrong ; since it is always to
be remembered that the same Scriptures which establish these
principles have set a sufficient number of guards and limits about
them, and that the rights and duties of sovereign and subject are
reciprocal. The manner in which they are made to harmonize
with public interest and liberty will appear after these reciprocal
duties and rights are explained.

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 307

The duties of the sovereign power, whatever its form may be,
are, the enactment of just and equal laws ; the impartial execution
of those laws in mercy ; the encouragement of religion, morality,
learning, and industry ; the protection and sustenance of the poor
and helpless ; the maintenance of domestic peace, and, as far as
the interests of the community will allow, of peace with all
nations ; the faithful observance of all treaties ; an incessant
application to the cares of government, without exacting more
tribute from the people than is necessary for the real wants of
the State, and the honourable maintenance of its officers ; the
appointment of inferior magistrates of probity and fitness, with a
diligent and strict oversight of them ; and finally, the making
provision for the continued instruction of the people in the reli-
gion of the Scriptures which it professes to receive as a revelation
from God, and that with such a respect to the rights of conscience,
as shall leave all men free to discharge their duties to Him who is
" higher than the highest."

All these obligations are either plainly expressed, or are to be
inferred from such passages as the following : " The God of
Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over
men must be just, ruling in the fear of God ; and he shall be as
the light of the morning when the sun riseth, even a morning
without clouds, as the tender grass springeth out of the earth by
clear shining after rain ;" images which join to the attribute of
justice a constant and diffusive beneficence. " Mercy and truth
preserve the king." "Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judg-
ment ; thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour
the person of the mighty ; but in righteousness thou shalt judge."
" He that saith unto the wicked, Thou art righteous," that is,
acquits the guilty in judgment, "him shall the people curse,
nations shall abhor him." " Moreover thou shalt provide out of
all the people able men ; such as fear God ; men of truth, hating
covetousness ; and place such over them, and let them judge the
people at all seasons." " Him that hath a high look and a proud
heart I will not sutler. Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful in
the land, that they may dwell with me ; he that walketh in a
perfect way, he shall serve me. He that worketh deceit shall
not dwell in my house, he that telleth lies shall not tarry in my
sight." To these and many similar passages in the Old Testa-
ment may be added, as so many intimations of the Divine will as
to rulers, those patriotic and pious practices of such of the judges
and kings of Israel as had the express approbation of God ; for
although they may not apply as particular rules in all cases, they

808 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

have to all succeeding ages the force of the general principles
which are implied in them. The New Testament directions,
although expressed generally, are equally comprehensive ; and it
is worthy of remark, that whilst they assert the Divine ordination
of " the powers that be," they explicitly mark out for what ends
they were thus appointed, and allow, therefore, of no plea of
divine right in rulers for any thing contrary to them. " Render
unto Cesar the things that are Cesar's," that is, things which are
Cesar's by public law and customary impost. " For rulers are not
a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou not be afraid of
the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise
of the same ; for he is the minister of God to thee for good. But
if thou do that which is evil, be afraid ; for he beareth not the
sword in vain ; for he is the minister of God, a revenger to exe-
cute wrath upon him that doeth evil." "Submit yourselves to
every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake ; whether it be to the
king, as supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that are sent
by him for the punishment of evil doers, and for the praise of them
that do well."

In these passages, which state the legitimate ends of govern-
ment, and limit God's ordination of government to them, the
duties of subjects are partially anticipated ; but they are capable
of a fuller enumeration.

Subjection and Obedience are the first ; qualified, however, as we
know from the example of the Apostles, with exceptions as to what
is contrary to conscience and morality. In such cases they obeyed
not, but suffered rather. Otherwise the rule is, "Let every soul be
subject to the higher powers ;" and that not merely " for wrath,"
fear of punishment, but " for conscience' sake," from a conviction
that it is right. " For this cause pay ye tribute also ; for they are
God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Ren-
der, therefore, to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due,
custom to whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom
honour." — Supplies for the necessities of government are therefore
to be willingly and faithfully furnished. Rulers are also to be
treated with respect and reverence : " Thou shalt not speak evil of
the ruler of thy people." They are to be honoured both by exter-
nal marks of respect, and by being maintained in dignity ; their
actions are to be judged of with candour and charity, and when
questioned or blamed, this is to be done with moderation, and not
with invective or ridicule, a mode of " speaking evil of dignities,"
which grossly offends against the Christian rule. This branch of
our duties is greatly strengthened by the enjoined duty of praying

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 309

for rulers, a circumstance which gives an efficacy to it which no
uninspired system can furnish. " I exhort, therefore, that first of
all supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be
made for all men ; for kings, and for all that are in authority, that
we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty ;
for this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour."
This holy and salutary practice is founded upon a recognition of
the ordinance of God as to government ; it recognises, also, the
existing powers in every place, as God's " ministers ;" it supposes
that all public affairs are under Divine control ; it reminds men
of the arduous duties and responsibility of governors ; it promotes
a benevolent, grateful, and respectful feeling towards them ; and
it is a powerful guard against the factious and seditious spirit.
These are so evidently the principles and tendencies of this sacred
custom, that when prayer has been used, as it sometimes has, to
convey the feelings of a malignant, factious, or light spirit, every
well disposed mind must have been shocked at so profane a
mockery, and must have felt that such prayers " for all that are
in authority," were any thing but " good and acceptable in the
sight of God our Saviour."

Connected as these reciprocal rights and duties of rulers, and
of their subjects, are with the peace, order, liberty, and welfare of
society, so that were they universally acted upon, nothing would
remain to be desired for the promotion of its peace and welfare ;
it is also evident that in no part of the world have they been fully
observed, and, indeed, in most countries they are, to this day,
grossly trampled upon. A question then arises, How far does it
consist with Christian submission to endeavour to remedy the evils
of a government ]

On this difficult and often controverted point we must proceed
with caution, and with steady respect to the principles above
drawn from the word of God ; and that the subject may be less
entangled, it may be proper to leave out of our consideration, for
the present, all questions relating to rival supreme powers, as in
the case of a usurpation, and those which respect the duty of
subjects, when persecuted by their government on account of
their religion.

Although government is enjoined by God, it appears to be left
to men to judge in what form its purposes may, in certain circum-
stances, be most effectually accomplished. No direction is given
on this subject in the Scriptures. The patriarchal or family govern-
ments of the most ancient times, were founded upon nature ; but
when two or more families were joined under one head, either for

310 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

mutual defence, or for aggression, the [government] was one of
choice, or it resulted from a submission effected by conquest. Here,
in many cases, a compact might, and in some instances did, come in,
though differing in principle from " the social compact" of theoreti-
cal writers ; and this affords the only rational way of interpreting
that real social compact which in some degree or other exists in
all nations. In all cases where the patriarchal government was to
be raised into a government common to many families, some con-
siderable number of persons must have determined its form, and
they would have the right to place it upon such fundamental prin-
ciples as might seem best, provided that such principles did not
interfere with the duties made obligatory by God upon every
sovereign power, and with the obligations of the subject to be
governed by justice in mercy, and to be controlled from injuring
others. Equally clear would be the right of the community, either
en masse, or by their natural heads or representatives, to agree
upon a body of laws, which should be the standing and published
expression of the will of the supreme power, that so the sovereign
will on all main questions might not be subject to constant changes
and the caprice of an individual ; and to oblige the sovereign, as
the condition of his office, to bind himself to observe these funda-
mental principles and laws of the State by solemn oath, which has
been the practice among many nations, and especially those of the
Gothic stock. It follows from hence, that whilst there is an ordi-
nation of God as to government, prior to the establishment of aW
governments, there is no ordination of a particular man or men to
govern, nor any investment of families with hereditary right. There
is no such ordination in Scripture, and we know that none takes
place by particular revelation. God " setteth up one, and putteth
down another,1' in virtue of his dominion over all things ; but he
does this through men themselves, as his controlled and often
unconscious instruments. Hence, by St. Peter, in perfect con-
sistency with St Paul, the existing governments of the world are
called " ordinances of men." — " Submit to every ordinance of
man" or to every human creation or constitution, " for the Lord's
sake, whether to the king as supreme," &c. Again, as the wisdom
to govern with absolute truth and justice, is not to be presumed to
dwell in one man, however virtuous, so, in this state of things, the
better to secure a salutary administration, there would be a right
to make provision for this also, by Councils, Senates, Parliaments,
Cortes, or similar institutions, vested with suitable powers, to for-
ward, but not to obstruct, the exercise of good government. And
accordingly, we can trace the rudiments of these institutions in the

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 311

earliest stages of most regular governments. These and similar
arrangements, are left to human care, prudence, and patriotism ;
and they are in perfect accordance with the principles of sovereign
right as laid down in Scripture.

It is not, however, in the forming of a new State, that any great
difficulty in morals arises. It comes in when either old States,
originally ill constituted, become inadapted to the purposes of good
government in a new and altered condition of society, and the
supreme power refuses to adapt itself to this new state of affairs ;
or when, in States originally well constituted, encroachments upon
the public liberties take place, and great misrule or neglect is
chargeable upon the executive. The question in such cases is,
whether resistance to the will of the supreme power is consistent
with the subjects' duty 1

To answer this, resistance must be divided into two kinds, — the
resistance of opinion, and the resistance of force.

As to the first, the lawfulness, nay, even the duty of it must
often be allowed ; but under certain qualifying circumstances.
As, 1 . That this resistance of opposing and inculpating opinion is
not directed against government, as such, however strict, provided
it be just and impartial. 2. That it is not personal against the
supreme magistrate himself, or his delegated authorities, but relates
to public acts only. 3. That it springs not from mere theoretical
preference of some new form of government to that actually exist-
ing, so that it has in it nothing practical. 4. That it proceeds not
from a hasty, prejudiced, or malignant interpretation of the cha-
racter, designs, and acts of a government. 5. That it is not factious ;
that is, not the result of attachment to parties, and of zeal to effect
mere party objects, instead of the general good. 6. That it does
not respect the interests of a few only, or of a part of the commu-
nity, or the mere local interests of some places in opposition to the
just interests of other places. Under such guards as these, the
respectful, but firm expression of opinion, by speech, writing,
petition, or remonstrance, is not only lawful, but is often an
imperative duty, a duty for which hazards even must be run by
those who endeavour to lead up public opinion to place itself
against real encroachments upon the fundamental laws of a State,
or any serious maladministration of its affairs. The same conclu-
sion may be maintained under similar reserves, when the object is
to improve a deficient and inadequate state of the supreme govern-
ment. It is indeed specially requisite here, that the case should be
a clear one ; that it should be felt to be so by the great mass of
those who with any propriety can be called the public; that it

312 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

should not be urged beyond the necessity of the case ; that the
discussion of it should be temperate ; that the change should be
directly connected with an obvious public good, not otherwise to
be accomplished. When these circumstances meet, there is mani-
festly no opposition to government as an ordinance of God ; no
blamable resistance " to the powers that be," since it is only pro-
posed to place them in circumstances the more effectually to fulfil
the duties of their office ; nothing contrary, in fact, to the original
compact, the object of which was the public benefit, by rendering
its government as efficient to promote the good of the State as
possible, and which therefore necessarily supposed a liability to
future modifications, when the fairly collected public sentiment,
through the organs by which it usually expresses itself as to the
public weal, required it. The least equivocal time, however, for
proposing any change in what might be regarded as fundamental
or constitutional in a form of government originally ill settled,
would be on the demise of the sovereign, when the new stipula-
tions might be offered to his successor, and very lawfully be
imposed upon him.

Resistance by force may be divided into two kinds. The first is>
that milder one which belongs to constitutional states, that is, to
those in which the compact between the supreme power and the
people has been drawn out into express articles, or is found in well
understood and received principles and ancient customs, imposing
checks upon the sovereign will, and surrounding with guards the
public liberty. The application of this controlling power, which,
in this country, is placed in a Parliament, may have in it much of
compulsion and force ; as when Parliament rejects measures pro-
posed by the ministry, who are the organs of the will of the
sovereign ; or when it refuses the usual supplies for the army and
navy, until grievances are redressed. The proper or improper
use of this power depends on the circumstances ; but when not
employed factiously, nor under the influence of private feelings,
nor in subservience to unjustifiable popular clamour, or to popular
demagogues ; but advisedly and patriotically, in order to maintain
the laws and customs of the kingdom, there is in it no infringement
of the laws of Scripture as to the subjects' obedience. A compact
exists ; these are the established means of enforcing it ; and to
them the sovereign has consented in his coronation oath.

The second kind is resistance by force of arms ; and this at least
must be established before its lawfulness, in any case, however
extreme, can be proved, that it is so necessary to remedy some
great public evil that milder means are totally inadequate, — a point

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 31o

which can very seldom be made out so clearly as to satisfy con-
scientious men. One of three cases must be supposed : — either
that the nation enjoys good institutions which it is enlightened
enough to value : — or that public liberty and other civil blessings
are in gradual progress ; but that a part only of the people are
interested in maintaining and advancing them, whilst a great body
of ignorant, prejudiced, and corrupt persons, are on the side oi
the supreme power, and ready to lend themselves as instruments
of its misrule and despotism : — or, thirdly, that although the
majority of the public are opposed to infringements on the con-
stitution, yet the sovereign, in attempting to change the funda-
mental principles of his compact, employs his mercenary troops
against his subjects, or is aided and abetted by some foreign
influence or power.

In the first case we have supposed, it does not seem possible
for unjust aggressions to be successful. The people are enlight-
ened, and attached to their institutions ; and a prompt resistance
of public opinion to the very first attempt of the supreme power
must, in that case, be excited, and will be sufficient to arrest the
evil. Accordingly, we find no instance of such a people being
bereft of their liberty by their rulers. The danger in that state o!
society often lies on the other side. For as there is a natural
inclination in men in power to extend their authority, so in sub-
jects there is a strong disposition to resist or evade it ; and when
the strength of public opinion is known in any country, there are
never wanting persons, who, from vanity, faction, or interest, are
ready to excite the passions, and to corrupt the feelings of the
populace, and to render them suspicious and unruly ; so that the
difficulty which a true patriotism will often have to contend with,
is, not to repress but to support a just authority. Licentiousness in
the people has often, by a reaction, destroyed liberty, overthrowing
the powers by which alone it is supported.

The second case supposes just opinions and feelings on the
necessity of improving the civil institutions of a country to be in
some progress ; that the evils of bad government are not only
beginning to be felt, but to be extensively reflected upon ; and
that the circumstances of a country are such that these considera-
tions must force themselves upon the public mind, and advance
the influence of public opinion in favour of beneficial changes
When this is the case, the existing evils must be gradually coun-
teracted, and ultimately subdued by the natural operation of all
these circumstances. But if little impression has been made upon
the public mind, resistance would be hopeless, and, even if not

Vol. III. 35

314 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

condemned by a higher principle, impolitic. The elements of
society are not capable of being formed into a better system, or,
if formed into it, cannot sustain it, since no form of government,
however good in theory, is reducible to beneficial practice, without
a considerable degree of public intelligence and public virtue.
Even where society is partially prepared for beneficial changes,
they may be hurried on too rapidly, that is, before sufficient
previous impression has been made upon the public mind and
character, and then nothing but mischief could result from a
contest of force with a bad government. The effect would be
that the leaders of each party would appeal to an ignorant and
bad populace, and the issue on either side would prove injurious
to the advancement of civil improvement. If the despotic party
should triumph, then, of course, all patriotism would be con-
founded with rebellion, and the efforts of moderate men to benefit
their country be rendered for a long time hopeless. If the party
seeking just reforms should triumph, they could only do so by the
aid of those whose bad passions they had inflamed, as was the
case in the French Revolution ; and then the result would be o
violence which, it is true, overthrows one form of tyranny, but
sets up another under which the best men perish. It cannot be
doubted but that the sound public opinion in, France, independent
of all the theories in favour of republicanism which had been circu-
lated among a people previously unprepared for political discus-
sions, was sufficient to have effected, gradually, the most beneficial
changes in its government ; and that the violence which was
excited by blind passions threw back the real liberties of that coun-
try for many years. The same effect followed the parliamentary
war, excited in our own country in the reign of Charles the First.
The resistance of arms was in neither case to be justified, and it
led to the worst crimes. The extreme case of necessity was not
made out in either, instance ; and the duty of subjects to their
sovereigns was grossly violated.

The third case supposed appears to be the only one in which
the renunciation of allegiance is clearly justifiable ; because when
the contract of a king with his people is not only violated obvi-
ously, repeatedly, and in opposition to petition and remonstrance,
but a mercenary soldiery is employed against those whom he is
bound to protect, and the fear of foreign force and compulsion i<
also suspended over them to compel the surrender of those rights
which are accorded to them both by the laws of God, and the
fundamental laws of the kingdom, the resistance of public feeling
and sentiment, and that of the constitutional authorities, is no

THIRD.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 315

longer available ; and such a sovereign does, in fact, lose his lights
by a hostile denial of his duties, in opposition to his contract with
his people. Such a case arose in this country at the Revolution of
1 688 ; it was one so clear and indubitable, as to carry with it the
calm and deliberate sense of the vast majority of all ranks of society ;
and the whole was stamped Avith the character of a deliberate
national act, not that of a faction. This resistance was doubtless
justifiable. It involved no opposition to government as such, but
was made for the purpose of serving the ends of good government,
and the preservation of the very principles of the constitution. Nor
did it imply any resistance to the existing power in any respect in
which it was invested with any right, either by the laws of God, or
those of the realm. It will, however, appear that here was a con-
currence of circumstances which rendered the case one which can
very rarely occur. It was not the act of a few individuals ; nor of
mere theorists in forms of government ; nor was it the result of
unfounded jealousy or alarm ; nor was it the work of either the
populace on the one hand, or of an aristocratic faction on the
other ; bvit of the people under their natural guides and leaders, —
the nobility and gentry of the land : nor were any private interests
involved, the sole object being the public weal, and the maintenance
of the laws. When such circumstances and principles meet,
similar acts may be justified ; but in no instance of an equivocal
character.

The question of a subject's duty in case of the existence of rival
supreme powers, is generally a very difficult one, at least for some
time. When the question of right which lies between them divides
a nation, he who follows his conscientious opinion as to this point
Is doubtless morally safe, and he ought to follow it at the expense
of any inconvenience. But when a power is settled de facto in the
possession of the government, although the right of its claim should
remain questionable in the minds of any, there appears a limit
beyond which no man can be fairly required to withhold his full
allegiance. Where that limit lies it is difficult to say, and individual
conscience must have considerable latitude ; but perhaps* the general
rule may be, that when continued resistance would be manifestly con-
trary to the general welfare of the whole, it is safe to conclude that
lie who changes the " powers that be" at his sovereign pleasure,
has in his providence permitted or established a new order of things
to which men are bound to conform.

Whether men are at liberty to resist their lawful princes when
persecuted by them for conscience' sake, is a question which
brings in additional considerations ; because of that patience and

316 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES.

meekness which Christ has enjoined upon his followers when the)
suffer for his religion. When persecution falls upon a portion only
of the subjects of a country, it appears their clear duty to submit,
rather than to engage in plots and conspiracies against the perse-
cuting power ; practices which never can consist with Christian
moderation and truth. But when it should fall upon a people
constituting a distinct State, though united politically with some
other, as in the case of the Waldenses, then the persecution, ii
carried to the violation of liberty, life, and property, would involve
(he violation of political rights also, and so nullify the compact
which has guaranteed protection to all innocent subjects. A
national resistance on these grounds would, for the foregoing
reasons, stand on a very different basis.

No questions of this kind can come before a Christian man,
however, without placing him under the necessity of considering
the obligation of many duties of a much clearer character than, in
almost any case, the duty of resistance to the government under
which he lives, can be. He is bound to avoid all intemperance
and uncharitableness, and he is not, therefore, at liberty to become
a factious man ; he is forbidden to indulge malignity, and is
restrained therefore from revenge; he is taught to be distrustful
of his own judgment, and must only admit that of the wise and
good to be influential with him ; he must therefore avoid all asso-
ciation with low and violent men, the rabble of a State, and their
designing leaders ; he is bound to submission to rulers in all cases
where a superior duty cannot be fairly established ; and he is warned
of the danger of resistance " to the power," as bringing after it
Divine " condemnation," wherever the case is not clear, and not
Cully within the principles of the word of God. So circumstanced,
ihe allegiance of a Christian people is secured to all governors,
and to all governments, except in very extreme cases which can
very seldom arise in the judgment of any who respect the authority
of the word of God ; and thus this branch of Christian morality is
established upon principles which at once uphold the majesty of
[governmeAt,] and throw their shield over the liberties of the
people ; principles which in the wisdom of God beautifully entwine
[ fidelity.] freedom, and peace.

END OF THE THIRD PART,

PART FOURTH.

THE INSTITUTIONS OF CHRISTIANITY

CHAPTER I.

The Christian Church.

The Church of Christ, in its largest sense, consists of all who
have been baptized in the name of Christ, and who thereby make
a visible profession of faith in his Divine mission, and in all the
doctrines taught by him and his inspired Apostles. In a stricter
sense, it consists of those who are vitally united to Christ, as the
members of the body to the head, and who, being thus imbued
with spiritual life, walk no longer " after the flesh, but after the
Spirit." Taken in either view; it is a visible society, bound to
observe the laws of Christ, its sole Head and Lord. Visible fel-
lowship with this Church is the duty of all who profess faith in
Christ ; for in this, in part, consists that " confession of Christ
before men," on which so much stress is laid in the discourses of
our Lord. It is obligatory on all who are convinced of the truth
of Christianity to be baptized ; and upon all thus baptized fre-
quently to partake of the Lord's Supper, in order to testify their
continued faith in that great and distinguishing doctrine of the
religion of Christ, the redemption of the world by the sacrificial
effusion of his blood, both of which suppose union with his Church.
The ends of this fellowship or association are, to proclaim our
faith in the doctrine of Christ as divine in its origin, and necessarv
to salvation ; to offer public prayers and thanksgivings to God
through Christ, as the sole Mediator; to hear God's word ex-
plained and enforced ; and to place ourselves under that discipline
which consists in the enforcement of the laws of Christ, (which
are the rules of the society called the Church,) upon the mem-
bers, not merely by general exhortation, but by kind oversight,
and personal injunction and admonition of its Ministers. All these

35*

'J15 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

flow from the original obligation to avow our faith in Christ, and
our love to him.

The Church of Christ being then a visible and permanent
society, bound to observe certain rites, and to obey certain rules,
the existence of government in it is necessarily supposed. All
religious rites suppose order, all order direction and control.
and these a directive and controlling power. Again, all
laws are nugatory without enforcement, in the present mixed and
imperfect state of society ; and all enforcement supposes an
executive. If Baptism be the door of admission into the Church,
some must judge of the fitness of candidates, and administrators of
the rite must be appointed ; if the Lord's Supper must be partaken
of, the times and the mode are to be determined, the qualifications
of communicants judged of, and the administration placed in suit-
able hands ; if worship must be social and public, here again there
must be an appointment of times, an order, and an administra-
tion ; if the word of God is to be read and preached, then readers
and preachers are necessary ; if the continuance of any one in
the fellowship of Christians be conditional upon good conduct, so
that the purity and credit of the Church may be guarded, then
the power of enforcing discipline must be lodged somewhere.
Thus government flows necessarily from the very nature of the
institution of the Christian Church ; and since this institution has
the authority of Christ and his Apostles, it is not to be supposed
that its government was left unprovided for ; and if they have in
fact made such a provision, it is no more a matter of mere option
with Christians whether they will be subject to government in the
Church, than it is optional with them to confess Christ by becom-
ing its members.

The Nature of this government, and the Persons to whom it is
committed, are both points which we must briefly examine by the
light of the Holy Scriptures.

As to the first, it is wholly spiritual : — " My kingdom," says our
Lord, " is not of this world." The Church is a society founded
upon faith, and united by mutual love, for the personal edification
of its members in holiness, and for the religious benefit of the
world. The nature of its government is thus determined ; — it is
concerned only with spiritual objects. It cannot employ force to
compel men into its pale ; for the only door of the Church is faith,
to which there can be no compulsion, — :" he that belicveth and is
baptized" becomes a member. It cannot inflict pains and penal-
lies upon the disobedient and refractory, like civil governments ;
for the only punitive discipline authorized in the New Testament,

tOUHTH.j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 319

is comprised in "admonition," "reproof," " sharp rebukes," and,
iinally, " excision from the society." The last will be better under-
stood if we consider the special relations in which true Christians
stand to each other, and the duties resulting from them. They are
members of one body, and are therefore bound to tenderness and
sympathy ; they are the conjoint instructers of others, and are
therefore to strive to be of " one judgment ;" they are brethren,
and they are to love one another as such, that is, with an affection
more special than that general good will which they are com-
manded to bear to all mankind ; they are therefore to seek the
intimacy of friendly society among themselves, and, except in the
ordinary and courteous intercourse of life, they are bound to keep
themselves separate from the world ; they are enjoined to do good
unto all men, but " specially to them that are of the household oi
faith ;" and they are forbidden " to eat" at the Lord's Table with
immoral persons, that is, with those who, although they continue
their Christian profession, dishonour it by their practice. With
these relations of Christians to each other and to the world, and
their correspondent duties before our minds, we may easily inter-
pret the nature of that extreme discipline which is vested in the
Church. " Persons who will not hear the Church" are to be held
" as heathen men and publicans," as those who are not members
of it ; that is, they are to be separated from it, and regarded as oi
" the world," quite out of the range of the above-mentioned rela-
tions of Christians to each other, and their correspondent duties ;
but still, like "heathen men and publicans," they are to be the
objects of pity, and general benevolence. Nor is this extreme dis-
cipline to be hastily inflicted before "a first and second admonition,"'
nor before those who are " spiritual" have attempted " to restore a
brother overtaken by a fault;" and when the "wicked person"
is " put away," still the door is to be kept open for his reception
again upon repentance. The true excommunication of the Chris-
tian Church is therefore a merciful and considerate separation ol
an incorrigible offender from the body of Christians, without any
infliction of civil pains or penalties. " Now we commanr? you,
brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw
yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not
after the tradition which ye have received from us," 2 Thess. iii, 6.
•' Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump,"
1 Cor. v, 5. " But now I have written to you not to keep com-
pany, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covet-
ous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner,
with such a one, no not to eat," 1 Cor. v, 11. This then is the

320 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

moral discipline which is imperative upon the Church of Christ,
and its government is criminally defective whenever it is not
enforced. On the other hand, the disabilities and penalties which
established Churches in different places have connected with these
sentences of excommunication, have no countenance at all in
Scripture, and are wholly inconsistent with the spiritual character
and ends of the Christian association.

As to the second point, — the persons to whom the government
of the Church is committed, it is necessary to consider the com-
position, so to speak, of the primitive Church, as stated in the
New Testament.

A full enunciation of these offices we find in Ephesians iv, 1 1 :
•; And he gave some, Apostles; and some, Prophets; and some,
Evangelists ; and some, Pastors and Teachers ; for the perfecting
of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the
body of Christ." Of these, the office of Apostle is allowed by all
to have been confined to those immediately commissioned by
Christ to witness the fact of his miracles and of his resurrection
from the dead, and to repeal the complete system of Christian
doctrine and duty ; confirming their extraordinary mission by
miracles wrought by themselves. If by " Prophets" we are to
understand persons who foretold future events, then the office was
from its very nature extraordinary, and the gift of prophecy has
passed away with the other miraculous endowments of the first
age of Christianity. If, with others, we understand that these
Prophets were extraordinary teachers raised up until the churches
were settled under permanent qualified instructers ; still the office
was temporary. The " Evangelists" are generally understood to
be assistants of the Apostles, who acted under their especial au-
thority and direction. Of this number were Timothy and Titus :
and as the Apostle Paul directed them to ordain Bishops or
Presbyters in the several Churches, but gave them no authority
to ordain successors to themselves in their particular office as
Evangelists, it is clear that the Evangelists must also be reckoned
among the number of extraordinary and temporary Ministers suited
to the first age of Christianity. Whether by " Pastors and Teach-
ers" two offices be meant, or one, has been disputed. The change
in the mode of expression seems to favour the latter view, and so
the text is interpreted by St. Jerome, and St. Augustine ; but the
point is of little consequence. A Pastor was a Teacher ; although
every Teacher might not be a Pastor ; but in many cases be con-
lined to the office of subordinate instruction, whether as an expounder
of doctrine, a catechisr, or even a more private instructer of those

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 321

who as yet were unacquainted with the first principles of the gospel
of Christ. The term Pastor implies the duties both of instruction
and of government, of feeding and of ruling the flock of Christ ;
and, as the Presbyters or Bishops were ordained in the several
churches, both by the Apostles and. Evangelists, and rules are
left by St. Paul as to their appointment, there can be no doubt
but that these are the " Pastors" spoken of in the Epistle to the
Ephcsians, and that they were designed to be the permanent Minis-
ters of the Church ; and that with them both the government ol
the Church and the performance of its leading religious services
were deposited. Deacons had the charge of the gifts and offerings
for charitable purposes, although, as appears from Justin Martyr,
uot in every instance ; for he speaks of the weekly oblations as
being deposited with the chief Minister, and distributed by him.

Whether Bishops and Presbyters be designations of the same
office, or these appellatives express two distinct sacred orders, is a
subject which has been controverted by Episcopalians and Pres-
byterians with much warmth ; and whoever would fully enter into
their arguments from Scripture and antiquity, must be referred to
this controversy, which is too large to be here more than glanced
at. The argument drawn by the Presbyterians from the promis-
cuous use of these terms in the New Testament, to prove that the
same order of Ministers is expressed by them, appears incontro-
vertible. When St. Paul, for instance, sends for the " Elders," or
Presbyters, of the Church of Ephesus to meet him at Miletus, he
thus charges them, " Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock,
over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers," or
Bishops. That here the Elders or Presbyters are called "Bishops,'*
cannot be denied, and the very office assigned to them, to "feed
the Church of God," and the injunction, to " take heed to the
flock," show that the office of Elder or Presbyter is the same as
that of " Pastor" in the passage just quoted from the Epistle to
the Ephesians. St. Paul directs Titus to "ordain Elders (Pres-
byters) in every city," and then adds, as a directory of ordination,
" a- Bishop must be blameless," &c, plainly marking the same
office by these two convertible appellations. " Bishops and Dea-
cons" are the only classes of Ministers addressed in the Epistle to
the Philippians ; and if the Presbyters were not understood to be
included under the term " Bishops," the omission of any notice ol
this order of Ministers is not to be accounted for. As the Apos-
tles, when not engaged in their own extraordinary vocation, appear
to have filled the office of stated Ministers in *hose Churches in
which they occasionally resided for considerable periods of time.

o22 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

they sometimes called themselves Presbyters. " The Elder,"
Presbyter, "unto the elect lady," 2 John i, 1. "The Elders
(Presbyters) which are among you, I exhort, who am also an
Elder," (Presbyter,) and from what follows, the highest offices of
teaching and government in- the Church are represented as vested
in the Presbyters. " Feed the flock of God, which is among you.,
taking the oversight thereof." There seems, therefore, to be the
most conclusive evidence, from the New Testament, that, after
the extraordinary ministry vested in Apostles, Prophets, and Evan-
gelists, as mentioned by St. Paul, had ceased, the feeding and
oversight, that is, the teaching and government of the Churches,
devolved upon an order of men indiscriminately called " Pastors,"
i; Presbyters," and "Bishops," the two latter names growing into
most frequent use ; and with this the testimony of the Apostolical
Fathers, so far as their writings are acknowledged to be free from
later interpolations, agrees.

It is not indeed to be doubted, that, at a very early period, in
some instances probably from the time of the Apostles themselves.
a distinction arose between Bishops and Presbyters ; and the
whole strength of the cause of the Episcopalians lies in this fact.
Still this gives not the least sanction to the notion of Bishops being
a superior order of Ministers to Presbyters, invested, in virtue oi
that order, and by divine right, with powers of government both
over Presbyters and people, and possessing exclusively the authority
of ordaining to the sacred offices of the Church. As little too will
that ancient distinction be found to prove any thing in favour oi
diocesan Episcopacy, which is of still later introduction.

Could it be made clear that the power of ordaining to the Minis-
try was given to Bishops to the exclusion of Presbyters, that would
indeed go far to prove the former a distinct and superior order oi
Ministers in their original appointment. But there is no passage
in the New Testament which gives this power at all to Bishops,
as thus distinguished from Presbyters ; whilst all the examples oi
ordination which it exhibits are confined to Apostles, to Evan-
gelists, or to Presbyters, in conjunction with them. St. Paul, in
2 Timothy i, 6, says, "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance,
(hat thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the putting
on of my hands ;" but in 1 Timothy iv, 14, he says, "Neglect not
the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the
laying on of the hands of the Presbytery ;" which two passages,
referring, as they plainly do, to the same event, the setting apart
of Timothy for the ministry, show that the Presbytery were asso-
ciated with St. Paul in the office of ordination, and further provt

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. o2o

that the exclusive assumption of this power, as by divine right, b\
Bishops, is an aggression upon the rights of Presbyters, for which
uot only can no scriptural authority be pleaded, but which is in
direct opposition to it.

The early distinction made between Bishops and Presbyters ma\
be easily accounted for, without allowing this assumed distinction
of order. In some of the Churches mentioned in the Acts of
the Apostles, the Apostles ordained several Elders or Presbyters,
partly to supply the present need, and to provide for the future
increase of believers, as it is observed by Clemens in his Epistle-
Another reason would also urge this : — Before the building of spa-
cious edifices for the assemblies of the Christians living in one pity,
and in its neighbourhood, in common, their meetings for public-
worship must necessarily have been held in different houses ov
rooms obtained for the purpose ; and to each assembly an Elder
would be requisite for the performance of worship. That these
Elders or Presbyters had the power of government in the Churches
cannot be denied, because it is expressly assigned to them in Scrip-
ture. It was inherent in their pastoral office ; and " the Elders
that rule well," were to be " counted worthy of double honour."
A number of Elders, therefore, being ordained by the Apostles to
one Church, gave rise to the catus prcsbyterorum, in which assem-
bly the affairs of the Church were attended to, and measures taken
for the spread of the Gospel, by the aid of the common counsel
and efforts of the whole. This meeting of Presbyters would natu-
rally lead to the appointment, whether by seniority or by election,
of one to preside over the proceedings of this assembly for the sake
of order ; and to him was given the title of Jlngel of the Church,
and Bishop by way of eminence. The latter title came in time to
be exclusively used of the presiding Elder, because of that special
oversight imposed upon him by his office, and which, as Churches
were raised up in the neighbourhood of the larger cities, would
also naturally be extended over them. Independently of his fellow
Presbyters, however, he did nothing.

The whole of this arrangement shows, that in those particulars in
which they were left free by the Scriptures, the primitive Christians
adopted that arrangement for the government of the Church which
promised to render it' most efficient for the maintenance of truth
and piety ; but they did not at this early period set up that unserip
tural distinction of order between Bishops and Presbyters, which
obtained afterwards. Hence Jerome, even in the fourth century,
contends against this doctrine, and says, that before there were
parties in religion, Churches were governed communi consilio pres-

324 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

bytcrorum; but that afterwards, it became a universal practice,
founded upon experience of its expediency, that one of the Presby-
ters should be chosen by the rest to be the head, and that the care
of the Church should be committed to him. He therefore exhorts
Presbyters to remember that they are subject by the custom of the
Church to him that presides over them ; and reminds Bishops that
they are greater than Presbyters, rather by custom than by the
appointment of the Lord; and that the Church ought still to be
governed in common. The testimony of antiquity also shows,
that, after Episcopacy had very greatly advanced its claims, the
Presbyters continued to be associated with the Bishop in the man-
agement of the affairs of the Church.

Much light is thrown upon the constitution of the primitive
Churches, by recollecting that they were formed very much upon
the model of the Jewish synagogues. We have already seen that
the mode of public worship in the primitive Church was taken
from the synagogue service, and so also was its arrangement of
offices. Each synagogue had its Rulers, Elders, or Presbyters, of
whom one was the Angel of the Church, or Minister of the Syna-
gogue, who superintended the public service ; directed those that
read the Scriptures, and offered up the prayers, and blessed the
people. The president of the council of Elders or Rulers was
called, by way of eminence, the " Ruler of the Synagogue ;" and
in some places, as Acts xiii, 15, we read of these "Rulers" in the
plural number ; a sufficient proof that one was not elevated in
order above the rest. The Angel of the Church, and the Minister
of the Synagogue, might be the same as he who was invested with
the office of President ; or these offices might be held by others
of the Elders. Lightfoot, indeed, states that the Rulers in each
synagogue were three, whilst the Presbyters or Elders were ten.
To this council of grave and wise men, the affairs of the syna-
gogue, both as to worship and discipline, were committed. In the
synagogue they sat by themselves in a semicircle, and the people
before them, face to face. This was the precise form in which
the Bishop and Presbyters used to sit in the primitive Churches.
The description of the worship of the synagogue by a Jewish
Rabbi, and that of the primitive Church by early Christian writers,
presents an obvious correspondence. " The Elders," says Maimo
nides, " sit with their faces towards the people, and their backs to
the place where the law is deposited ; and all the people sit rank
before rank ; so the faces of all the people are towards the sanc-
tuary, and towards the Elders ; and when the Minister of the sanc-
tuary standeth up to prayer, he standeth with his face towards thr

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 325

sanctuary, as do the rest of the people." In the same order the
first Christians sat with their faces towards the Bishops and Pres-
byters, first to hear the Scriptures read by the proper Reader ;
" then," says Justin Martyr, " the Reader sitting down, the Presi-
dent of the assembly stands up and makes a sermon of instruction
and exhortation ; after this is ended, we all stand up to prayers ;
prayers being ended, the bread, wine, and water are all brought
forth ; then the President again praying and praising to his utmost
ability, the people testify their consent by saying, Amen."(8)
" Here we have the Scriptures read by one appointed for that pur-
pose, as in the synagogue ; after which follows the word of exhort-
ation by the President of the assembly, who answers to the Minister
of the synagogue ; after this, public prayers are performed by the
same person ; then the solemn acclamation of Amen by the people,
which was the undoubted practice of the synagogue." (9) Ordina-
tion of Presbyters or Elders is also from the Jews. Their Priests
were not ordained, but succeeded to their office by birth ; but the
Rulers and Elders of the synagogue received ordination by impo-
sition of hands and prayer.

Such was the model which the Apostles followed in providing
for the future regulation of the Churches they had raised up. They
took it, not from the temple and its Priesthood ; for that was typical,
and was then passing away. But they found in the institution of
synagogues a plan admirably adapted to the simplicity and purity
of Christianity, one to which some of the first converts in most
places were accustomed, and which was capable of being applied
to the new dispensation without danger of Judaizing. It secured
the assembling of the people on the Sabbath, the reading of the
Scriptures, the preaching of sermons, and the offering of public
prayer and thanksgiving. It provided too for the government of
the Church by a Council of Presbyters, ordained solemnly to their
office by imposition of hands and prayer ; and it allowed of that
presidency of one Presbyter chosen by the others, which was use-
ful for order and for unity, and by which age, piety, and gifts, might
preserve their proper influence in the Church. The advance from
this state of scriptural Episcopacy to Episcopacy under another
form was the work of a later age.

When the Gospel made its way into to urns and villages, the con-
cerns of the Christians in these places naturally fell under the cog-
nizance and direction of the Bishops of the neighbouring cities.
Thus diocesses were gradually formed, comprehending districts
of country, of different extent. These diocesses were originally
(8) JpoL 2. (9) Stillingfleet'3 Irenicwn.

Vol. IN. 36

326 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

called rfapoixiai, parishes, and the word Sim-ridg, diocess, was not
used in its modern sense till at least the fourth century ; and when
we find Ignatius describing it as the duty of a Bishop, " to speak
to each member of the Church separately, to seek out all by name,
even the slaves of both sexes, and to advise every one of the flock
in the affair of marriage," diocesses, as one observes, must have
been very limited, or the labour inconceivably great.

"As Christianity increased and overspread all parts, and espe-
cially the cities of the empire, it was found necessary yet farther
to enlarge the Episcopal office ; and as there was commonly a
Bishop in every great city, so in the metropolis, (as the Romans
called it,) the mother city of every province, (wherein they had
courts of civil judicature,) there was an Archbishop or a Metro-
politan, who had ecclesiastical jurisdiction over all the Churches
within that province. He was superior to all the Bishops within
those limits ; to him it belonged to ordain or to ratify the elections
and ordinations of all the Bishops within his province, insomuch
that without his confirmation they were looked upon as null and
void. Once at least every year he was to summon the Bishops
under him to a Synod, to inquire into and direct the ecclesiastical
affairs within that province ; to inspect the lives and manners, the
opinions and principles of his Bishops ; to admonish, reprove, and
suspend them that were disorderly and irregular ; if any controver-
sies or contentions happened between any of them, he was to have
the hearing and determination of them ; and indeed no matter of
moment was done within the whole province, without first consulting
him in the case. When this office of Metropolitan first began, I
find not i only this we are sure of, that the Council of JW'cc, set-
tling the just rights and privileges of Metropolitan Bishops, speaks
of them as a thing of ancient date, ushering in the canon with an
ap^aia z&y\ xpa7eirw, Let ancient customs still take place. The original
of the institution seems to have been partly to comply with the
people's occasions, who oft resorted to the metropolis for despatch
of their affairs, and so might fitly discharge their civil and ecclesias-
tical both at once ; and partly because of the great confluence of
people to that city : that the Bishop of it might have pre-eminence
above the rest, and the honour of the Church bear some proportion
to that of the State.

"After this sprung up another branch of the Episcopal office, as
much superior to that of Metropolitans, as theirs was to ordinary
Bishops ; these were called Primates and Patriarchs, and had
jurisdiction over many provinces. For the understanding of this,
it is necessary to know, that, when Christianity came to be fully

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 327

settled in the world, they contrived to model the external govern-
ment of the Church, as near as might be, to the civil government
of the Roman empire ; the parallel is most exactly drawn by an
ingenious person of our own nation ; the sum of it is this : — The
whole empire of Rome was divided into thirteen diocesses, (so they
called those divisions,) these contained about one hundred and twenty
provinces, and every province several cities. Now, as in every city
there was a temporal Magistrate for the executing of justice, and
keeping the peace, both for that city, and the towns round about
it ; so was there also a Bishop for spiritual order and government,
whose jurisdiction was of like extent and latitude. In every pro-
vince there was a Proconsul or President, whose seat was usually
at the metropolis, or chief city of the province ; and hither all
inferior cities came for judgment in matters of importance. And
in proportion to this there was in the same city an Archbishop or
Metropolitan, for matters of ecclesiastical concernment. Lastly,
in every diocess the Emperors had their Vicarii or Lieutenants, who
dwelt in the principal city of the diocess, where all imperial edicts
were published, and from whence they were sent abroad into the
several provinces, and where was the chief tribunal where all causes
not determinable elsewhere, were decided. And, to answer this,
there was in the same city a Primate, to whom the last determina-
tion of all appeals from all the provinces in differences of the Clergy,
and the sovereign care of all the diocess for sundry points of spi-
ritual government, did belong. This, in short, is the sum of the
account which that learned man gives of this matter. So that the
Patriarch, as superior to the Metropolitans, was to have under his
jurisdiction not any one single province, but a whole diocess, (in
the old Roman notion of that word,) consisting of many provinces.
To him belonged the ordination of all the Metropolitans that were
under him, as also the summoning them to Councils, the correcting
and reforming the misdemeanors they were guilty of; and from his
judgment and sentence, in things properly within his cognizance,
there lay no appeal. To this I shall only add what Salmasius has
noted, that as the diocess that was governed by the Vicarius had
many provinces under it, so the Praifectus Prcetorio had several
diocesses under him : and in proportion to this, probable it was, that
Patriarchs were first brought in, who, if not superior to Primates
in jurisdiction and power, were yet in honour, by reason of the
dignity of those cities where their Sees were fixed, as at Rome,
Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch, and Jerusalem." (I)

(1) Cave's Primitive Christianity.

328 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

Thus diocesan Bishops, Metropolitans, Primates, Patriarchs,
and finally the Pope, came in, which offices are considered as cor-
ruptions or improvements ; as dictated by the necessities of the
Church, or as instances of worldly ambition ; as of Divine right,
or from Satan ; according to the different views of those who have
written on such subjects. As to them all it may, however, be
said, that, so far as they are pleaded for as of Divine right, they
have no support from the New Testament ; and if they are placed
upon the only ground on which they can be reasonably discussed,
that of necessity and good polity, they must be tried by circum-
stances, and their claims of authority be so defined that it may be
known how far they are compatible with those principles with
which the New Testament abounds, although it contains no formal
plan of Church government. The only scriptural objection to
Episcopacy, as it is understood in modern times, is its assumption
of superiority of order, of an exclusive right to govern the Pastors
as well as the flock, and to ordain to the Christian Ministry. These
exclusive powers are by the New Testament no where granted to
Bishops in distinction from Presbyters. The government of Pas-
tors as well as people, was at first in the assembly of Presbyters,
who were individually accountable to that ruling body, and that
whether they had a president or not. So also as to ordination ;
it was a right in each, although used by several together, for better
security ; and even when the presence of a Bishop came to be
thought necessary to the validity of ordination, the Presbyters
were not excluded.

As for the argument from the succession of Bishops from the
times of the Apostles, could the fact be made out it would only-
trace diocesan Bishops to the Bishops of parishes ; those, to the
Bishops of single churches ; and Bishops of a supposed superior
order, to Bishops who never thought themselves more than pre-
siding Presbyters, primi inter pares. This therefore would only
show that an unscriptural assumption of distinct orders has been
made, which that succession, if established, would refute. But the
succession itself is imaginary. Even Epiphanius, a Bishop of the
fourth century, gives this account of things, " that the Apostles
were not able to settle all things at once. But according to the
number of believers, and the qualifications for the different offices
which those whom they found appeared to possess, they appointed
in some places only a Bishop and Deacons ; in others Presbyters
and Deacons ; in others a Bishop, Presbyters, and Deacons :" —
a statement fatal to the argument from succession. As for the
pretended catalogues of Bishops of the different Churches from the

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 329

days of the Apostles, exhibited by some ecclesiastical writers, they
are filled up by forgeries and inventions of later times. Eusebius,
more honest, begins his catalogue with declaring, that it is not easy
to say who were the disciples of the Apostles that were appointed
to feed the Churches which they planted, excepting only those,
whom we read of in the writings of St. Paul.

Whether Episcopacy may not be a matter of prudential regu-
lation, is another question. We think it often may ; and that
Churches are quite at liberty to adopt this mode, provided they
maintain St. Jerome's distinction, that " Bishops are greater than
Presbyters rather by custom than by appointment of the Lord,
and that still the Church ought to be governed in common," that
is, by Bishops and Presbyters united. It was on this ground that
Luther placed Episcopacy, — as useful, though not of Divine right ;
it was by admitting this liberty in Churches, that Calvin and other
Divines of the Reformed Churches allowed Episcopacy and dioce-
san Churches to be lawful, there being nothing to forbid such an
arrangement in Scripture, when placed on the principle of expe-
diency. Some Divines of the English Church have chosen to defend
its Episcopacy wholly upon this ground, as alone tenable ; and,
admitting that it is safest to approach as near as possible to primi-
tive practice, have proposed the restoration of Presbyters as a
senate to the Bishop, the contraction of diocesses, the placing of
Bishops in all great towns, and the holding of provincial Synods ; —
thus raising the Presbyters to their original rank, as the Bishop's
" compresbyters," as Cyprian himself calls them, both in government
and in ordinations.

As to that kind of Episcopacy which trenches upon no scriptural
principle, much depends upon circumstances, and the forms in
which Christian Churches exist. When a Church composes but
one congregation, the Minister is unquestionably a scriptural Bishop ;
but he is, and can be, only Bishop of the flock, episcopus gregis.
Of this kind, it appears from the extract given above from Epipha-
nius, were some of the primitive Churches, existing, probably, in
the smaller and more remote places. Where a number of Pres-
byters were ordained to one Church, these would, in their common
assembly, have the oversight and government of each other as well
as of the people ; and, in this their collective capacity, they would
be episcopi gregis et pastorwn. In this manner, Episcopacy, as
implying the oversight and government both of Ministers and their
flocks, exists in Presbyterian Churches, and in all others, by what-
ever name they are called, where Ministers are subject to the dis-
cipline of assemblies of Ministers who admit to the Ministry by joint

36*

330 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [FART

consent, and censure or remove those who are so appointed. "When
the ancient Presbyteries elected a Bishop, he might remain, as he
appears to have done for some time, the mere president of the
assembly of Presbyters, and their organ of administration ; or be
constituted, as afterwards, a distinct governing power, although
assisted by the advice of his Presbyters. He was then in person
an episcopus gregis et pastorwn, and his official powers gave rise at
length to the unfounded distinction of superior order. But abating
this false principle, even diocesan Episcopacy may be considered as
in many possible associations of Churches throughout a province,
or a whole country, as an arrangement in some circumstances of
a wise and salutary nature. Nor do the evils which arose in the
Church of Christ appear so attributable to this form of government
as to that too intimate connexion of the Church with the State,
which gave to the former a political character, and took it from
under the salutary control of public opinion, — an evil greatly
increased by the subsequent destruction of religious liberty, and
the coercive interferences of the civil Magistrate.

At the same time, it may be very well questioned, whether any
Presbyters could lawfully surrender into the hands of a Bishop
their own rights of government and ordination without that secu-
rity for their due administration which arises from the accountability
of the administrator. That these are rights which it is not impera-
tive upon the individual possessing them to exercise individually,
appears to have the judgment of the earliest antiquity, because the
assembly of Presbyters, which was probably co-existent with the
ordination of several Presbyters to one Church by the Apostles,
necessarily placed the exercise of the office of each under the
direction and control of all. When therefore a Bishop was chosen
by the Presbyters, and invested with the government, and the power
of granting orders, so long as the Presbyters remained his Council,
and nothing was done but by their concurrence, they were still
parties to the mode in which their own powers were exercised,
and were justifiable in placing the administration in the hands of
one, who was still dependent upon themselves. In this way they
probably thought that their own powers might be most efficiently
and usefully exercised. Provincial and national Synods or Coun-
cils, exercising a proper superintendence over Bishops when made
even more independent of their Presbyters than was the case in
the best periods of the primitive Church, might also, if meeting
frequently and regularly, and as a part of an ecclesiastical system,
afford the same security for good administration, and might justify
the surrender of the exercise of their powers by the Presbyters.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 331

But when that surrender was formally made, or is at any time
made now in the constitution of Churches, to Bishops, or to those
bearing a similar office however designated, without security and
control, either by making that office temporary and elective, or by
the constitution of Synods or Assemblies of the Ministers of a large
and united body of Christians for the purpose of supreme govern-
ment, an office is created which has not only no countenance in
Scripture, that of a Bishop independent of Presbyters, but one
which implies an unlawful surrender of those powers, on the part
of the latter, with which they were invested, not for their own
sakes, but for the benefit of the Church ; and which they could
have no authority to divest themselves of and to transfer, without
retaining the power of counselling and controlling the party charged
with the administration of them. In other words, Presbyters have
a right, under proper regulations, to appoint another to administer
for them, or to consent to such an arrangement when they find it
already existing ; but they have no power to divest themselves of
these rights and duties absolutely. If these principles be sound,
modern Episcopacy, in many Churches, is objectionable in other
respects than as it assumes an unscriptural distinction of order.

The following is a liberal concession on the subject of Episco-
pacy, from a strenuous defender of that form of government as it
exists in the Church of England : —

" It is not contended that the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, of
England, are at present precisely the same that Bishops, Presby-
ters, and Deacons, were in Asia Minor seventeen hundred years
ago. We only maintain that there have always been Bishops,
Priests, and Deacons, in the Christian Church, since the days of
the Apostles, with different powers and functions, it is allowed, in
different countries and at different periods ; but the general prin-
ciples and duties which have respectively characterized these
clerical orders, have been essentially the same at all times, and
in all places ; and the variations which they have undergone, have
only been such as have ever belonged to all persons in public
situations, whether civil or ecclesiastical, and which are indeed
inseparable from every thing in which mankind are concerned in
this transitory and fluctuating world.

" I have thought it right to take this general view of the minis-
terial office, and to make these observations upon the clerical
orders subsisting in this kingdom, for the purpose of pointing out
the foundation and principles of Church authority, and of showing
that our ecclesiastical establishment is as nearly conformable, as
change of circumstances will permit, to the practice of the primitive

332 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

Church. But, though I flatter myself that I have proved Episco-
pacy to be an Apostolical institution, yet I readily acknowledge
that there is no precept in the New Testament which commands
that every Church should be governed by Bishops. No Church
can exist without some government ; but though there must be
rules and orders for the proper discharge of the offices of public
worship, though there must be fixed regulations concerning the
appointment of Ministers, and though a subordination among them
is expedient in the highest degree, yet it does not follow that all
these things must be precisely the same in every Christian coun-
try ; they may vary with the other varying circumstances of human
society, with the extent of a country, the manners of its inhabit-
ants, the nature of its civil government, and many other peculiarities
which might be specified. As it has not pleased our Almighty Fa-
ther to prescribe any particular form of civil government for the
security of temporal comforts to his rational creatures, so neither
has he prescribed any particular form of ecclesiastical polity as
absolutely necessary to the attainment of eternal happiness. But
he has, in the most explicit terms, enjoined obedience to all govern-
ors, whether civil or ecclesiastical, and whatever may be their
denomination, as essential to the character of a true Christian.
Thus the Gospel only lays down general principles, and leaves the
application of them to men as free agents."(2)

Bishop Tomline, however, and the high Episcopalians of the
Church of England, contend for an original distinction in the
office and order of Bishops and Presbyters, in which notion they
are contradicted by one who may be truly called the Founder of
the Church of England, Archbishop Cranmer, who says, " The
Bishops and Priests were at one time, and were not two things ;
but both one office in the beginning of Christ's religion."(3)

On the subject of the Church itself, opinions as opposite or
varying as possible have been held, down from that of the Papists,
who contend for its visible unity throughout the world under a
visible head, to that of the Independents, who consider the uni-
versal Church as composed of congregational Churches, each
perfect in itself, and entirely independent of every other.

The first opinion is manifestly contradicted by the language of the
Apostles, who, whilst they teach that there is but one Church, com-
posed of believers throughout the world, think it not at all incon-
sistent with this to speak of "the Churches of Judea," "of Achaia,"
" the seven Churches of Asia," " the Church at Ephesus," &c.

(2) Bishop Tomline's Elements. (3) Stulingfleet's Irenicum, p. 392.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 333

Among themselves the Apostles had no common head ; but planted
Churches and gave directions for their government, in most cases
without any apparent correspondence with each other. The popish
doctrine is certainly not found in their writings, and so far were
they from making provision for the government of this one sup-
posed Church, by the appointment of one visible and exclusive
head, that they provide for the future government of the respective
Churches raised up by them, in a totally different manner, that is,
Iry the ordination of Ministers for each Church, who are indiffer-
ently called Bishops, and Presbyters, and Pastors. The only unity
of which they speak is the unity of the whole Church in Christ,
the invisible Head, by faith ; and the unity produced by " fervent
love towards each other." Nor has the popish doctrine of the
visible unity of the Church any countenance from early antiquity.
The best ecclesiastical historians have showed, that, through the
greater part of the second century, "the Christian Churches were
independent of each other. Each Christian assembly was a little
State governed by its own laws, which were either enacted, or at
least approved by the society. But in process of time, all the
Churches of a province were formed into one large ecclesiastical
body, which, like confederate States, assembled at certain times in
order to deliberate about the common interests of the whole." (4)
So far indeed this union of Churches appears to have been a wise
and useful arrangement, although afterwards it was carried to an
injurious extreme, until finally it gave birth to the assumptions of
the Bishop of Rome, as universal Bishop ; a claim, however, which
when most successful, was but partially submitted to, the Eastern
Churches having always maintained their independence. No very
large association of Churches of any kind existed till towards the
close of the second century, which sufficiently refutes the papal
argument from antiquity.

The independence of the early Christian Churches does not,
however, appear to have resembled that of the Churches which in
modern times are called Independent. During the lives of the
Apostles and Evangelists, they were certainly subject to their
counsel and control, which proves that the independency of sepa-
rate societies was not the first form of the Church. It may, indeed,
be allowed, that some of the smaller and more insulated Churches
might, after the death of the Apostles and Evangelists, retain this
form for some considerable time ; but the larger Churches, in the
chief cities, and those planted in populous neighbourhoods, had

(4) Mo8HEiM's Ecclesiastical History, Cent. 2, Chap. ii.

»-- •-«•

334 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

many Presbyters, and as the members multiplied, they had several
separate assemblies or congregations, yet all under the same com-
mon government. And when Churches were raised up in the
neighbourhood of cities, the appointment of Chorepiscopi, or coun-
try Bishops, and of visiting Presbyters, both acting under the
Presbytery of the city, with its Bishop at its head, is sufficiently in
proof, that the ancient Churches, especially the larger and more
prosperous of them, existed in that form which, in modern times,
we should call a religious Connexion, subject to a common govern-
ment. This appears to have arisen out of the very circumstance
of the increase of the Church, through the zeal of the first Chris-
tians ; and in the absence of all direction by the Apostles, that
every new society of believers raised should be formed into an
Independent Church, it was doubtless much more in the spirit of
the very first discipline exercised by the Apostles and Evangelists,
(when none of the Churches were independent, but remained
under the government of those who had been chiefly instrumental
in raising them up,) to place themselves under a common inspec-
tion, and to unite the weak with the strong, and the newly con-
verted with those who were " in Christ before them." There was
also in this, greater security afforded both for the continuance of
wholesome doctrine, and of godly discipline.

The persons appointed to feed and govern the Church of Christ
being, then, as we have seen, those who are called " Pastors" a
word which imports both care and government, two other subjects
claim our attention, — the share which the body of the people have
in their own government by their Pastors, and the objects towards
which the power of government, thus established in the Church, is
legitimately directed.

As to the first, some preliminary observations may be necessary,
1. When Churches are professedly connected with, and exclu-
sively patronized and upheld by, the State, questions of ecclesias-
tical government arise, which are of greater perplexity and difficulty
than when they are left upon their original ground, as voluntary
and spiritual associations. The State will not exclusively recognise
Ministers without maintaining some control over their functions ;
and will not lend its aid to enforce the canons of an established
Church, without reserving to itself some right of appeal, or of
interposition. Hence a contest between the civil and ecclesiasti-
cal powers often springs up, and one at least generally feels itself
to be fettered by the other. When an established Church is per-
fectly tolerant, and the State allows freedom of dissent and separa-
tion from it without penalties, these evils are much mitigated. But

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 335

it is not my design to consider a Church as at all allied with the
State ; but as deriving nothing from it except protection, and that
general countenance which the influence of a government, pro-
fessing Christianity and recognising its laws, must afford.

2. The only view in which the sacred writers of the New Testa-
ment appear to have contemplated the Churches, was that of
associations founded upon conviction of the truth of Christianity,
and the obligatory nature of the commands of Christ. They con-
sidered the Pastors as dependent for their suppbrt upon the free
contributions of the people ; and the people as bound to sustain,
love, and obey them in all things lawful, that is, in all things agree-
able to the doctrine they had received in the Scriptures, and, in
things indifferent, to pay respectful deference to them. They
enjoined it upon the Pastors to " rule well," " diligently," and
with fidelity, in executing the directions they had given them ; —
to silence all teachers of false doctrines, and their adherents ; — to
reprove unruly and immoral members of the Church, and, if incor-
rigible, to put them away. On the other hand, should any of their
Pastors or Teachers err in doctrine, the people are enjoined not
" to receive them," to " turn away" from them, and not even to bid
them " God speed." The rule which forbids Christians " to eat,"
that is, to communicate at the Lord's table with an immoral " bro-
ther," held, of course, good, when that brother was a Pastor. Thus
Pastors were put by them under the influence of the public opinion
of the Churches ; and the remedy of separating from them, in
manifest defections of doctrine and morals, was afforded to the
sound members of a Church, should no power exist, able or
inclined to silence the offending Pastor and his party. In all this,
principles were recognised, which, had they not been in future
times lost sight of or violated, would have done much, perhaps
every thing, to preserve some parts of the Church, at least, in
soundness of faith, and purity of manners. A perfect religious
liberty is always supposed by the Apostles to exist among Chris-
tians ; no compulsion of the civil power is any where assumed by
them as the basis of their advices or directions ; no binding of the
members to one Church, without liberty to join another, by any
ties but those involved in moral considerations, of sufficient weight,
however, to prevent the evils of faction and schism. It was this
which created a natural and competent check upon the Ministers
of the Church ; for being only sustained by the opinion of the
Churches, they could not but have respect to it ; and it was this
which gave to the sound part of a fallen Church the advantage of
renouncing, upon sufficient and well weighed grounds, their com-

336 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

munion with it, and of kindling up the light of a pure ministry and
a holy discipline, by forming a separate association, bearing its
testimony against errors in doctrine, and failures in practice. Nor
is it to be conceived, that, had this simple principle of perfect reli-
gious liberty been left unviolated through subsequent ages, the
Church could ever have become so corrupt, or with such difficulty
and slowness have been recovered from its fall. This ancient Chris-
tian liberty has happily been restored in a few parts of Christendom.

3. In places where now the communion with particular Churches,
as to human authority, is perfectly voluntary, and liberty of con-
science is unfettered, it often happens that questions of Church
government are argued on the assumption that the governing
power in such Churches is of the same character, and tends to
the same results, as where it is connected with civil influence, and
is upheld by the power of the State.

Nothing can be more fallacious, and no instrument has been so
powerful as this in the hands of the restless and factious, to delude
the unwary. Those who possess the governing power in such
Churches are always under the influence of public opinion to an
extent unfelt in establishments. They can enforce nothing felt to
be oppressive to the members in general, without dissolving the
society itself; and their utmost power extends to excision from the
body, which, unlike the sentences of excommunication in State
Churches, is wholly unconnected with civil penalties. If, then, a
resistance is created to any regulations among the major part of
any such religious community, founded on a sense of their inju-
rious operation, or to the manner of their enforcement ; and if
that feeling be the result of a settled conviction, and not the effer-
vescence of temporary mistake and excitement, a change must
necessarily ensue, or the body at large be disturbed or dissolved :
if, on the other hand, this feeling be the work of a mere faction,
partial tumults or separation may take place, and great moral evil
may result to the factious parties, but the body will retain its com-
munion, which will be a sufficient proof that the governing power
has been the subject of ungrounded and uncharitable attack, since
otherwise the people at large must have felt the evils of the general
regulations or administration complained of. The very terms often
used in the grand controversy arising out of the struggle for the
establishment of religious liberty with national and intolerant
Churches, are not generally appropriate to such discussions as
may arise in voluntary religious societies, although they are often
employed, either carelessly or ad captandum, to serve the purposes
of faction.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 337

4. It is also an important general observation, that, in settline
the government of a Church, there are pre-existent laws of Christ,
which it is not in the option of any to receive or to reject. Unde;
whatever form the governing power is arranged, it is so bound to
execute all the rules left by Christ and his Apostles, as to doctrine;,
worship, the sacraments, and discipline, honestly interpreted, thai
It is not at liberty to take that office, or to continue to exercise it.
if by any restrictions imposed upon it it is prevented from carrying
these laws into effect. As in the State, so in the Church, govern-
ment is an ordinance of God ; and as it is imperative upon rulers
in the State to be "a terror to evil doers, and a praise to them
that do well," so also is it imperative upon the rulers of the Church
to banish strange doctrines, to uphold God's ordinances, to reprove
and rebuke, and, finally, to put away evil doers. The spirit in
which this is to be done is also prescribed. It is to be done in the
spirit of meekness, and with long suffering ; but the Avork must b<
done upon the responsibility of the Pastors to Him Avho has com-
missioned them for this purpose ; and they have a right to require
from the people, that in this office and ministry they should nc;
only not be obstructed, but affectionately and zealously aided, as
ministering in these duties, sometimes painful, not for themselves,
but for the good of the whole. With respect to the members of a
Church, the same remark is applicable as to the members of :i
State. It is not matter of option with them whether they will be
under government according to the laws of Christ or not, for that
is imperative ; government in both cases being of Divine appoint-
ment. They have, on the other hand, the right to full security,
that they shall be governed by the laws of Christ ; and they have
a right too to establish as many guards against human infirmity
and passion in those who are "set over them," as may be pru-
dently devised, provided these are not carried to such an extent
as to be obstructive to the legitimate scriptural discharge of their
duties. The true view of the case appears to be, that the govern-
ment of the Church is in its Pastors, open to various modifications
as to form ; and that it is to be conducted with such a concurrence
of the people, as shall constitute a sufficient guard against abuse,
and yet not prevent the legitimate and efficient exercise of pas-
toral duties, as these duties are stated in the Scriptures. This
original authority in the Pastors, and concurrent consent in the
people, may be thus applied to particular cases : —

1. As to the ordination of Ministers. If we consult the New
Testament, this office was never conveyed by the people. The
Apostles were ordained by our Lord ; the Evangelists, bv the

Vol. III. 37

338 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

Apostles ; the Elders in every Church, both by Apostles and
Evangelists. The passage which has been chiefly urged by those
who would originate the ministry from the people, is Acts xiv, 23,
where the historian, speaking of St. Paul and Barnabas, says,
" And wjjen they had ordained (xs'?0T0V^<favrss) Elders in every
Church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to
the Lord." Here, because x£,p0T0V,Slv originally signified to choose
by way of suffrage, some have argued that these Elders were
appointed by the suffrages of the people. Long, however, before
the time of St. Luke, this word was used for simple designation,
without any reference to election by suffrages ; and so it is em-
ployed by St. Luke himself in the same book, Acts x, 41, "Witnesses
foreappolnted of God," where of course the suffrages of men arc
out of the question. It is also fatal to the argument drawn from
the text, that the act implied in the word, whatever it might be.
was not the act of the people, but that of Paul and Barnabas,
Even the Deacons, whose appointment is mentioned Acts vi,
although "looked out" by the disciples as men of honest report,
did not enter upon their office till solemnly "appointed" thereto
by the Apostles. Nothing is clearer in the New Testament, than
that all the candidates for the ministry were judged of by those
who had been placed in that office themselves, and received their
appointment from them. Such too was the practice of the primi-
tive Churches alter the death of both Apostles and Evangelists.
Presbyters, who during the life of the Apostles had the power of
ordination, (for they laid their hands upon Timothy,) continued to
perform that office in discharge of one solemn part of their duty,
to perpetuate the ministry, and to provide for the wants of the
Churches. In the times of the Apostles, who were endued with
special gifts, the concurrence of the people was not, perhaps,
always formally taken ; but the directions to Timothy and Titus
imply a reference to the judgment of the members of the Church,
because from them only it could be learned whether the party fixed
upon for ordination possessed those qualifications without which
ordination was prohibited. When the Churches assumed a more
regular form, " the people were always present at ordinations, and
ratified the action with their approbation and consent. To this
end the Bishop was wont before every ordination to publish the
names of those who were to have holy orders conferred upon
them, that so the people, who best knew their lives and conversa-
tion, might interpose if they had any thing material to object against
'them. "(5) Sometimes also they nominated them by suffrages*, and

(5) Cave's Primitive Christianity.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 339,

thus proposed them for ordination. The mode in which the people
shall be made a concurrent party is matter of prudential regula-
tion ; but they had an early, and certainly a reasonable right to a
voice in the appointment of their Ministers, although the power of
ordination was vested in Ministers alone, to be exercised on their
responsibility to Christ.

2. As to the laws by which the Church is /to be governed. So
far as they are manifestly laid down in the word of God, and not
regulations judged to be subsidiary thereto, it is plain that the
rulers of a Church are bound to execute them, and the people to
obey them. They cannot be matter of compact on either side,
except as the subject of a mutual and solemn engagement to defer
to them without any modification or appeal to any other standard.

Every Church declares in some way, how it understands the
doctrine and the disciplinary laws of Christ. This declaration as
to doctrine, in modern times, is made by confessions or articles of
faith, in which, if fundamental error is found, the evil rests upon
the head of that Church collectively, and upon the members indi-
vidually, every one of whom is bound to try all doctrines by the
Holy Scriptures, and cannot support an acknowledged system of
error without guilt. As to discipline, the manner in which a
Church provides for public worship, the publication of the Gospel,
the administration of the sacraments, the instruction of the igno-
rant, the succour of the distressed, the admonition of the disorderly,
and the excision of offenders, (which are all points on which the
New Testament has issued express injunctions,) is its declaration
of the manner in which it interprets those injunctions, which also
it does on its own collective responsibility, and that of its members.
If, however, we take for illustration of the subject before us, a.
Church, at least substantially right in this its interpretation of doc-
trine, and of the laws of Christ as to general, and, what we may
call for distinction's sake, moral discipline ; these are the first
principles upon which this Church is founded. It is either an
apostolic Church, which has retained primitive faith and discipline ;
or it has subsequently been collected into a new communion, on
account of the fall of other Churches ; and has placed itself,
according to its own conviction, upon the basis of primitive doc-
trine and discipline as found in the Scriptures. On this ground
either the Pastors and people met and united at first ; or the people,
converted to faith and holiness by the labours of one or more
Pastors, holding, as they believed, these scriptural views, placed
themselves under the guidance of these Pastors, and thus formed
themselves into a Church state, which was their act of accession

340 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

to these principles. It is clear, therefore, that by this very act.
they bind themselves to comply with the original terms of the
communion into which they have entered, and that they have as to
these doctrines, and as to these disciplinary laws of Christ, which are
to be preached and enforced, no rights of control over Ministers,
which shall prevent the just exercise of their office in these respects-
They have a right to such regulations and checks as shall secure.
in the best possible way, the just and faithful exercise of that office.
and the honest and impartial use of that power ; but this is the
"hint of their right ; and every system of suffrages, or popular con-
currence, which, under pretence of guarding against abuse of
ministerial authority, makes its exercise absolutely and in all case?
dependent upon the consent of those over whom it extends, goes
beyond that limit, and invades the right of pastoral government,
which the New Testament has established. It brings, in a word,
die laws of Christ into debate, which yet the members profess to
have received as their rule ; and it claims to put into commission
ihose duties which Pastors are charged by Christ personally to
exercise. The Apostle Paul, had the incestuous person at Corinth
denied the crime, and there had been any doubtfulness as to the
fact, would unquestionably have taken the opinion of the Elders
of that Church and others upon that fact ; but when it became a
question whether the laws of Christ's discipline should be exercised
or not, he did not feel himself concluded by the sense of the whole
Corinthian Church, which was in favour of the offender continuing
in communion with them ; but he instantly reproved them for their
laxity, and issued the sentence of excision, thereby showing that an
obvious law of Christ was not to be subjected to the decision of a
majority.

This view indeed supposes, that such a society, like almost all
the Churches ever known, has admitted in the first instance, that
the power of admission into the Church, of reproof, of exhorta-
tion, and of excision from it, subject to various guards against
abuses, is in the Pastors of a Church. There are some who have
adopted a different opinion, supposing that the power of adminis-
tering the discipline of Christ must be conveyed by them to their
Ministers, and is to be wholly controlled by their suffrages ; so
that there is in these systems, not a provision of counsel against
possible errors in the exercise of authority ; not a guard against
human infirmity or viciousness ; not a reservation of right to deter-
mine upon the fitness of the cases to which the laws of Christ arc
applied ; but a claim of co-administration as to these laws them-
selves, or rather an entire administration of them through the Pas-

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 341

tor, as a passive agent of their- will. Those who adopt these views
are bound to show that this is the state of things established in the
New Testament. That it is not, appears plain from the very term
4< Pastors," which imports both care and government ; mild and
affectionate government indeed, but still government. Hence the
office of Shepherd is applied to describe the government of God,
and the government of kings. It appears too, from other titles
given, not merely to Apostles, but to the Presbyters they ordained
and placed over the Churches. They are called i/o^svoi, rulers;
itfirfKotfoi, overseers ; -apoztfrurts, those who preside. They are com-
mended for " ruling well ;" and they are directed " to charge,"
" to reprove," " to rebuke," " to watch," " to silence," " to put
away." The very "account" they must give to God, in connexion
with the discharge of these duties, shows that their office and re-
sponsibility was peculiar and personal, and much greater than that
of any private member of the Church, which it could not be if
they were the passive agents only in matters of doctrine and dis-
cipline of the will of the whole. To the double duty of feeding
and exercising the oversight of the flock, a special reward is also
promised when the " Chief Shepherd shall appear," — a title of
Christ, which shows that as the pastoral office of feeding and ruling
is exercised by Christ supremely, so it is exercised by his Ministers
in both branches subordinately. Finally, the exhortations to Chris-
tians to "obey them that have the rule over them," and to "submit"
to them, and "to esteem them very highly for their works' sake,"'
and to " remember them ;" — all show that the ministerial office is
not one of mere agency, under the absolute direction of the votes
of the collected Church.

3. With respect to other disciplinary regulations, supposed by
any religious society to be subsidiary to the great and scriptural
ends of Church communion, these appear to be matters of mutual
agreement, and are capable of modification by the mutual consent
of Ministers and people, under their common responsibility to
Christ, that they are done advisedly, with prayer, with reference
to the edification of the Church, and so as not to infringe upon,
but to promote, the influence of the doctrines, duties, and spirit of
the Gospel. The consent of the people to all such regulations,
either tacitly by their adoption of them, or more expressly through
any regular meetings of different officers, who may be regarded as
acquainted with, and representing the sentiments of the whole ; as
also by the approval of those aged, wise, and from different causes,
influential persons, who are to be found in all societies, and who
are always, whether in office or not, their natural guardians, guides,

37*

348 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and representatives, is necessary to confidence and harmony, and
a proper security for good and orderly government. It is thus that:
rhose to whom the government or well ordering of the Church is
committed, and those upon whom their influence and scriptural
authority exert themselves, appear to be best brought into a state
of harmony and mutual confidence ; and that abundant security is
afforded against all misrule, seeing that in a voluntary communion,
and where perfect liberty exists for any member to unite himself to
other Churches, or for any number of them to arrange themselves
into a new community, subject however to the moral cautions ol
die New Testament against the schismatic spirit, it can never be
the interest of those with whom the regulation of the affairs of a
Church is lodged, voluntarily to adopt measures which can be ge-
nerally felt to be onerous and injurious, nor is it practicable to per-
severe in them. In this method of bringing in the concurrence of
the people, all assemblages of whole societies, or very large por-
tions of them, are avoided, — a popular form of Church govern-
ment, which, however it were modified so as best to accord with
the scriptural authority of Ministers, could only be tolerable in ven
small isolated societies, and that in the times of their greatest sim-
plicity and love. To raise into legislators and censors all the mem-
bers of a Church, the young, the ignorant, and the inexperienced,
is to do them great injury. It is the sure way to ibster debates.
contentions, and self confidence, to open the door to intrigue and
policy, to tempt forward and conceited men to become a kind of
religious demagogues, and entirely to destroy the salutary influence
of the aged, experienced, and gifted members, by referring every
decision to members and suffrages, and placing all that is good and
venerable, and influential among the members themselves, at the
feet of a democracy.

4. As to the power of admission into the Church, that is clearly
with Ministers, to whom the office of baptism is committed, bj
which the door is opened into the Church universal ; and as there-
can be no visible communion kept up with the universal Church,
except by communion with some particular Church, the admission
into that particular communion must be in the hands of Ministers,
because it is one of the duties of their office, made such by the
Scripture itself, to enjoin this mode of confessing Christ, by assem-
bling with his saints in worship, by submitting to discipline, and b}
■' showing forth his death" at the Lord's Supper. We have, how-
ever, already said, that the members of a Church, although they
have no right to obstruct the just exercise of this power, have the
right to prevent its being unworthily exercised ; and their concur-

) OURTH.J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 343

rence with the admission, tacit or declared, according to their
usages, is an arrangement, supported by analogies drawn from the
New Testament, and from primitive antiquity. The expulsion of
unworthy members, after admonition, devolves upon those to whom
the administration of the sacraments, the signs of communion, is
entrusted, and therefore upon Ministers, for this reason, that as
" Shepherds" of the flock under the " Chief Shepherd," they are
charged to carry his laws into effect. These laws, it is neither with
them nor with the people to modify ; they are already declared by
superior authority ; but the determination of the facts of the case
to which they are to be applied, is matter of mutual investigation
and decision, in order to prevent an erring or an improper exercise
of authority. That such investigations should take place, not be-
fore the assembled members of a society, but before proper and
select tribunals, appears not only an obviously proper, but, in many
respects, a necessary regulation.

The trial of unworthy Ministers remains to be noticed, which
wherever a number of religious societies exist as one Church,
having therefore many Pastors, is manifestly most safely placed in
the hands of those Pastors themselves, and that not only because
the official acts of censure and exclusion lie with them, but for
other reasons also. It can scarcely happen that a Minister should
be under accusation, except in some very particular cases, but
that, from his former influence, at least with a part of the people,
some faction would be found to support him. In proportion to
the ardour of this feeling, the other party would be excited to
undue severity and bitterness. To try such a case before a whole
society, there would not only be the same objection as in the case
of private members ; but the additional one, that parties would be
more certainly formed, and be still more violent. If he must be
arraigned then before some special tribunal, the most fitting is that
of his brethren, provided that the parties accusing have the right
to bring on such a trial upon exhibition of probable evidence, and
to prosecute it without obstruction. In Churches whose Ministers
are thrown solely upon the public opinion of the society, and exist
as such only by their character, this is ordinarily a sufficient guard
against the toleration of improper conduct ; whilst it removes the
trial from those whose excitement for or against the accused might
on either side be unfavourable to fair and equitable decision, and
to the peace of the Church.

The above remarks contain but a sketch of those principles of
Church government, which appear to be contained in, or to be
suggested by, the New Testament. They still leave much liberty

344 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. . [PART

to Christians to adapt them in detail to the circumstances in which
they are placed. The offices to be created ; the meetings neces-
sary for the management of the various affairs of the Church.,
spiritual and financial ; the assembling of Ministers in larger or
smaller numbers for counsel, and for oversight of each other, and
of the Churches to which they belong ; are all matters of this kind,
and are left to the suggestions of wisdom and piety. The extent
to which distinct societies of Christians shall associate in one Church,
under a common government, appears also to be a matter of pru-
dence and of circumstances. In the primitive Church we see
different societies in a city and its neighbourhood under the common
government of the assembly of Presbyters ; and afterwards these
grew into provincial Churches, of greater or smaller extent. In
modern times, we have similar associations in the form of national
Churches, Episcopal or Presbyterian ; and of Churches existing
without any recognition of the State at all, and forming smaller or
larger communities, from the union of a few societies, to the union
of societies throughout a whole country ; holding the same doc-
trines, practising the same modes of worship, and placing them-
selves under a common code of laws and a common government.
But whatever be the form they take, they are bound to respect,
and to model themselves by, the principles of Church communion
and of Church discipline which are contained in the New Testa-
ment ; and they will be fruitful in holiness and usefulness, so long
as they conform to them, and so long as those forms of adminis-
tration are conscientiously preferred which appear best adapted to
preserve and to diffuse sound doctrine, Christian practice, spiritual-
ity, and charity. That discipline is defective and bad in itself, or it
is ill administered, which does not accomplish these ends ; and that
is best which best promotes them.

The Ends to which Church authority is legitimately directed
remain to be briefly considered.

The first is, the prcserv ation and the publication of " sound
doctrine." Against false doctrines, and the men " of corrupt minds''"
who taught them, the sermons of Christ, and the writings of the
Apostles, abound in cautions ; and since St. Paul lays it down as
a rule, as to erring teachers, that their " mouths must be stopped,"
this implies, that the power of declaring what sound doctrine is, and
of silencing false teachers, was confided by the Apostles to the
future Church. By systematic writers <his has been called potestas
do/fjiowixTj ; which, abused by the ambition of man, forms no small
part of that antichristian usurpation which characterizes the Church
of Rome. Extravagant as are her claims, so that she brings in her

OURTH.'j THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 345

traditions as of equal authority with the inspired writings, and denies
to men the right of private judgment, and of trying her dogmas by
the test of the Holy Scriptures ; there is a sober sense in which
tfah power may be taken. The great Protestant principle, that
the Holy Scriptures are the only standard of doctrine ; that the
doctrines of every Church must be proved out of them ; and that
to this standard every individual member has the right of bringing
them, in order to the confirmation of his own faith ; must be held
inviolate, if we would not see Divine authority displaced by human,
Since, however, men may come to different conclusions upon the
meaning of Scripture, it has been the practice from primitive times
to declare the sense in which Scripture is understood by collective
assemblies of Ministers, and by the Churches united with them, in
order to the enforcement of such interpretations upon Christians
generally, by the iniUience of learning, piety, numbers, and solemn
deliberation. The reference of the question respecting circum-
cision by the Church at Antioch to " the Apostles and Elders at
Jerusalem," is the first instance of this, though with this peculiarity,
that, in this case, the decision was given under plenary inspiration.
Whilst one of the Apostles lived, an appeal could be made to him
in like manner when any doctrinal novelty sprung up in the Church
After their death, smaller or larger Councils, composed of the..
public Teachers of the Churches, were resorted to, that they
might pronounce upon these differences of opinion, and by theii
authority confirm the faithful, and abash the propagators of error.
Still later, four Councils, called General, from the number of per-
sons assembled in them from various parts of Christendom, have
peculiar eminence. The Council of Nice, in the fourth century,
which condemned the Arian heresy, and formed that scriptural
and important formulary called the Nicene Creed ; the Council
of Constantinople, held at the end of the same century, which
condemned the errors of Macedonius, and asserted the divinity
and personality of the Holy Ghost ; and the Councils of Ephesus
and Chalcedon, about the middle of the fifth century, which cen-
sured the opinions of Nestorius and Eutyches. At Nice it was
declared that the Son is truly God, of the same substance with the
Father ; at Constantinople, that the Holy Ghost is also truly God ;
at Ephesus, that the Divine nature was truly united to the human in
Christ, in one person ; at Chalcedon, that both natures remained dis-
tinct, and that the human nature was not lost or absorbed in the Di-
vine. The decisions of these Councils, both from their antiquity and
from the manifest conformity of their decisions on these points to the
Holy Scriptures, have been received to this day in what have been

34U THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

called the Orthodox Churches, throughout the world. On General
Councils, the Romish Church has been divided as to the questionSy
whether infallibility resides in them, or in the Pope, or in the Pope
when at their head. Protestants cut this matter short by acknow-
ledging that they have erred, and may err, being composed of fal-
lible men, and that they have no authority but as they manifestly
agree with the Scriptures. To the above-mentioned Councils,
they have in general always paid great deference, as affording
confirmation of the plain and literal sense of Scripture on the
points in question ; but on no other ground. " Things ordained
by General Councils as necessary to salvation, have neither
strength nor authority, unless it may be declared they be taken
out of Holy Scripture."(6) The manner in which the respective
Churches of the Reformation declared their doctrinal interpreta-
tion of the Scriptures on the leading points of theology, was by
Confessions and Articles of Faith, and by the adoption of ancienr
or primitive Creeds. With reference to this practice, no doubt it
is, that the Church of England declares in her twentieth Article,
that " the Church hath authority in controversies of faith ;" but
qualifies the tenet, by adding, " and yet it is not lawful for the
Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's word writ-
ten ;" in which there is a manifest recognition of the right of all
who have God's word in their hands, to make use of it in order to
try what any Church " ordains," as necessary to be. believed. This
authority of a Church in matters of doctrine appears then to be
reduced to the following particulars, which, although directly opposed
to the assumptions of the Church of Rome, are of great import-
ance : — 1. To declare the sense in which it interprets the language
of Scripture on all the leading doctrines of the Christian revela-
tion ; for to contend, as some have done, that no creeds or articles
of faith are proper, but that belief in the Scriptures only ought to
be required, would be to destroy all doctrinal distinctions, since
the most perverse interpreters of Scripture profess to believe the
words of Scripture. 2. To require from all its members, with
whom the right of private judgment is by all Protestant Churches
left inviolate, to examine such declarations of faith, professing to
convey the sense of Scripture, with modesty and proper respect to
those grave and learned assemblies in which all these points have
been weighed with deliberation ; receiving them as guides to truth,
not implicitly, it is true, but still with docility and humility. "Great
weight and deference is due to such decisions, and every man that

(6) Art. 21st of the Church of England.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. o4?

iincls his own thoughts differ from them, ought to examine the
matter over again with much attention and care, freeing himseli
all he can from prejudice and obstinacy, with a just distrust of his
own understanding, and an humble respect to the judgment of his
superiors. This is due to the consideration of peace and union,
and to that authority which the Church has to maintain it ; but if,
after all possible methods of inquiry, a man cannot master his
thoughts, or make them agree with the public decisions, his con-
science is not under bonds, since this authority is not absolute,
nor grounded upon a promise of infallibility." (7) 3. To silence
within its own pale the preaching of all doctrines contrary to the
received standards. On this every Church has a right to insist
which sincerely believes that contrary doctrines to its own arc
fundamental or dangerous errors, and which is thereby bound
both to keep its members from their contamination, and also to
preserve them from those distractions and controversies to which
the preaching of diverse doctrines by its Ministers would inevitably
lead. Nor is there any thing in the exercise of this authority con-
trary to Christian liberty, since the members of any communion,
and especially the Ministers, know beforehand the terms of fellow-
ship with the Churches whose confessions of faith are thus made
public ; and because also, where conscience is unfettered by public
iaw, they are neither prevented from enjoying their own opinions
in peace, nor from propagating them in other assemblies.

The second end is, the forming of such regulations for the con-
duct of its Ministers, Officers, and Members, as shall establish ft
common order for worship ; facilitate the management of the affairs
of the community, spiritual, economical, and financial ; and give a
right direction to the general conduct of the whole society. This
in technical language is called potestas oiaTa*™^ and consists in
making canons, or rules, for those particular matters which are not
provided for in detail by the directions of Scripture. This power
also, like the former, has been carried to a culpable excess in many
Churches, so as to fill them with superstition, and in many respects
to introduce an onerous system of observances, like that of Juda-
ism, the yoke from which the Gospel has set us free. The sim-
plicity of Christianity has thus been often destroyed, and the "doc-
trines of men" set up " as commandments of God." At the same
time, there is a sound sense in which this power in a Church must
be admitted, and a deference to it bound upon the members. For,
when the laws of Christ are both rightly understood and cordially
admitted, the application of them to particular cases is still neces-

(7) Burnet.

348 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [»AB1

sary ; many regulations also are dictated by inference and by
analogies, and often appear to be required by the spirit of the
Gospel, for which there is no provision in the letter of Scrip-
ture. The obligation of public worship, for instance, is plainly
stated ; but the seasons of its observance, its frequency, and the
mode in which it is to be conducted, must be matter of special
regulation, in order that all things may be done " decently and in
order." The observance of the Sabbath is binding ; but particular
rules guarding against such acts, as in the judgment of a Church,
are violations of the law of the Sabbath, are often necessary to
direct the judgment and consciences of the body of the people.
Baptism is to be administered ; but the manner of this service may
be prescribed by a Church, since the Scriptures have not deter-
mined it. So also as to the mode and the times of receiving the
Lord's Supper, in the same absence of inspired directions regula-
tions must be agreed upon, that there may be, as nearly as edifi-
cation requires, an undistracted uniformity of practice. Special
festivals of commemoration and thanksgivings may also be ap-
pointed, as lit occasions for the inculcation of particular truths.
and moral duties, and for the special excitement of grateful affec-
tions. For although they are not particularly prescribed in (Scrip-
ture, they are in manifest accordance with its spirit, and are sanc-
tioned by many of the examples which it exhibits. Days of fasting
and humiliation, for the same reasons, may be the subject of ap-
pointment ; and beside the regular acts of public worship, private
meetings of the members for mutual prayer and religious converse,
may also be found necessary. To these may be added, various
plans for the instruction of children, the visitation and relief of the
sick, and the introduction of the Gospel into neglected neighbour-
hoods, and its promotion in foreign lands. A considerable number
of other regulations touching order, contributions, the repressing
of particular vices which may mark the spirit of the times, and
the practice of particular duties, will also be found necessary.

The only legitimate ends, however, of all these directions and
rules, are, the edification of the Church ; the preservation of its
practical purity ; the establishment of an influential order and
decorum in its services ; and the promotion of its usefulness to
the world. The general principles by which they are to be con-
trolled, are the spirituality, simplicity, and practical character of
Christianity ; and the authority with which they are invested, is
derived from piety, wisdom, and singleness of heart, in those who
originate them, and from that docility and submissiveness of Chris-
tians to each other, which is enforced upon them in the New

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 349

Testament. For although every Christian is exhorted to " try all
things," to "search the Scriptures," and to exercise his best judg-
ment, in matters which relate to doctrine, discipline, and practice,
yet he is to do this in the spirit of a Christian ; not with self willed-
ness, and self confidence ; not contemning the opinion and author-
ity of others ; not factiously and censoriously. This is his duty
even where the most important subjects are in question ;• how
much more then in things comparatively indifferent ought he to
practise the Apostolic rule : — " Likewise, ye younger, submit
yourselves unto the elder ; yea, all of you be subject one to
another, and be clothed with humility."

The third end of Church government is the infliction and remo-
val of censures, a power (potcstas SiaxpiTur}) the abuse of which,
and the extravagant lengths to which it has been carried, have led
some wholly to deny it, or to treat it slightly ; but which is never-
theless deposited with every scriptural Church. Even associations
much less solemn and spiritual in their character, have the power
to put away their members, and to receive again, upon certain
conditions, those who offend against their rules ; and if the offence
which called forth this expulsion be of a moral nature, the censure
of a whole society, inflicted after due examination, comes with
imich greater weight, and is a much greater reproach and misfor-
tune to the person who falls under it, than that of a private indi-
vidual. In the case of a Christian Church, however, the proceeding
connects itself with a higher than human authority. The members
have separated from the world, and have placed themselves under
the laws of Christ. They stand in a special relation to him, so long
as they are faithful ; they are objects of his care and love, as mem-
bers of his own body ; and to them, as such, great and numerous
promises are made. To preserve them in this state of fidelity, to
guard them from errors of doctrine and viciousness of practice,
and thus to prevent their separation from Christ, the Church with
its ministry, its ordinances, and its discipline, was established. He
who becomes unfaithful in opposition to the influence of those
edifying and conservatory means, forfeits the favour of Christ, even
before he is deservedly separated from the Church ; but when he
is separated, put away, denied communion with the Church, he
loses also the benefit of all those peculiar means of grace and sal-
vation, and of those special influences and promises which Christ
bestows upon the Church. He is not only thrown back upon
common society with shame, stigmatized as an " evil worker," by
the solemn sentence of a religious tribunal ; but becomes, so to
speak, again a member of that incorporated and hostile societv.

Vol. III. 38

350 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the world, against which the exclusive and penal sentences of
the word of God are directed. Where the sentence of excision by
a Church is erring or vicious, as it may be in some cases, it cannot
affect an innocent individual ; he would remain, notwithstanding
the sentence of men, a member of Christ's invisible universal
Church ; but when it proceeds upon a just application of the
laws of Christ, there can be no doubt of its ratification in heaven,
although the door is left open to penitence and restoration.

In proportion, however, as a sober and serious Christian, having
those views, wishes to keep up in his own mind, and in the minds
of others, a proper sense of the weight and solemnity of Church
censures when rightly administered, he will feel disgusted at those
assumptions of control over the mercy and justice of God, which
fallible men have in some Churches endeavoured to establish, and
have too often exercised for the gratification of the worst passions.
So because our Lord said to Peter, " I will give unto thee the
keys of the kingdom of heaven," and " whatsoever thou shalt bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven," which is also said Matt, xviii,
1 8, to all the Apostles, " it came to be understood that the sentence
of excommunication, by its own intrinsic authority, condemned to
eternal punishment ; that the excommunicated person could not
be delivered from this condemnation, unless the Church gave him
absolution ; and that the Church had the power of absolving him
upon the private confession of his fault, either by prescribing to
him certain acts of penance, and works of charity, the performance
of which was considered as a satisfaction for the sin which he had
committed, or by applying to him the merits of some other person,
And as in the progress of corruption, the whole power of the
Church was supposed to be lodged in the Pope, there flowed from
him, at his pleasure, indulgences or remissions of some parts of the
penance, absolutions, and pardons, the possession of which was
represented to Christians as essential to salvation, and the sale of
which formed a most gainful traffic."

As to the passage respecting the gift of the Keys of the king-
dom of heaven to Peter, from which these views affect to be
derived, it is most naturally explained by the very apposite and
obviously explanatory fact, that this Apostle was the first preacher
of the Gospel dispensation in its perfected form, both to the Jews
at the day of Pentecost, and afterwards to the Gentiles. Bishop
Horsley applies it only to the latter of these events, to which
indeed it may principally, but not exclusively, refer.

" St. Peter's custody of the keys was a temporary, not a per-

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 351

petual authority : its object was not individuals, but the whole
human race. The kingdom of heaven upon earth is the true
Church of God. It is now therefore the Christian Church :
formerly the Jewish Church was that kingdom. The true Church
is represented in this text, as in many passages of Holy Writ
under the image of a walled city, to be entered only at the gates.
Under the Mosaic economy these gates were shut, and particular
persons only could obtain admittance, — Israelites by birth, or by
legal incorporation. The locks of these gates were the rites of
the Mosaic law, which obstructed the entrance of aliens. But.
after our Lord's ascension, and the descent of the Holy Ghost,
the keys of the city were given to St. Peter, by that vision which
taught him, and authorized him to teach others, that all distinc-
tions of one nation from another were at an end. By virtue of
this special commission, the great Apostle applied the key, pushed
back the bolt of the lock, and threw the gates of the city open for
the admission of the whole Gentile world, in the instance of Cor-
nelius and his family." (8)

When the same learned Prelate would also refer the binding and
loosing power mentioned in the above texts exclusively to Peter,
he forgets that in the passage above referred to, Matt, xviii, 18, it
is given to all the Apostles, " Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth
shall be loosed in heaven." These expressions manifestly refer to
the authoritative declaration of any thing to be obligatory, and its
infraction to be sinful, and therefore subject to punishment, or the
contrary ; and the passage receives sufficient illustration from the
words of our Lord to his Apostles, after his resurrection, when
after breathing upon them he said, " Receive ye the Holy Ghost :
whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them ; and whose-
soever sins ye retain, they are retained," John xx, 22, 23. To
qualify them for this authoritative declaration of what was obliga-
tory upon men, or otherwise ; and of the terms upon which sins
are " remitted," and the circumstances under which they are
•' retained ;" they previously received the Holy Ghost, — a sufficient
proof that this power was connected with the plenary inspiration
of the Apostles ; and beyond those inspired men it could not
extend, unless equally strong miraculous evidence of the same
degree of inspiration were afforded by any others. The manner
also in which the Apostles exercised this power elucidates the
subject. We have no instance at all of their forgiving the sins ol

(ft) Horsley's Sermons.

352 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

any individuals ; they merely proclaimed the terms of pardon. And
we have no instance of their " retaining" the sins of any one,
except by declaring them condemned by the laws of the Gospel,
of which they were the preachers. They authoritatively explain
in their writings the terms of forgiveness ; they state as to duty
what is obligatory, and what is not obligatory, upon Christians ;
they pronounce sinners of various kinds, impenitent and unbe-
lieving, to be under God's wrath ; and they declare certain apos-
tates to be put beyond forgiveness by their own act, not b)
Apostolic excommunication ; and thus they bind and loose, remit
sins and retain them. The meaning of these passages is in this
manner explained by the practice of the Apostles themselves, and
we may also see the reason why in Matthew xviii, a similar decla-
ration stands connected with the censures of a Church : " More-
over, if thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault
between thee and him alone ; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained
thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one
or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every
word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them,
tell it unto the Church ; but if he neglect to hear the Church, let
him be unto thee as a heathen man and as a publican ; verily, I
say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound
in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed
in heaven."

That here there may be a reference to a provision made among
the Jews for settling questions of accusation and dispute by the
Elders of their synagogues, is probable ; but it. is also clear that
our Lord looked forward to the establishment of his own Church,
which was to displace the synagogue ; and that there might be
infallible rules to guide that Church in its judgment on mora?
cases, he turns to the disciples, to whom the discourse is addressed,
and says to them, " Whatsoever ye," not the Church, " shall bind
on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose
on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Of the disciples then present
the subsequent history leads us to conclude, that he principally
meant that the Apostles should be endued with this power, and
that they were to be the inspired persons who were to furnish "the
Church" with infallible rules of judgment, in all such cases of dis-
pute and accusation. When, therefore, any Church rightly inter-
prets these Apostolic rules, and rightly applies them to particular
cases, it then exercises a discipline which is not only approved,
but is also confirmed, in heaven by the concurring dispensations of
God, who respects his own inspirations in his Apostles, The whole

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 353

shows the careful and solemn manner in which all such investiga-
tions are to be conducted, and the serious effect of them. It is by
the admonishing and putting away of offenders, that the Church
bears its testimony against all sin before the world ; and it is thus^
that she maintains a salutary influence over her members, by the
well-grounded fear of those censures which, when scripturally
administered, are sanctioned by Christ its Head ; and which, when
they extend to excision from the body, and no error of judgment,
or sinister intention, vitiates the proceeding, separates the offenders
from that special grace of Christ which is promised to the faithful
collected into a Church state, — a loss, an evil, and a danger,
which nothing but repentance, humiliation, and a return to God
and his people, can repair. For it is to be observed, that this part
of discipline is an ordinance of Christ, not only for the maintenance
of the character of his Churches, and the preservation of their
influence in the world ; but for the spiritual benefit of the offend-
ers themselves. To this effect are the words of the Apostle Paul
as to the immoral Corinthian, — " to deliver such a one to Satan,
for the destruction of the flesh" the dominion of his bodily appe-
tites, " that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus."
The practice of many of the ancient Churches was, in this respect,
rigid ; in several of the circumstances far too much so ; and thus it
assumed a severity much more appalling than in the Apostolic times.
It shows, however, how deeply the necessity of maintaining moral
discipline was felt among them, and in substance, though not in
every part of the mode, is worthy of remembrance. " When dis-
ciples of Christ who had dishonoured bis religion by committing
any gross immorality, or by relapsing into idolatry, were cut off
:Vom the Church by the sentence of excommunication ; they were
kept, often for years, in a state of penance, however desirous to
be re-admitted. They made a public confession of their faith,
accompanied with the most humiliating expressions of grief. For
some time they stood without the doors, while the Christians were
employed in worship. Afterwards they were allowed to enter ;
then to stand during a part of the service ; then to remain during
the whole : but they were not permitted to partake of the Lord's
Supper, till a formal absolution was pronounced by the Church. The
time of the penance was sometimes shortened, when the anguish
of their mind, or any occasional distress of body, threatened the
danger of their dying in that condition, or when those who were
then suffering persecution, or other deserving members of the
Church, interceded for them, and became, by this intercession,
in some measure, sureties for their future good behaviour. The

38*

354 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PARI

duration of the penance, the acts required while it continued* and
the manner of the absolution, varied at different times. The mat-
ter was, from its nature, subject to much abuse ; it was often taken
under the cognizance of ancient Councils ; and a great part of
their canons was employed in regulating the exercise of dis-
cipline."^)

In concluding this Chapter, it may be observed, that however
difficult it may be, in some cases, to adjust modes of Church
government, so that, in the view of all, the principles of the New
Testament may be fully recognised, and the ends for which
Churches are collected may be effectually accomplished, this
labour will always be greatly smoothed, by a steady regard, on
each side, to duties as well as to rights. These are equally impera-
tive upon Ministers, upon subordinate officers, and upon the private
members of every Church. Charity, candour, humility, public
spirit, zeal, a forgiving spirit, and the desire, the strong desire, of
unity and harmony, ought to pervade all, as well as a constant
remembrance of the great and solemn truth, that Christ is the
Judge, as well as the Saviour, of his Churches. Whilst the people
are docile ; obedient to the word of exhortation ; willing to submit.
N' in the Lord," to those who "preside over them," and are charged
to exercise Christ's discipline ; and whilst Ministers are " gentle
among them," after the example of St. Paul, — a gentleness, how-
ever, which, in his case, winked at no evil, and kept back no truth,
and compromised no principle, and spared no obstinate and incu-
rable offender, — whilst they feed the flock of Christ with sound
doctrine, and are intent upon their edification, watching over them
" as they that must give account," and study, live, and labour, for
no other ends, than to present that part of the Church committed
to their care " perfect in Christ Jesus ;" every Church will fall
as it were naturally and without, effort into its proper "order."
Pure and undefiled religion in Churches, like the first poetry,
creates those subordinate rules by which it is, afterwards, guarded
and governed ; and the best canons of both are those which are
dictated by the fresh and primitive effusions of their own inspiration

(0) Hill's Lecture*.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. .555

CHAPTER II.

Institutions op Christianity. — The Sacraments.

The number of Sacraments is held by all Protestants to be but
two, — Baptism, and the Lord's Supper ; because they find no other
instituted in the New Testament, or practised in the early Church.
The superstition of the Church of Rome has added no fewer than
live to the number, — Confirmation, Penance, Orders, Matrimony*
and Extreme Unction.

The word used by the Greek Fathers for sacrament was
wtfrypiov. In the New Testament this word always means, as
Campbell has showed, either a secret, — something unknown till
revealed ; or the spiritual meaning of some emblem or type. In
both these senses it is rendered sacramentum in the Vulgate trans-
lation, which shows that the latter word was formerly used in a
large signification. As the Greek term was employed in the New
Testament to express the hidden meaning of an external symbol,
as in Revelation i, 20, " the mystery of the seven stars," it was
naturally applied by early Christians to the symbolical rite of the
Lord's Supper'; and as some of the most sacred and retired parts
of the ancient heathen worship were called mysteries, from which
all but the initiated were excluded, the use of the same term to
designate that most sacred act of Christian worship, which was
strictly confined to the approved members of the Church, was
probably thought peculiarly appropriate. The Latin word sacra-
mentum, in its largest sense, may signify a sacred ceremony ; and
is the appellation, also, of the military oath of fidelity, taken by the
Roman soldiers. For both these reasons, probably, the term
sacrament was adopted by the Latin Christians. For the first,
because of the peculiar sacredness of the Lord's Supper ; and for
the second, because of that engagement to be faithful to the com-
mands of Christ, their heavenly Leader, which was implied in this
ordinance, and impressed upon them by so sacred a solemnity.
It was, perhaps, from the designation of this ordinance, by the
term sacramentum, by the Christians whom Pliny examined as to
their faith and modes of worship, that he thus expresses himself in
his letter to the Emperor Trajan : — " From their affirmations I
learned that the sum of all their offence, call it fault or error, was,
that on a day fixed they used to assemble before sunrise, and sing

■loii THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

together, in alternate responses, hymns to Christ, as a Deity ;
binding themselves by the solemn engagements of an oath, not to
commit any manner of wickedness," &c. The term sacrament
was also at an early period given to Baptism, as well as to the
Supper of the Lord, and is now confined among Protestants to
these two ordinances only. The distinction between sacraments,
and other religious rites, is well stated by Burnet : — (1)

"This difference is to be put between sacraments and other
ritual actions ; that whereas other rites are badges and distinctions
by which Christians are known, a sacrament is more than a bare
matter of form ; as in the Old Testament, circumcision and pro-
pitiatory sacrifices were things of a different nature and order from
all the other ritual precepts concerning their cleansings, the dis-
tinctions of days, places, and meats. These were, indeed, precepts
given them of God ; but they were not federal acts of renewing
the covenant, or reconciling themselves to God. By circumcision
they received the seal of the covenant, and were brought under
the obligation of the whole law ; they were made by it debtors to
it ; and when by their sins they had provoked God's wrath, they
were reconciled to him by their sacrifices, with which atonement
was made, and so their sins were forgiven them ; the nature and
end of those was, to be federal acts, in the offering of which the
Jews kept to their part of the covenant, and in the accepting of
which God maintained it on his part ; so we see a plain difference-
between these and a mere rite, which, though commanded, yet
must pass only for the badge of a profession, as the doing of it is
an act of obedience to a Divine law. Now, in the new dispensa-
tion, though our Saviour has eased us of that law of ordinances.
that grievous yoke, and those beggarly elements, which were laid
upon the Jews ; yet since we are still in the body subject to our
senses, and to sensible things, he has appointed some federal
actions to be both the visible stipulations and professions of our
Christianity, and the conveyancers to us of the blessings of the
Gospel."

It is this view of the two sacraments, as federal acts, which
sweeps away the five superstitious additions that the temerity of
the Church of Rome has dared to elevate to the same rank of
sacredness and importance.

As it is usual among men to confirm covenants by visible and
solemn forms, and has been so from the most ancient times, so
when Almighty God was pleased to enter into covenant engage-

(1) On the Articles.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 357

ments with men, he condescended to the same methods of afford-
ing, on his part, sensible assurances of his fidelity, and to require
the same from them. Thus, circumcision was the sign and seal
of the covenant with Abraham ; and when the great covenant of
grace was made in the Son of God with all nations, it was agree-
able to this analogy to expect that he would institute some con-
stantly-recurring visible sign, in confirmation of his mercy to us,
which should encourage our reliance upon his promises, and have
the force of a perpetual renewal of the covenant between the
parties. Such is manifestly the character and ends both of the
Institution of Baptism and the Lord's Supper ; but as to the five
additional sacraments of the Church of Rome, " they have not
any visible sign or ceremony ordained of God," (2) and they stand
in no direct connexion with any covenant, engagement entered
into by him with his creatures. Conjinnation rests on no scriptural
authority at all. Penance, if it mean any thing more than repent-
ance, is equally unsanctioned by Scripture ; and if it mean " repent-
ance toward God," it is no more a sacrament than faith. Orders,
or the ordination of Ministers, is an Apostolic command, but has in
it no greater indication of a sacramental act than any other such
command, — say the excommunication of obstinate sinners from
the Church, which, with just as good a reason, might be elevated
into a sacrament. Marriage appears to have been made by the
Papists, a sacrament for this curious reason, that the Apostle Paul,
when speaking of the love and union of husband and wife, and
taking occasion from that to allude to the love of Christ to his
Church, says, " This is a great mystery," which the Vulgate version
translates, "Sacramejntum hoc magnum est :" Thus they confound
the large and the restricted sense of the word sacrament, and forget
that the true " mystery" spoken of by the Apostle, lies not in mar-
riage, but in the union of Christ with his people, — " This is a great
mystery, but I speak concerning Christ and the Church." If, how-
ever, the use of the word " mystery" in this passage by St. Paul,
were sufficient to prove marriage a sacrament, then the calling of
the Gentiles, as Beza observes, might be the eighth sacrament,
sinee St. Paul terms that " a mystery," Eph. i, 9, which the Vul-
gate, in like manner, translates by " sacramentum." The last of
their sacraments is Extreme Unction, of which it is enough to say,
that it is no where prescribed in Scripture ; and if it were, has
clearly nothing in it of a sacramental character. The passage in
3fc James's Epistle to which they refer, cannot serve them at all ;

(2) Article 25th of the Church of England.

358 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

for the Romanists use extreme unction only when all hope of reco-
very is past, whereas the prayers and the anointing" mentioned by
St. James were resorted to in order to a miraculous cure, for life,
and not for death. With them, therefore, extreme unction is called
" the sacrament of the dying-."

Of the nature of sacraments there are three leading views.

The first is that taken by the Church of Rome.

According- to the doctrine of this Church, the sacraments con-
tain the grace they signify, and confer grace, ex opere operate, by
the work itself, upon such as do not put an obstruction by mortal
sin. " For these sensible and natural things," it is declared, "work
by the almighty power of God in the sacraments what they could
not do by their own power." Nor is any more necessary to this
effect, than that the Priests, "who make and consecrate the sacra-
ments, have an intention of doing what the Church doth, and dotb
intend to do." (3) According therefore to this doctrine, the matter
of the sacrament derives from the action of the Priest, in pro-
nouncing certain words, a Divine virtue, provided it be the intention
of the Priest to give to that matter such a Divine virtue, and this
grace is conveyed to the soul of every person who receives it. Nor
is it required of the person receiving a sacrament, that he should
exercise any good disposition, or possess faith ; for such is con-
ceived to be the physical virtue of a sacrament, that, except when
opposed by the obstacle of a mortal sin, the act of receiving it is
alone sufficient for the experience of its efficacy. This is so capital
an article of faith with the Romish Church; that the Council of
Trent anathematizes all who deny that grace is not conferred by
the sacraments from the act itself of receiving them, and affirm thai
faith only in the Divine promises is sufficient to the obtaining of
grace,-r-" Se quis dixerit, per ipsa nova legis sacramenta, ex operc
operato, non conferri graliam, sed solum fidem divince promissionis ad
gratiam consequendam sujficere, anathema s?L"(4) It is on this
ground also, that the members of that Church argue the supe-
riority of the sacraments of the New Testament to those of the
Old ; the latter having been effectual only ex opere operantis, from
the piety and faith of the persons receiving them, whilst the former
confer grace ex opere operato, from their own intrinsic virtue, and
an immediate physical influence upon the mind of the receiver.

The first great objection to this statement is, that it has even no
pretence of authority from Scripture, and grounds itself whollx
upon the alleged traditions of the Church of Rome, which, in fact,

(3) Cone. Trid. Can. 11. (4) Cone. Trid. Scss. vii, Can. S.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 350

are just what successive inventors of superstitious practices have
thought proper to make them. The second is, that it is decidedly
anti-scriptural ; for as the only true notion of a sacrament is, that
it is the sign and seal of a covenant ; and as the saving benefits of
the covenant of grace are made expressly to depend upon a true
faith ; the condition of grace being made by the Church of Rome
the act of receiving a sacrament independent of true faith, she
impudently rejects the great condition of salvation as laid down in
God's word, and sets up in its place another of an opposite kind
by mere human authority. The third is, that it debases an ordi-
nance of God from a rational service into a mere charm, discon-
nected with every mental exercise, and working its effect physically,
and not morally. The fourth is its licentious tendency ; for as a
very large class of sins is by the Romish Church allowed to be
venial, and nothing but a mortal sin can prevent the recipient of
the sacrament from receiving the grace of God ; men may live in
the practice of all these venial offences, and consequently in an
unrenewed habit of soul, and yet be assured of the Divine favour,
and of eternal salvation ; thus again boldly contradicting the whole
tenor of the New Testament. Finally, whatever privileges the
sacraments are designed to confer, all of them are made by this
doctrine to depend, not upon the state of the receiver's mind, but
upon the " intention" of the administrator, who, if not intending to
impart the physical virtue to the elements, renders the sacrament
of no avail to the recipient, although he performs all the external
acts of the ceremony.

The opposite opinion to this gross and unholy doctrine is that
maintained by Socinus, and adopted generally by his followers :
to which also the notions of some orthodox Protestants have too
carelessly leaned. The view taken on the subject of the sacra-
ments by such persons is, that they differ not essentially from other
rites and ceremonies of religion ; but that their peculiarity consists
in their emblematic character, under which they represent what is
spiritual and invisible, and arc memorials of past events. Their
sole use therefore is to cherish pious sentiments, by leading the
mind to such meditations as arc adapted to excite them. Some
also add, that they are the badges of a Christian profession, and
the instituted means by which Christians testify their faith in
Christ.

The fault of the Popish opinion is superstitious excess ; the fault
of the latter scheme is that of defect. The sacraments are emblem-
atical ; they are adapted to excite pious sentiments ; they are
memorials, at least the Lord's Supper bears this character ; they

360 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

are badges of profession ; they are the appointed means for
declaring our faith in Christ ; and so far is this view superior to
the Popish doctrine, that it elevates the sacraments from the base
and degrading character of a charm and incantation, to that of a
spiritual and reasonable service, and instead of making them sub-
stitutes for faith and good works, renders them subservient to both.

But if the sacraments are federal rites, that is, if they are cove-
nant transactions, they must have a more extensive and a deeper
import than this view of the subject conveys. If circumcision was
"a token," and "a seal" of the covenant by which God engaged
to justify men by faith, then, as we shall subsequently show, since
Christian baptism came in its place, it has precisely the same-
office ; if the passover was a sign, a pledge or seal, and subse-
quently a memorial, then these characters will belong to the Lord's
Supper ; the relation of which to the "New Testament," or Cove-
nant, " in the blood" of our Saviour, is expressly stated by himself.
What is the import of the terms Sign and Seal, will be hereafter
considered ; but it is enough here to suggest them, to show that
the second opinion above stated loses sight of these peculiarities,
and is therefore defective.

The third opinion may be stated in the words of the formularies
of several Protestant Churches.

The Heidelberg Catechism has the following question and
reply :—

" What are the sacraments ?"

" They are holy visible signs and seals ordained by God for
this end, that He may more fully declare and seal by them the
promise . of his Gospel unto us ; to wit, that not only unto all-
believers in general, but unto each of them in particular, he freely
giveth remission of sins and life eternal, upon the account of thai-
only sacrifice of Christ, which he accomplished upon the cross."

The Church of England, in her Twenty-fifth Article, thus
expresses herself: —

" Sacraments ordained of Christ be not only badges or tokens
of Christian men's profession, but rather they be sure witnesses,
and effectual signs of grace, and God's will towards us, by the
which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken,
but also strengthen and confirm our faith in him."

The Church of Scotland, in the one hundred and sixty-second
Question of her Larger Catechism, asks,

" What is a sacrament '?" and replies,

" A sacrament is a holy ordinance, instituted by Christ in his
Church, to signify, seal, and exhibit, unto those within the cove-

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 361

nant of grace, the benefits of his mediation ; to strengthen and
increase their faith, and all other graces ; to oblige them to obe-
dience ; to testify and cherish their love and communion one with
another ; and to distinguish them from those that are without."

In all these descriptions of a sacrament, terms are employed of
just and weighty meaning, which will subsequently require notice.
Generally it may, however, here be observed, that they all assume
that there is in this ordinance an express institution of God ; that
there is this essential difference between them and every other
symbolical ceremony, that they are seals as well as signs, that is,
that they afford pledges on the part of God of grace and salvation ;
that as a covenant has two parties, our external acts in receiving
the sacraments are indications of certain states and dispositions of
our mind with regard to God's covenant, without which none can
have a personal participation in its benefits, and so the sacrament is
useless where these are not found ; that there are words of insti-
tution ; and a promise also by which the sign and the thing signified
are connected together.

The covenant of which they are the seals, is that called by the
Heidelberg Catechism, " the promise of the Gospel ;" the import of
which is, that God giveth freely to every one that believeth remis-
sion of sins, with all spiritual blessings, and " life eternal, upon the
account of that only sacrifice of Christ which he accomplished
upon the cross."

As Signs, they are visible and symbolical expositions of what
the Article of the Church of England, above quoted, calls " the
grace of God," and his " will," that is, his "good will towards us ;"
or, according to the Church of Scotland, " significations of the
benefits of his mediation ;" that is, they exhibit to the senses, under
appropriate emblems, the same benefits as are exhibited in another
form in the doctrines and promises of the word of God, so that " the
eye may affect and instruct the heart," and that for the strong
incitement of our faith, our desire, and our gratitude. It ought
nevertheless to be remembered that they are not signs merely of
the grace of God to us, but of our obligations to him ; obligations,
however, still flowing from the same grace.

They are also Seals. A seal is a confirming sign, or, accord-
ing to theological language, there is in a sacrament a signum signi-
ficant, and a signum confirmans ; the former of which is said, signi-
ficare, to notify or to declare ; the latter obsignate, to set one's seal
to, to witness. As, therefore, the sacraments, when considered as
signs, contain a declaration of the same doctrines and promises
which the written word of God exhibits, but addressed by a signi-

Vol. III. 39

362 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

ficant emblem to the senses ; so also as seals, or pledges, they
confirm the same promises which are assured to us by God's own
truth and faithfulness in his word, (which is the main ground of all
affiance in his mercy,) and by his indwelling Spirit by which we
are " sealed," and have in our hearts " the earnest" of our hea-
venly inheritance. This is done by an external and visible institu-
tion ; so that God has added these ordinances to the promises of
his word, not only to bring his merciful purpose towards us in
Christ to mind, but constantly to assure us that those who believe
in him shall be and are made partakers of his grace. These
ordinances are a pledge to them, that Christ and his benefits
are theirs, whilst they are required, at the same time, by faith,
as well as by the visible sign, to signify their compliance with his
covenant, which may be called " setting to their seal." " The
sacraments are God's seals, as they are ordinances given by him
for the confirmation of our faith that he would be our covenant
God ; and they are our seals, or we set our seal thereunto, when
we visibly profess that we give up ourselves to him to be his
people, and, in the exercise of a true faith, look to be partakers
of the benefits which Christ hath purchased, according to the
terms of the covenant." (5)

The passage quoted from the Heidelberg Catechism has a
clause which is of great importance in explaining the design of
the sacraments. They are "visible signs and seals ordained by
God for this end, that He may more fully declare, and seal by
them the promise of his Gospel unto us, to wit, that not only unto
all believers in general, but to each of them in particular, he freely
giveth remission of sins and life eternal, upon the account of that
only sacrifice of Christ, which he accomplished upon the cross."
For it is to be remarked that the administration is to particular
individuals separately, both in Baptism and the Lord's Supper, —
" Take, eat," " drink ye all of this ;" so that the institution of the
sign and seal of the covenant, and the acceptance of this sign and
seal is a solemn transaction between God and each individual.
From which it follows, that to every one to whom the sign is
exhibited, a seal and pledge of the invisible grace is also given ;
and every individual who draws near with a true heart and full
assurance of faith, does in his own person enter into God's cove-
nant, and to him in particular that covenant stands firm. He renews
it also in every sacramental act, the repetition of which is appoint-
ed ; and being authorized by a Divine and standing institution thus

(5) Dr. Ridcley.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 363

to put in his claim to the full grace of the covenant, he receives
thereby continual assurances of the love and faithfulness of a God
who changes not ; but exhibits the same signs and pledges of the
same covenant of grace, to the constant acceptance of every indivi-
dual believer throughout all the ages of his Church, which is charged
with the ministration of these sacred symbols of his mercy to man-
kind. This is an important and most encouraging circumstance.

CHAPTER III.

The Institutions of the Church. — Baptism.

The obligation of baptism rests upon the example of our Lord,
who, by his disciples, baptized many that by his discourses and
miracles were brought to profess faith in him as the Messias ; —
upon his solemn command to his Apostles after his resurrection,
"Go and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ;"(6)— and upon
the practice of the Apostles themselves, who thus showed that
they did not understand baptism, like our Quakers, in a mystical
sense. Thus St. Peter, in his sermon upon the day of Pentecost,
exhorts, " Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name
of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the
Holy Ghost." (7)

As to this sacrament, which has occasioned endless and various
controversies, three things require examination, — its nature ; its
subjects ; and its mode.

I. Its Nature. — The Romanists, agreeably to their supersti-
tious opinion as to the efficacy of sacraments, consider baptism
administered by a Priest having a good intention, as of itself apply-
ing the merits of Christ to the person baptized. According to them,
baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation, and they therefore
admit its validity when administered to a dying child by any person
present, should there be no Priest at hand. From this view of its
efficacy arises their distinction between sins committed before and
after baptism. The hereditary corruption of our nature, and all
actual sins committed before baptism, are said to be entirely removed
by it ; so that if the most abandoned person were to receive it for
the first time in the article of death, all his sins would be washed
away. But all sins committed after baptism, and the infusion of

(6) Matt, xxviii, 30. (7) Acts ii, 38.

364 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

that grace which is conveyed by the sacrament, must be expiated
by penance. In this notion of regeneration, or the washing away
of original sin by baptism, the Roman Church followed Augustine ;
but as he was a predestinarian, he was obliged to invent a distinc-
tion between those who are regenerated, and those who are pre-
destinated to eternal life ; so that, according to him, although all
the baptized are freed from that corruption which is entailed upon
mankind by Adam's lapse, and experience a renovation of mind,
none continue to walk in that state but the predestinated. The
Lutheran Church also places the efficacy of this sacrament in
regeneration, by which faith is actually conveyed to the soul of an
infant. The Church of England in her baptismal services has not
departed entirely from the terms used by the Romish Church from
which she separated. She speaks of those who are by nature
" born in sin," being made by baptism " the children of grace,"
which are, however, words of equivocal import ; and she gives
thanks to God " that it hath pleased him to regenerate this infant
with his Holy Spirit," probably using the term regeneration in the
same large sense as several of the ancient Fathers, and not in its
modern theological interpretation, which is more strict. However
this be, a controversy has long existed in the English Church as to
the real opinion of her founders on this point ; one part of the
Clergy holding the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and the
absolute necessity of baptism unto salvation ; the other taking
different views not only of the doctrine of Scripture, but also
of the import of various expressions found in the Articles, Cate-
chisms, and Offices of the Church itself. The Quakers view
baptism only as spiritual, and thus reject the rite altogether, as
one of the " beggarly elements" of former dispensations ; whilst
the Socinians regard it as a mere mode of professing the religion
of Christ. Some of them indeed consider it as calculated to
produce a moral effect upon those who submit to it, or who
witness its administration ; whilst others think it so entirely a
ceremony of induction into the society of Christians from Judaism
and Paganism, as to be necessary only when such conversions take
place, so that it might be wholly laid aside in Christian nations.

We have called baptism a federal transaction ; an initiation into,
and acceptance of, the covenant of grace, required of us by Christ
as a visible expression and act of that faith in Him which He has
made a condition of that salvation. It is a point, however, of so much
importance to establish the covenant character of this ordinance,
and so much of the controversy as to the proper subjects of baptism
depends upon it, that we may consider it somewhat at large.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 365

That the covenant with Abraham, of which circumcision was
made the sign and seal, (8) was the general covenant of grace, and
not wholly, or even chiefly, a political and national covenant, may
be satisfactorily established.

The first engagement in it was, that God would " greatly bless"
Abraham ; which promise, although it comprehended temporal
blessings, referred, as we learn from St. Paul, more fully to the
blessing of his justification by the imputation of his faith for
righteousness, with all the spiritual advantages consequent upon
the relation which was thus established between him and God, in
time and eternity. The second promise in the covenant was,
that he should be " the Father of many nations," which we are
also taught by St. Paul to interpret more with reference to his
spiritual seed, the followers of that faith whereof cometh justifica-
tion, than to his natural descendants. " That the promise might
be sure to all the seed, not only to that which is by the law, but
to that also which is by the faith of Abraham, who is the father of
us a//," — of all believing Gentiles as well as Jews. The third
stipulation in God's covenant with the patriarch, was the gift to
Abraham and to his seed of "the land of Canaan," in which the
temporal promise was manifestly but the type of the higher pro-
mise of a heavenly inheritance. Hence St. Paul says, " By faith
he sojourned in the land of promise, dwelling in tabernacles with
Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise ;" but
this " faith" did not respect the fulfilment of the temporal promise ;
for St. Paul adds, " they looked for a city which had foundations,
whose builder and maker is God." (9) The next promise was, that
God would always be " a God to Abraham, and to his seed after
him," a promise which is connected with the highest spiritual bless-
ings, such as the remission of sins, and the sanctification of our
nature, as well as with a visible Church state. It is even used to
express the felicitous state of the Church in heaven, Rev. xxi, 3.
The final engagement in the Abrahamic covenant, was, that in
Abraham's " seed, all the nations of the earth should be blessed ;"
and this blessing, we are expressly taught by St. Paul, was nothing
less than the justification of all nations, that is, of all believers in all
nations, by faith in Christ : — " And the Scripture, foreseeing that
God would justify the Heathen by faith, preached before the
Gospel to Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
So then they who are of faith, are blessed with believing Abra-
ham," they receive the same blessing, justification, by the same
means, faith, Gal. iii, 8, 9.

(8) Gen. xvii, 7-14. (9) Heb. xi, 19.

39*

366 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

This covenant with Abraham, therefore, although it respected a
natural seed, Isaac, from whom a numerous progeny was to spring ;
and an earthly inheritance provided for this issue, the land of Ca-
naan ; and a special covenant relation with the descendants of
Isaac, through the line of Jacob, to whom Jehovah was to be " a
God," visibly and specially, and they a visible and " peculiar
people ;" yet was, under all these temporal, earthly, and external
advantages, but a higher and spiritual grace embodying itself under
these circumstances, as types of a dispensation of salvation and eternal
life, to all who should follow the faith of Abraham, whose justifica-
tion before God was the pattern of the justification of every man,
whether Jew or Gentile, in all ages.

Now, of this covenant, in its spiritual as well as in its temporal
provisions, circumcision was most certainly the sacrament, that is,
the " sign" and the " seal ;" for St. Paul thus explains the case :
"And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the right-
eousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised." And
as this rite was enjoined upon Abraham's posterity, so that every
" uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin was not cir-
cumcised on the eighth clay," was to be " cut off from his people,"
by the special judgment of God, and that because " he had broken
God's covenant,'" (I) it therefore follows that this rite was a constant
publication of God's covenant of grace among the descendants of
Abraham, and its repetition a continual confirmation of that cove-
nant, on the part of God, to all practising it in that faith of which
it was the ostensible expression.

As the covenant of grace made with Abraham was bound up
with temporal promises and privileges, so circumcision was a sign
and seal of the covenant in both its parts, — its spiritual and its
temporal, its superior and inferior, provisions. The spiritual pro-
mises of the covenant continued unrestricted to all the descendants
of Abraham, whether by Isaac or by Ishmael ; and still lower
down, to the descendants of Esau as well as to those of Jacob.
Circumcision was practised among them all by virtue of its Divine
institution at first ; and was extended to their foreign servants, and
to proselytes, as well as to their children ; and wherever the sign
of the covenant of grace was by Divine appointment, there it was
as a seal of that covenant, to all who believingly used it ; for we
read of no restriction of its spiritual blessings, that is, its saving
engagements, to one line of descent from Abraham only. But
over the temporal branch of the covenant, and the external religious

(1) Gen. xvii, 14.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 367

privileges arising out of it, God exercised a rightful sovereignty,
and expressly restricted them first to the line of Isaac, and then to
that of Jacob, with whose descendants he entered into special
covenant by the ministry of Moses. The temporal blessings and
external privileges comprised under general expressions in the
covenant with Abraham, were explained and enlarged under that
of Moses, whilst the spiritual blessings remained unrestricted as
before. This was probably the reason why circumcision was
re-enacted under the law of Moses. It was a confirmation of the
temporal blessings of the Abrahamic covenant, now, by a covenant
of peculiarity, made over to them, whilst it was still recognised
as a consuetudinary rite which had descended to them from their
fathers, and as the sign and seal of the covenant of grace, made
with Abraham and with all his descendants without exception.
This double reference of circumcision, both to the authority of
Moses and to that of the patriarchs, is found in the words of our
Lord, John vii, 22 ; " Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision,
not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers ;" or, as it is better
translated by Campbell, " Moses instituted circumcision amongst
you, (not that it is from Moses, but from the patriarchs,) and ye
circumcise on the Sabbath. If on the Sabbath a child receive cir-
cumcision, that the law of Moses may not be violated," &c.

From these observations, the controversy in the Apostolic
Churches respecting circumcision will derive much elucidation.

The covenant with Abraham prescribed circumcision as an act
of faith in its promises, and a pledge [to perform its conditions]
[on the part of his descendants.] But the object on which this
faith rested, was " the Seed of Abraham," in whom the nations of
the earth were to be blessed : which Seed, says St. Paul, " is
Christ ;" — Christ as promised, not yet come. When the Christ
had come, so as fully to enter upon his redeeming offices, he could
no longer be the object of faith, as still to come ; and this leading
promise of the covenant being accomplished, the sign and seal of
it vanished away. Nor could circumcision be continued in this
view, by any, without an implied denial that Jesus was the Christ,
the expected Seed of Abraham. Circumcision also as an institu-
tion of Moses, who continued it as the sign and seal of the Abra-
hamic covenant both in its spiritual and temporal provisions, but
with respect to the latter made it also the sign and seal of the
restriction of its temporal blessings and peculiar religious privi-
leges to the descendants of Israel, was terminated by the entrance
of our Lord upon his office of Mediator, in which office all nations
were to be blessed in him. The Mosaic edition of the covenant

368 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

not only guaranteed the land of Canaan, but the peculiarity of the
Israelites, as the people and visible Church of God to the exclusion
of others, except by proselytism. But when our Lord commanded
the Gospel to be preached to " all nations," and opened the gates
of the " common salvation" to all, whether Gentiles or Jews, cir-
cumcision, as the sign of a covenant of peculiarity and religious
distinction, was done away also. It had not only no reason remain-
ing, but the continuance of the rite involved the recognition of
exclusive privileges which had been terminated by Christ.

This will explain the views of the Apostle Paul on this great
question. He declares that in Christ there is neither circumcision
nor uncircumcision ; that neither circumcision availeth any thing,
nor uncircumcision, but " faith that worketh by love ;" faith in the
Seed of Abraham already come and already engaged in his media-
torial and redeeming work ; faith, by virtue of which the Gentiles
came into the Church of Christ on the same terms as the Jews them-
selves, and were justified and saved. The doctrine of the non-neces-
sity of circumcision, he applies to the Jews as well as to the Gentiles,
although he specially resists the attempts of the Judaizers to
impose this rite upon the Gentile converts ; in which he was
supported by the decision of the Holy Spirit when the appeal
upon this question was made to " the Apostles and Elders at
Jerusalem," from the Church at Antioch. At the same time it is
clear that he takes two different views of the practice of circum-
cision, as it was continued among many of the first Christians.
The first is that strong one which is expressed in Gal. v, 2-4,
" Behold I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ
shall profit you nothing ; for I testify again to every man that is
circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is
become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the
law, ye are fallen from grace." The second is that milder view
which he himself must have had when he circumcised Timothy to
render him more acceptable to the Jews ; and which also appears
to have led him to abstain from all allusion to this practice when
writing his Epistle to the believing Hebrews, although many, per-
haps most of them, continued to circumcise their children, as did
the Jewish Christians for a long time afterwards. These different
views of circumcision, held by the same person, may be explained
by considering the different principles on which circumcision might
be practised after it had become an obsolete ordinance.

1. It might be taken in the simple view of its first institution, as
the sign and seal of the Abrahamic covenant ; and then it was to
be condemned as involving a denial that Abraham's Seed, the

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 369

Christ, had already come, since, upon his coming, every old cove-
nant gave place to the new covenant introduced by him.

2. It might be practised and enjoined as the sign and seal of
the Mosaic covenant, which was still the Abrahamic covenant
with its spiritual blessings, but with restriction of its temporal
promises and special ecclesiastical privileges to the line of Jacob,
with a law of observances which was obligatory upon all entering
that covenant by circumcision. In that case it involved, in like
manner, the notion of the continuance of an old covenant, after the
establishment of the new ; for thus St. Paul states the case in Gal.
iii, 19, "Wherefore then serveth the law1? It was added because
of transgressions until the seed should come." After that there-
fore it had no effect : — it had waxed old, and had vanished away.

3. Again : Circumcision might imply an obligation to observe
all the ceremonial usages and the moral precepts of the Mosaic
law, along with a general belief in the mission of Christ, as neces-
sary to justification before God. This appears to have been the
view of those among the Galatian Christians who submitted to cir-
cumcision, and of the Jewish teachers who enjoined it upon them ;
for St. Paul in that epistle constantly joins circumcision with legal
observances, and as involving an obligation to do " the whole law,"
in order to justification. — " I testify again to every man that is cir-
cumcised that he is a debtor to do the whole law ; whosoever
of you are justified by the law, ye are fallen from grace." " Know-
ing that a man is not justified by the loorks of the law, but by the
faith of our Lord Jesus Christ," Gal. ii, 1 6. To all persons there-
fore practising circumcision in this view it was obvious, that "Christ
was become of none effect," the very principle of justification by
faith alone in him was renounced, even whilst his Divine mission
was still admitted.

4. But there are two grounds on which circumcision may be
conceived to have been innocently, though not wisely, practised
among the Christian Jews. The first was that of preserving an
ancient national distinction on which they valued themselves ; and
were a converted Jew in the present day disposed to perform that
rite upon his children for this purpose only, renouncing in the act
all consideration of it as a sign and seal of the old covenants, or as
obliging to ceremonial acts in order to justification, no one would
censure him with severity. It appears clear that it was under some
such view that St. Paul circumcised Timothy, whose mother was a
Jewess ; he did it because of " the Jews which were in those
quarters," that is, because of their national prejudices, " for they
knew that his father was a Greek." The second was a lingering

I

370 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

notion, that, even in the Christian Church, the Jews who believed
would still retain some degree of eminence, some superior relation
to God ; a notion which, however unfounded, was not one which
demanded direct rebuke, when it did not proudly refuse spiritual
communion with the converted Gentiles, but was held by men who
" rejoiced that God had granted to the Gentiles repentance unto
life." These considerations may account for the silence of St. Paul
on the subject of circumcision in his Epistle to the Hebrews. Some
of them continued to practise that rite, but they were probably
believers of the class just mentioned ; for had he thought that the
rite was continued among them on any principle which affected the
fundamental doctrines of Christianity, he would no doubt have
been equally prompt and fearless in pointing out that apostasy from
Christ which was implied in it, as when he wrote to the Galatians.
Not only might circumcision be practised with views so opposite
that one might be wholly innocent, although an infirmity of preju-
dice ; the other such as would involve a rejection of the doctrine
of justification by faith in Christ ; but some other Jewish observ-
ances also stood in the same circumstances. St. Paul, in his
Epistle to the Galatians, a part of his writings from which we
obtain the most information on these questions, grounds his
" doubts" whether the members of that Church were not seek-
ing to be " justified by the law," upon their observing " days,
and months, and times, and years." Had he done more than
" doubt," he would have expressed himself more positively. He
saw their danger on this point ; he saw that they were taking steps
to this fatal result, by such an observance of these " days," &c, as
had a strong leaning and dangerous approach to that dependence
upon them for justification, which would destroy their faith in
Christ's solely sufficient sacrifice ; but his very doubting, not of
the fact of their being addicted to these observances, but of the
animus with which they regarded them, supposes it possible, how-
ever dangerous this Jewish conformity might be, that they might
be observed for reasons which would still consist with their entire
reliance upon the merits of Christ for salvation. Even he himself,
strongly as he resisted the imposition of this conformity to Jewish
customs upon the converts to Christianity as a matter of necessity,
yet in practice must have conformed to many of them, when no
sacrifice of principle was understood ; for, in order to gain the
Jews, he became " as a Jew."

From these observations, which have been somewhat digressive,
we return to observe that not only was the Abrahamic covenant,
of which circumcision was the sign and seal, a covenant of grace,

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 371

but that when this covenant in its ancient form was done away in
Christ, then the old sign and seal peculiar to that form was by con-
sequence abolished. If then baptism be not the initiatory sign and
seal of the same covenant in its new and perfect form, as circum-
cision was of the old, this new covenant has no such initiatory rite
or sacrament at all ; since the Lord's Supper is not initiatory, but,
like the sacrifices of old, is of regular and habitual observance.
Several passages of Scripture, and the very nature of the ordinance
of baptism, will, however, show that baptism is to the new cove-
nant what circumcision was to the old, and took its place by the
appointment of Christ.

This may be argued from our Lord's commission to his Apos-
tles, " Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the
name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teach-
ing them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you,"
Matt, xxviii, 19, 20. "Go ye into all the world, and preach the
Gospel to every creature ; he that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved," Mark xvi, 15, 16.

To understand the force of these words of our Lord, it must be
observed, that the gate of " the common salvation" was only now
for the first time going to be opened to the Gentile nations. He
himself had declared that in his personal ministry he was not sent
but to " the lost sheep of the house of Israel ;" and he had restricted
his disciples in like manner, not only from ministering to the Gen-
tiles, but from entering any city of the Samaritans. By what means
therefore were " all nations" now to be brought into the Church
of God, which from henceforth was most truly to be catholic or
universal 1 Plainly, by baptizing them that believed the "good
news," and accepted the terms of the new covenant. This is
apparent from the very words ; and thus was baptism expressly
made the initiatory rite, by which believers of " all nations" were
to be introduced into the Church and covenant of grace ; an office
in which it manifestly took the place of circumcision, which here-
tofore, even from the time of Abraham, had been the only initiatory
rite into the same covenant. Moses re-enacted circumcision ; our
Lord not only does not re-enact it, but, on the contrary, he appoints
another mode of entrance into the covenant in its new and per-
fected form, and that so expressly as to amount to a formal abro-
gation of the ancient sign, and the putting of baptism in its place.
The same argument may be maintained from the words of our
Lord to Nicodemus, " Except a man be born of water and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." By the king-
dom of God our Lord, no doubt, in the highest sense, means the

372 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

future state of felicity ; but he uses this phrase to express the state
of his Church on earth, which is the gate to that celestial kingdom ;
and generally indeed speaks of his Church on earth under this mode
of expression, rather than of the heavenly state. If then he declares
that no one can " enter" into that Church but by being " born of
water and of the Holy Spirit," which heavenly gift followed upon
baptism when received in true faith, he clearly makes baptism the
mode of initiation into his Church in this passage as in the last
quoted ; and in both he assigns to it the same office as circum-
cision in the Church of the Old Testament, whether in its Patri-
archal or Mosaic form.

A further proof that baptism has precisely the same federal and
initiatory character as circumcision, and that it was instituted for
the same ends, and in its place, is found in Colossians ii, 10-12,
"And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality
and power ; in whom also ye are circumcised with the circum-
cision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of
the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, buried with him in baptism"
&c. Here baptism is also made the initiatory rite of the new dis-
pensation, that by which the Colossians were joined to Christ in
whom they are said to be " complete ;" and so certain is it that bap-
tism has the same office and import now as circumcision formerly, —
with this difference only, that the object of faith was then future,
and now it is Christ as come, — that the Apostle expressly calls bap-
tism " the circumcision of Christ," the circumcision instituted by
him, which phrase he puts out of the reach of frivolous criticism,
by adding exegetically, — "buried with Him in baptism" For unless
the Apostle here calls baptism " the circumcision of Christ," he
asserts that we " put off the body of the sins of the flesh," that is,
become new creatures by virtue of our Lord's own personal cir-
cumcision ; but if this be absurd, then the only reason for which
he can call baptism " the circumcision of Christ," or Christian cir-
cumcision, is, that it has taken the place of the Abrahamic circum-
cision, and fulfils the same office of introducing believing men into
God's covenant, and entitling them to the enjoyment of spiritual
blessings.

But let us also quote Gal. iii, 27-29, "For as many of you as
have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ ; there is
neither Jew nor Gentile, there is neither bond nor free, there is
neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus ; and if
ye are Christ's," by thus being " baptized," and by "putting on"
Christ, " then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the
promise."

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 373

The argument here is also decisive. It cannot be denied that it
was by circumcision believingly submitted to, that " strangers" or
Heathens, as well as Jews, became the spiritual " seed of Abra-
ham," and " heirs" of the same spiritual and heavenly " promises.'''
But the same office in this passage is ascribed to baptism also
believingly submitted to ; and the conclusion is therefore inevitable.
The same covenant character of each rite is here also strongly
marked, as well as that the covenant is the same, although under
a different mode of administration. In no other way could circum-
cision avail any thing under the Abrahamic covenant, than as it
was that visible act by which God's covenant to justify men by
faith in the promised Seed was accepted by them. It was there-
fore a part of a federal transaction ; that outward act which he
who offered a covenant engagement so gracious required as a
solemn declaration of the acceptance of the covenanted grace,
upon the covenanted conditions. It was thus that the Abrahamic
covenant was offered to the acceptance of all who heard it, and
thus that they were to declare their acceptance of it. In the same
manner there is a standing offer of the same covenant of mercy
wherever the Gospel is preached. The "good news" which it
contains is that of a promise, an engagement, a covenant on the
part of God to remit sin, and to save all that believe in Christ. To
the covenant in this new form he also requires a visible and formal
act of acceptance, which act when expressive of the required iaitli
makes us parties to the covenant, and entitles us through the faith-
fulness of God to its benefits. " He that believelh and is baptized
shall be saved ;" or, as in the passage before us, " As many of you
as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ ; and if ye
be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to
the promise."

We have the same view of baptism as an act of covenant accept-
ance, and as it relates to God's gracious engagement to justify the
ungodly by faith in his Son, in the often quoted passage in 1 Peter
iii, 20, "Which sometime were disobedient, when once the long
suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was
preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us,
(not the putting away the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good
conscience towards God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

When St. Peter calls baptism the " figure," avnruirov, the anti-
type of the transaction by which Noah and his family were saved
from perishing with the ungodly and unbelieving world, he had
doubtless in mind the faith of Noah, and that under the same view

Vol. III. 40

374 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

as the Apostle Paul, in Heb. xi, " By faith Noah, being warned
of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark
to the saving of his house ; by the which" act of faith " he con-
demned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by
faith ;" an expression of the same import as if he had said, " by
which act of faith he was justified before God." It has been
already explained in another place (2) in what way Noah's pre-
paring of the ark, and his faith in the Divine promise of preserva-
tion, were indicative of his having that direct faith in the Christ to
come, of which the Apostle Paul discourses in the eleventh of the
Hebrews, as that which characterized " all the Elders," and by
which they obtained their " good report" in the Church. His pre-
servation and that of his family was so involved in the fulfilment of
the more ancient promise respecting the Seed of the woman, and
the deliverance of man from the power of Satan, that we are war-
ranted to conclude that his faith in the promise respecting his own
deliverance from the deluge, was supported by his faith in that
greater promise, which must have fallen to the ground had the
whole race perished without exception. His building of the ark,
and entering into it with his family, are therefore considered, by
St. Paul, as the visible expression of his faith in the ancient pro-
mises of God respecting Messiah ; and for this reason baptism is
called by St. Peter, without any allegory at all, but in the sobriety
of fact " the anti-type" of this transaction ; the one exactly answer-
ing to the other, as an external expression of faith in the same
objects and the same promises.

But the Apostle does not rest in this general representation. He
proceeds to express, in a particular and most forcible manner, the
nature of Christian baptism, — " not the putting away of the filth of
the flesh ; but the answer of a good conscience towards God, by
the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Now, whether we take the
word exipurruxa., rendered in our translation " answer," for a demand
or requirement ; or for the answer to a question or questions ; or in
the sense of stipulation ; the general import of the passage is nearly
the same. If the first, then the meaning of the Apostle is, that
baptism is not the putting away the filth of the flesh, not a mere
external ceremony ; but a rite which demands or requires some-
thing of us, in order to the attainment of a "good conscience."
What that is, we learn from the words of our Lord ; it is faith in
Christ ; " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ;" which
faith is the reliance of a penitent upon the atonement of the Saviour,

(2) Vol. ii, Chap. 22.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 375

who thus submits with all gratitude and truth to the terms of the
evangelical covenant. If we take the second sense, we must lay
aside the notion of some lexicographers and commentators, who
think that there is an allusion to the ancient practice of demanding
of the candidates for baptism, whether they renounced their sins,
and the service of Satan, with other questions of the same import ;
for, ancient as these questions may be, they are probably not so
ancient as the time of the Apostle. We know however, from the
instance of Philip and the Eunuch, that there was an explicit require-
ment of faith, and as explicit an answer or confession : "And Philip
said, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest ; and he an-
swered, I believe that Jesus is the Son of God." Every adminis-
tration of baptism indeed implied this demand ; and baptism, if we
understand St. Peter to refer to this circumstance, was such an
" answer" to the interrogations of the administrator, as expressed
a true and evangelical faith. If we take the third rendering of
" stipulation," which has less to support it critically than either of
the others, still as the profession of faith was a condition of baptism,
that profession had the full force of a formal stipulation, since all
true faith in Christ requires an entire subjection to him as Lord, as
well as Saviour.

Upon this passage, however, a somewhat clearer light may be
thrown, by understanding the word s-n-spurri^a in the sense of that
which asks, requires, seeks, something beyond itself. The verb
from which it is derived signifies to ask, or require ; but etspurrj^a
occurs no where else in the New Testament ; and but once in the
version of the Seventy, Dan. iv, 17, where, however, it is used so
as to be fully illustrative of the meaning of St. Peter. Nebuchad-
nezzar was to be humbled by being driven from men to associate
with the beasts of the field ; and the vision in which this was repre-
sented, concludes, " This matter is by the decree of the watchers,
and the demand, to s^wn^a, by the word of the holy ones, to the
intent that the living may know, iva yvwtfiv 01 %uvrsg, that the Most
High ruleth in the kingdom of men." The Chaldaic word, like
the Greek, is from a verb which signifies to ask, to require, and
may be equally expressed by the. word petitio, which is the render-
ing of the Vulgate, or by postulatum. There was an end, an " intent,"
for which the humbling of the Babylonian king was required " by
the word of the holy ones," that, by the signal punishment of the
greatest earthly monarch, " the living might know that the Most
High ruleth in the kingdom of men." In like manner baptism has
an end, an " intent," " not the putting away the filth of the flesh,"
but obtaining " a good conscience towards God ;" and it requires,

376 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

claims, this good conscience, through that faith in Christ whereof
cometh remission of sins, the cleansing of the " conscience from
dead works," and those supplies of supernatural aid by which, in
future, men may " live in all good conscience before God." It is
thus that we see how St. Peter preserves the correspondence be-
tween the act of Noah in preparing the ark as an act of faith by
which he was justified, and the act of submitting to Christian bap-
tism, which is also obviously an act of faith, in order to the remis-
sion of sins, or the obtaining a good conscience before God. This
is further strengthened by his immediately adding, " by the resur-
rection of Jesus Christ :" A clause which our translators, by the
use of a parenthesis, connect with "baptism doth also now save
us;" so that their meaning is, we are saved by baptism through the
resurrection of Jesus Christ ; and as he "rose again for our justifi-
cation," this sufficiently shows the true sense of the Apostle, who,
by our being " saved," clearly means our being justified by faith.

The text however needs no parenthesis, and the true sense may
be thus expressed : " The antitype to which water of the flood,
baptism, doth now save us ; not the putting away of the filth of
the flesh, but that which intently seeks a good conscience towards
God, through faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ." But how-
ever a particular word may be disposed of, the whole passage can
only be consistently taken to teach us, that baptism is the outward
sign of our entrance into God's covenant of mercy ; and that when
it is an act of true faith, it becomes an instrument of salvation,
like that act of faith in Noah, by which, when moved with fear,
he " prepared an ark to the saving of his house," and survived the
destruction of an unbelieving world.

From what has been said it will then follow, that the Abrahamic
covenant and the Christian covenant is the same gracious engage-
ment on the part of God to show mercy to man, and to bestow
upon him eternal life, through faith in Christ as the true sacrifice
for sin, differing only in circumstances ; and that as the sign and
seal of this covenant under the Old dispensation was circumcision,
under the New it is baptism, which has the same federal character,
performs the same initiatory office, and is instituted by the same
authority. For none could have authority to lay aside the appointed
seal, but the Being who first instituted it, who changed the form of
the covenant itself, and who has in fact abrogated the old seal by
the appointment of another, even baptism, which is made obliga-
tory upon " all nations to whom the Gospel is preached, and is" to
continue to "the end of the world."

This argument is sufficiently extended to show that the A.nti-

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 377

paedobaptist writers have in vain endeavoured to prove that bap-
tism has not been appointed in the room of circumcision ; a point
on which, indeed, they were bound to employ all their strength ;
for, the substitution of baptism for circumcision being established,
one of their main objections to infant baptism, as we shall just now
show, is rendered wholly nugatory.

But it is not enough, in stating the nature of the ordinance of
Christian baptism, to consider it generally as an act by which man
enters into God's covenant of grace. Under this general view
several particulars are contained, which it is of great importance
rightly to understand. Baptism, both as a sign and seal, presents
an entire correspondence with the ancient rite of circumcision.
Let it then be considered,

1. As a sign. Under this view, circumcision indicated, by a
visible and continued rite, the placability of God towards his sinful
creatures ; and held out the promise of justification, by faith alone,
to every truly penitent offender. It went further, and was the
sign of sanctification, or the taking away the pollution of sin, " the
superfluity of naughtiness," as well as the pardon of actual offences,
and thus was the visible emblem of a regenerate mind, and a
renewed life. This will appear from the following passages, " For
he is not a Jew which is one outwardly in the flesh ; but he is a
Jew which is one inwardly ; and circumcision is that of the heart,
in the spirit, and not in the letter, whose praise is not of men, but of
God," Rom. ii, 28. "And the Lord thy God will circumcise
thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the Lord thy God
with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live,"
Deut. xxx, 6. " Circumcise yourselves to the Lord, and take
away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah, and inhabit-
ants of Jerusalem," Jer. iv, 3. It was the sign also of peculiar
relation to God, as his people : " Only the Lord had a delight in
thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even
you above all people as it is this day. Circumcise, therefore,
the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiff necked," Deut.
x, 15, 16.

In all these respects, baptism, as a sign of the new covenant,
corresponds to circumcision. Like that, its administration is a
constant exhibition of the placability of God to man ; like that, it
is the initiatory rite into a covenant which promises pardon and
salvation to a true faith, of which it is the outward profession ; like
that, it is the symbol of regeneration, the washing away of sin, and
" the renewing of the Holy Ghost ;" and like that, it is a sign of
peculiar relation to God, Christians becoming, in consequence,

40*

378 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

" a chosen generation, a peculiar people," — his " church" on earth,
as distinguished from "the world." " For we," says the Apostle,
"are the circumcision," we are that peculiar people and church
now, which was formerly distinguished by the sign of circumcision,
" who worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and
have no confidence in the flesh."

But as a sign baptism is more than circumcision ; because the
covenant, under its new dispensation, was not only to offer pardon
upon believing, deliverance from the bondage of fleshly appetites,
and a peculiar spiritual relation to God, all of Avhich we find under
the Old Testament ; but also to bestow the Holy Spirit, in his
fulness, upon all believers ; and of this effusion of " the Power
from on High," baptism was made the visible sign ; and perhaps
for this, among some other obvious reasons, was substituted for
circumcision, because baptism by effusion, or pouring, (the New
Testament mode of baptizing, as we shall afterwards show,) was a
natural symbol of this heavenly gift. The baptism of John had
special reference to the Holy Spirit, which was not to be adminis-
tered by him, but by Christ who should come after him. This
gift only honoured John's baptism once, in the extraordinary case
of our Lord ; but it constantly followed upon the baptism adminis-
tered by the Apostles of Christ, after his ascension, and " the
sending of the promise of the Father." Then Peter said unto them.
"Repent, and be baptized every one of you for the remission of
sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost," Acts ii, 17.
" According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regene-
ration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost, which he shed," or poured
out, "on us abundantly through Jesus Christ." For this reason
Christianity is called " the ministration of the Spirit ;" and so far is
this from being confined to the miraculous gifts often bestowed in
the first age of the Church, that it is made the standing and pro-
minent test of true Christianity to " be led by the Spirit," — " If
any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Of this
great new covenant blessing, baptism was therefore eminently the
sign ; and it represented " the pouring out" of the Spirit, " the
descending" of the Spirit, the " falling" of the Spirit " upon men,"
by the mode in which it was administered, the pouring of water
from above upon the subjects baptized.

As a seal also, or confirming sign, baptism answers to circum-
cision. By the institution of the latter, a pledge was constantly
given by the Almighty to bestow the spiritual blessings of which
the rite was the sign, pardon and sanctification through faith in the
future Seed of Abraham ; peculiar relation to Him as "his people ;"

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 379

and the heavenly inheritance. Of the same blessings, baptism is
also the pledge, along with that higher dispensation of the Holy
Spirit which it specially represents in emblem. Thus in baptism
there is on the part of God a visible assurance of his faithfulness
to his covenant stipulations. But it is our seal also ; it is that act
by which we make ourselves parties to the covenant, and thus " set
to our seal, that God is true." In this respect it binds us, as, in
the other, God mercifully binds himself for the stronger assurance
of our faith. We pledge ourselves to trust wholly in Christ for
pardon and salvation, and to obey his laws ; — " teaching them ' to
observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you:'" in that
rite also we undergo a mystical death unto sin, a mystical separa-
tion fiom the world, which St. Paul calls being " buried with Christ
in or by baptism ;" and a mystical resurrection to newness of life,
through Christ's resurrection from the dead. Thus in circumcision,
an obligation of faith in the promises made to Abraham, and an
obligation to holiness of life, and to the observance of the Divine
laws, was contracted ; and Moses, therefore, in a passage above
quoted, argues from that peculiar visible relation of the Israelites
to God, produced by outward circumcision, to the duty of circum-
cising the heart : " The Lord had a delight in thy fathers to love
them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all
people ; circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart,"
Deut. x, 15.

If then we bring all these considerations under one view, we
shall find it sufficiently established that baptism is the sign and seal
of the covenant of grace under its perfected dispensation ; — that
it is the grand initiatory act by which we enter into this covenant,
in order to claim all its spiritual blessings, and to take upon our-
selves all its obligations ; — that it was appointed by Jesus Christ in
a manner which plainly put it in the place of circumcision ; — that
it is now the means by which men become Abraham's spiritual
children, and heirs with him of the promise, which was the office
of circumcision, until " the Seed," the Messiah, should come ; —
and that baptism is therefore expressly called by St. Paul "the
circumcision of Christ," or Christian circumcision, in a sense
which can only import that baptism has now taken the place of
the Abrahamic rite.

The only objection of any plausibility which has been urged by
Anti-pa?dobaptist writers against the substitution of baptism for
circumcision, is thus stated by Mr. Booth : " If baptism succeeded
m the place of circumcision, how came it that both of them were
in full force at the same time, that is. from the commencement of

380 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES [PART

John's ministry to the death of Christ 1 For one thing to come in
the room of another, and the latter to hold its place, is an odd kind
of succession. Admitting the succession pretended, how came it
that Paul circumcised Timothy, after he had been baptized?'
That circumcision was practised along with baptism from John
the Baptist's ministry to the death of Christ may be very readily
granted, without affecting the question ; for baptism could not be
made the sign and seal of the perfected covenant of grace, until
that covenant was both perfected, and fully explained and proposed
for acceptance, which did not take place until after " the blood of
the everlasting covenant" was shed, and our Lord had opened its
full import to the Apostles who were to publish it "to all nations"
after his resurrection. Accordingly we find that baptism was form-
ally made the rite of initiation into this covenant for the first time,
when our Lord gave commission to his disciples to " go and teach
all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost," — "he that believeth and is baptized
shall be saved." John's baptism was upon profession of repentance,
and faith in the speedy appearance of Him who was to baptize
with the Holy Ghost, and fire ; and our Lord's baptism by his
disciples was administered to those Jews that believed on him, as
the Messias, all of whom, like the Apostles, waited for a fuller
deveiopement of his character and offices. For since the new
covenant was not then fully perfected, it could not be proposed in
any other way than to prepare them that believed in Christ, by its
partial but increasing manifestation in the discourses of our Lord,
for the full declaration both of its benefits and obligations ; which
declaration was not made until after his resurrection. Whatever
the nature and intent of that baptism which our Lord by his disci-
ples administered might be, (a point on which we have no informa-
tion,) like that of John it looked to something yet to come, and was
not certainly that baptism in the name " of the Father, of the Son,
and of the Holy Ghost," which was afterward instituted as the
standing initiatory rite into the Christian Church. As for the cir-
cumcision of Timothy, and the practice of that rite among many
of the Hebrew believers, it has already been accounted for. If
indeed the Baptist writers could show that the Apostles sanctioned
the practice of circumcision as a seal of the old covenant, either
as it was Abrahamic or Mosaic, or both, then there would be some
force in the argument, that one could not succeed the other, if both
were continued under inspired authority. But we have the most
decided testimony of the Apostle Paul against any such use of
circumcision; and he makes it, when practised in that view, a

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL IKSTITUTES. 381

total abnegation of Christ and the new covenant. It follows then,
that, when circumcision was continued by any connivance of the
Apostles. — and certainly they did no more than connive at it, — it
was practised upon some grounds which did not regard it as the
seal of any covenant, from national custom, or prejudice, a feeling
to which the Apostle Paul himself yielded in the case of Timothy.
He circumcised him, but not from any conviction of necessity,
since he uniformly declared circumcision to have vanished away
with that dispensation of the covenant of which it was the seal,
through the bringing in of a better hope.

We may here add, that an early Father, Justin Martyr, takes the
same view of the substitution of circumcision by Christian baptism :
" We, Gentiles," Justin observes, " have not received that circum-
cision according to the flesh, but that which is spiritual — and more-
over, for indeed we were sinners, we have received this in baptism,
through God's mercy, and it is enjoined on all to receive it in like
manner."

II. The nature of baptism having been thus explained, we may
proceed to consider its subjects.

That believers are the proper subjects of baptism, as they were
of circumcision, is beyond dispute. As it would have been a mon-
strous perversion of circumcision to have administered it to any
person, being of adult age, who did not believe in the true and
living God, and in the expected " Seed of Abraham," in whom all
nations were to be blessed ; so is faith in Christ also an indispensa-
ble condition for baptism in all persons of mature age : and no
Minister is at liberty to take from the candidate the visible pledge
of his acceptance of the terms of God's covenant, unless he has
been first taught its nature, promises, and obligations, and gives
sufficient evidence of the reality of his faith, and the sincerity of
his profession of obedience. Hence the administration of baptism
was placed by our Lord only in the hands of those who were il to
preach the Gospel," that is, of those who were to declare God's
method of saving men " through faith in Christ," and to teach them
"to observe all things, whatsoever Christ had commanded them."
Circumcision was connected with teaching, and belief of the truth
taught ; and so also is Christian baptism.

The question, however, which now requires consideration is,
whether the infant children of believing parents are entitled to be
made parties to the covenant of grace, by the act of their parents,
and the administration of baptism 1

In favour of infant baptism, the following arguments may be
adduced. Some of them are more direct than others ; but the

382 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

reader will judge whether, taken all together, they do not establish
this practice of the Church, continued to us from the earliest ages,
upon the strongest basis of scriptural authority.

1 . As it has been established, that baptism was put by our Lord
bimself and his Apostles in the room of circumcision, as an ini-
tiatory rite into the covenant of grace ; and as the infant children of
believers under the Old Testament were entitled to the covenant
benefits of the latter ordinance, and the children of Christian be-
lievers are not expressly excluded from entering into the same
covenant by baptism ; the absence of such an explicit exclusion is
sufficient proof of their title to baptism.

For if the covenant be the same in all its spiritual blessings, and
an express change was made by our Lord in the sign and seal of
that covenant, but no change at all in the subjects of it, no one can
have a right to carry that change further than the Lawgiver him-
self, and to exclude the children of believers from entering his cove-
nant by baptism, when they had always been entitled to enter into
it by circumcision. This is a censurable interference with the
authority of God ; a presumptuous attempt to fashion the new
dispensation in this respect so as to conform it to a mere human
opinion of fitness and propriety. For to say, that, because bap-
tism is directed to be administered to believers when adults are
spoken of, it follows that children who are not capable of personal
faith are excluded from baptism, is only to argue in the same man-
ner as if it were contended, that, because circumcision, when adults
were the subjects, was only to be administered to believers, there-
fore infants were excluded from that ordinance, which is contrary
to the fact. This argument will not certainly exclude them from
baptism by way of inference, and by no act of the Maker and Me-
diator of the covenant are they shut out.

2. If it had been intended to exclude infants from entering into
the new covenant by baptism, the absence of every prohibitory ex-
pression to this effect in the New Testament, must have been mis-
leading to all men ; and especially to the Jewish believers.

Baptism was no new ordinance when our Lord instituted it,
though he gave to it a particular designation. It was in his practice
to adapt, in several instances, what he found already established, to
the uses of his religion. "A parable, for instance, was the Jewish
mode of teaching. Who taught by parables equal to Jesus Christ ?
And what is the most distinguished and appropriate rite of his reli-
gion, but a service grafted on a Passover custom among the Jews
of his day ? It was not ordained by Moses, that a part of the
bread they had used in the Passover should be the last thing they

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 383

ate after that supper ; yet this our Lord took as he found it, and
converted it into a memorial of his body. The 'cup of blessing'
has no authority whatever from the original institution ; yet this
our Lord found in use, and adopted as a memorial of his blood : —
taken together, these elements form one commemoration of his
death, Probability, arising to rational certainty, therefore, would
lead us to infer, that whatever rite Jesus appointed as the ordinance
of admission into the community of his followers, he would also
adopt from some service already existing — from some token fami-
liar among the people of his nation.

" In fact, we know that ' divers baptisms' existed under the law,
and we have every reason to believe, that the admission of prose-
lytes into the profession of Judaism, was really and truly marked
by a washing with water in a ritual and ceremonial manner, I have
always understood that Maimonides is perfectly correct when he
says, ' In all ages, when a Heathen (or a stranger by nation) icas
willing to enter into the covenant of Israel, and gather himself under
the wings of the majesty of God, and take upon himself the yoke of
the law — he must be first circumcised, and secondly baptized, and
thirdly bring a sacrifice ; or if the party were a woman, then she must
be first baptized, and secondly bring a sacrifice.'' He adds, lAt this
present time when (the temple being destroyed) there is no sacrificing,
a stranger must be first circumcised, and secondly baptized.'

" Dr. Gill, indeed, in his Dissertation on Jewish Proselyte Bap-
tism, has ventured the assertion, that ' there is no mention made of
any rite or custom of admitting Jewish Proselytes by baptism, in
any writings or records before the time of John the Baptist, Christ
and his Apostles ; nor in any age after them, for the first three or
four hundred years ; or, however, before the writing of the Tal-
muds.'' But the learned Doctor has not condescended to under-
stand the evidence of this fact. It does not rest on the testimony
of Jewish records solely; it was in circulation among the Heathen,
as we learn from the clear and demonstrative testimony of Epic-
tetus, who has these words : (He is blaming those who assume the
profession of Philosophy without acting up to it :) ' Why do you
call yourself a Stoic 1 Why do you deceive the multitude 1 Why
do you pretend to be a Greek, when you are a Jew ? a Syrian ? an
Egyptian ? And when we see any one wavering, we are wont to
say, This is not a Jew, but acts one. But when he assumes the
sentiments of one who hath been baptized and circumcised, then he
both really is, and is called, a Jew. Thus we, falsifying our pro-
fession, are Jews in name, but in reality something else.'

" This practice then of the Jews, — proselyte baptism, — was so

384 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

notorious to the Heathen in Italy and in Greece, that it furnished
this philosopher with an object of comparison. Now, Epictetus
lived to be very old : He is placed by Dr. Lardner, A. D. 109, by
he Clerc, A. D. 104. He could not be less than sixty years of
age when he wrote this ; and he might obtain his information thirty
or forty years earlier, which brings it up to the time of the Apostles.
Those who could think that the Jews could institute proselyte bap-
tism at the very moment when the Christians were practising bap-
tism as an initiatory rite, are not to be envied for the correctness of
their judgment. The rite certainly dates much earlier, probably
many ages. I see no reason for disputing the assertion of Mai-
monides, notwithstanding Dr. Gill's rash and fallacious language
on the subject." (3)

This baptism of proselytes, as Lightfoot has fully showed, was
a baptism of families, and comprehended their infant children ; and
the rite was a symbol of their being washed from the pollution of
idolatry. Very different indeed in the extent of its import and office
was Christian baptism to the Jewish baptisms ; nevertheless, this
shows that the Jews were familiar with the rite as it extended to
children, in cases of conversions from idolatry ; and, as far at least
as the converts from paganism to Christianity were concerned, they
could not but understand Christian baptism to extend to the infant
children of Gentile proselytes, unless there had been, what we no
where find in the discourses of Christ and the writings of the Apos-
tles, an express exception of them. In like manner, their own prac-
tice oi infant circumcision must have misled them ; for if they were
taught that baptism was the initiatory seal of the Christian cove-
nant, and had taken the place of circumcision, which St. Paul had
informed them was " a seal of the righteousness which is by faith,"
how should they have understood that their children were no longer
to be taken into covenant with God, as under their own former
religion, unless they had been told that this exclusion of children
from all covenant relation to God, was one of those peculiarities of
the Christian dispensation in which it differed from the religion of
the Patriarchs and Moses 1 This was surely a great change ; a
change which must have made great impression upon a serious and
affectionate Jewish parent, who could now no longer covenant
with God for his children, or place his children in a special cove-
nant relation to the Lord of the whole earth ; a change indeed so
great, — a placing of the children of Christian parents in so infe-
rior, and, so to speak, outcast a condition, in comparison of the

(3) Facts and Evidences on the Subject of Baptism.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 3S5

children of believing Jews, whilst the Abrahamic covenant remained
in force, — that not only, in order to prevent mistake, did it require
an express enunciation, but in the nature of the thing it must have
given rise to so many objections, or at least inquiries, that expla-
nations of the reason of this peculiarity might naturally be expected
to occur in the writings of the Apostles, and especially in those of
St. Paul. On the contrary, the very phraseology of these inspired
men, when touching the subject of the children of believers only
incidentally, was calculated to confirm the ancient practice, in
opposition to what we are told is the true doctrine of the Gospel
upon this point. For instance : how could the Jews have under-
stood the words of Peter at the Pentecost, but as calling both upon
them and their children, to be baptized ? — " Repent and be bap-
tized, for the promise is unto you and to your children." For
that both are included, may be proved, says a sensible writer, by
considering,

" 1. The resemblance between this promise, and that in Gen.
xvii, 7, ' To be a God unto thee, and unto thy seed after thee.' —
The resemblance between these two lies in two things : (1.) Each
stands connected with an ordinance, by which persons were to be
admitted into Church fellowship ; the one by circumcision, the
other by baptism. (2.) Both agree in phraseology; the one is,
Ho thee and thy seed;' the other is, 'to you and your children.'
Now, every one knows that the word seed means children ; and
that children means seed ; and that they are precisely the same.
From these two strongly resembling features, viz. their connexion
with a similar ordinance, and the sameness of the phraseology,
I infer, that the subjects expressed in each, are the very same.
And as it is certain that parents and infants were intended by
the one ; it must be equally certain that both are intended by
the other.

" 2. The sense in which the speaker must have understood the
sentence in question : ' The promise is to you, and to your chil-
dren.'— In order to know this, we must consider who the speaker
was, and from what source he received his religious knowledge.
The Apostle was a Jew. He knew that he himself had been
admitted in infancy, and that it was the ordinary practice of the
Church to admit infants to membership. And he likewise knew,
that in this they acted on the authority of that place, where God
promises to Abraham, * to be a God unto him, and unto his seed.'
Now, if the Apostle knew all this, in what sense could he under-
stand the term children, as distinguished from their parents'? I
have said that rsxva, children, and tfirepfxa, seed, mean the same

Vot. UI. 41

386 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PAKT

thing. And as the Apostle well knew that the term seed intended
infants, though not mere infants only ; and that infants were cir-
cumcised and received into the Church as being the seed, what
else could he understand by the term children, when mentioned
with their parents 1 Those who will have the Apostle to mean,
by the term children, 'adult posterity' only, have this infelicity
attending them, that they understand the term differently from
all other men ; and they attribute to the Apostle a sense of
the word, which to him must have been the most forced and
infamiliar.

" 3. In what sense his hearers must have understood him, when
he said, ' The promise is to you, and to your children,'

" The context informs us, that many of St. Peter's hearers, as
he himself was, were Jews. They had been accustomed for many
hundred years to receive infants by circumcision into the Church ;;
and this they did, as before observed, because God had promised
to be a God to Abraham and to his seed. They had understood
this promise to mean parents and their infant offspring, and this
idea was become familiar by the practice of many centuries. What
then must have been their views, when one of their own commu-
nity says to them, ' The promise is to you and to your children V
If their practice of receiving infants was founded on a promise
exactly similar, as it was, how could they possibly understand him,
but as meaning the same thing, since he himself used the same
mode of speech 1 This must have been the case, unless we admit
this absurdity, that they understood him in a sense to which they
had never been accustomed.

" How idle a thing it is, in a Baptist, to come with a lexicon
in his hand, to inform us that tsxvcc, children, means posterity *
Certainly it does, and so includes the youngest infants.

" But the Baptists will have it that rava, children, in this place,
means only adult posterity. And if so, the Jews to whom he spoke,
unless they understood St. Peter in a way in which it was morally
impossible they should, would infallibly have understood him wrong.
Certainly, all men, when acting freely, will understand words in
that way which is most familiar to them ; and nothing could be
more so to the Jews, than to understand such a speech as Peter's
to mean adults and infants.

"We should more certainly come at the truth, if, instead of
idly criticising, we could fancy ourselves Jews, and in the habit
of circumcising infants, and receiving them into the Church ; and
then could we imagine one of our own nation and religion to
address us in the very language of Peter in this text, ' The pro-

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 387

mise is to you and to your children ;' let us ask ourselves whether
we could ever suppose him to mean adult posterity only !"(3)

To this we may add that St. Paul calls the children of believers
holy, separated to God, and standing therefore in a peculiar rela-
tion to him, 1 Cor. vii, 14; a mode of speech which would also
have been wholly unintelligible at least to a Jew, unless by some
rite of Christianity children were made sharers in its covenanted
mercies.

The practice of the Jews, and the very language of the Apos-
tles, so naturally leading therefore to a misunderstanding of this
sacrament, if infant baptism be not a Christian rite, and that in
respect of its subjects themselves, it was the more necessary that
some notice of the exclusion of infants from the Christian covenant
should have been given by -way of guard. And as we find no
intimation of this prohibitory kind, we may confidently conclude
that it was never the design of Christ to restrict this ordinance to
adults only.

3. Infant children are declared by Christ to be members of
his Church.

That they were made members of God's Church in the family
of Abraham, and among the Jews, cannot be denied. They were
made so by circumcision, which was not that carnal and merely
political rite which many Baptist writers in contradiction to the
Scriptures make it, but was, as we have seen, the seal of a spiritual
covenant, comprehending engagements to bestow the remission of
sins and all its consequent blessings in this life, and, in another, the
heavenly Canaan. Among these blessings was that special rela-
tion, which consisted in becoming a visible and peculiar people of
God, his Church. This was contained in that engagement of the
covenant, " I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a
people ;" a promise, which, however connected with temporal
advantages, was, in its highest and most emphatic sense, wholly
spiritual. Circumcision was therefore a religious, and not a mere
political rite, because the covenant, of which it was the seal, was
in its most ample sense spiritual. If therefore we had no direct
authority from the words of Christ to declare the infant children of
believers competent to become the members of his Church, the two
circumstances, — that the Church of God, which has always been
one Church in all ages, and into which the Gentiles are now
introduced, formerly admitted infants to membership by circum-
cision,— and that the mode of initiation into it only has been changed,

(3) Edwards On Baptism.

3SS THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and not the subjects, (of which we have no intimation,) would
themselves prove that baptism admits into the Christian Church
both believing parents and their children, as circumcision admitted
both. The same Church remains ; for " the olive tree" is not
destroyed ; the natural branches only are broken off, and the Gen-
tiles graffed in, and " partake of the root and fatness of the olive
tree," that is, of all the spiritual blessings and privileges heretofore
enjoyed by the Jews, in consequence of their relation to God as
his Church. But among these spiritual privileges and blessings,
was the right of placing their children in covenant with God ; the
membership of the Jews comprehended both children and adults ;
and the grafting in of the Gentiles, so as to partake of the same
" root and fatness," will therefore include a right to put their
children also into the covenant, so that they as well as adults
may become members of Christ's Church, have God to be " their
God," and be acknowledged by him, in the special sense of the
terms of the covenant, to be his " people."

But we have our Lord's direct testimony to this point, and that
in two remarkable passages, Luke ix, 47, 48, " And Jesus took a
child and set him by him, and he said unto them, Whosoever shall
receive this child in my name, receiveth me ; and whosoever shall
receive me, receiveth him that sent me ; for he that is least among
you all, the same shall be great." We grant that this is an instance
of teaching by parabolic action. The intention of Christ was to
impress the necessity of humility and teachableness upon his
disciples, and to afford a promise, to those who should receive
them in his name, of that special grace which was implied in
receiving himself. But then, were there not a correspondence
of circumstances between the child taken by Jesus in his arms,
and the disciples compared to this child, there would be no force,
no propriety, in the action, and the same truth might have been
as forcibly stated without any action of this kind at all. Let then
these correspondences be remarked in order to estimate the amount
of their meaning. The humility and docility of the true disciple
corresponded with the same dispositions in a young child ; and
the " receiving a disciple in the name" of Christ corresponds with
the receiving of a child in the name of Christ, which can only mean
the receiving of each with kindness, on account of a religious rela-
tion between each and Christ, which religious relation can only
be well interpreted of a Church relation. This is further confirmed
by the next point of correspondence, the identity of Christ both
with the disciple and the child, "Whosoever shall receive this
child in my name receiveth me ;" but such an identity of Christ

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 389

with his disciples stands wholly upon their relation to him as mem-
bers of his mystical " body, the Church." It is in this respect only
that they are "one with him ;" and there can be no identity of
Christ with "little children" but by virtue of the same relation,
that is, as they are members of his mystical body, the Church ; of
which membership, baptism is now, as circumcision was then, the
initiatory rite. That was the relation in which the very child he
then took up in his arms stood to him by virtue of its circumcision ;
it was a member of his Old Testament Church ; but, as he is
speaking of the disciples as the future teachers of his perfected
covenant, and their reception in his name under that character,
he manifestly glances at the Church relationship of children to
him to be established by the baptism to be instituted in his perfect
dispensation.

This is, however, expressed still more explicitly in Mark x, 14,
" But when Jesus saw it he was much displeased, and said unto
them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them

not ; for of such is the kingdom of God : and he took them

up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them."
Here the children spoken of are " little children," of so tender an
age, that our Lord " took them up in his arms." The purpose for
which they were brought was not, as some of the Baptist writers
would suggest, that Christ should heal them of diseases ; for though
St. Mark says, " They brought young children to Christ that he
might touch them,," this is explained by St. Matthew, who says,
" that he should put his hands upon them, and pray ;" and even
in the statement of St. Mark, x, 16, it is not said that: our Lord
healed them, but " put his hands upon them, and blessed them ;"
which clearly enough shows that this was the purpose for which
they were brought by their parents to Christ. Nor is there any
evidence that it was the practice among the Jews, for common
unofficial persons to put their hands upon the heads of those for
whom they prayed. The parents here appear to have been among
those who believed Christ to be a Prophet, " that Prophet," or the
Messias ; and on that account earnestly desired his prayers for
their children, and his official blessing upon them. That official
blessing, — the blessing which he was authorized and empowered
to bestow by virtue of his Messiahship, — he was so ready, we
might say so anxious, to bestow upon them, that he was "much
displeased" with his disciples who "rebuked them that brought
them," and gave a command which was to be in force in all future
time, — " Suffer the little children to come unto me," in order to
receive my official blessing; "for of such is the kingdom of God."

41*

390 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

The first evasive criticism of the Baptist writers is, that the phrase
" of such," means of such-like, that is, of adults being of a child-
like disposition ; a criticism Avhich takes away all meaning from
the words of our Lord. For what kind of reason was it to offer
for permitting children to come to Christ to receive his blessing,
that persons not children, but who were of a child-like disposition,,
were the subjects of the kingdom of God 1 The absurdity of this
is its own refutation, since the reason for children being permitted
to come, must be found in themselves, and not in others. The
second attempt to evade the argument from this passage is, to under-
stand " the kingdom of God," or " the kingdom of heaven," as St.
Matthew has it, exclusively of the heavenly state. We gladly
admit, in opposition to the Calvinistic Baptists, that all children,
dying before actual sin committed, are admitted into heaven
through the merits of Christ ; but for this very reason it follows
that infants are proper subjects to be introduced into his Church
on earth. The phrases, " the kingdom of God," and " the king-
dom of heaven," are, however, more frequently used by our Lord
to denote the Church in this present world, than in its state of
glory ; and since all the children brought to Christ to receive his
blessing were not likely to die in their infancy, it could not be
affirmed, that " of such is the kingdom of heaven," if that be
understood to mean the state of future happiness exclusively. As
children, they might all be members of the Church on earth ; but
not all as children, members of the Church in heaven, seeing they
might live to become adult, and be cast away. Thus, therefore, if
children are expressly declared to be members of Christ's Church,
then are they the proper subjects of baptism, which is the initiatory
rite into every portion of that Church which is visible.
But let this case be more particularly considered.
Take it that by ** the kingdom of God," or " of heaven," our
Lord means the glorified state of his Church ; it must be granted
that none can enter into heaven who are not redeemed by Christ,
and who do not stand in a vital relation to him as members of his
mystical body, or otherwise we should place human and fallen
beings in that heavenly state who are unconnected with Christ
as their Redeemer, and uncleansed by him as the Sanctifier of
his redeemed. Now, this relation must exist on earth, before it
can exist in heaven ; or else we assign the work of sanctifying the
fallen nature of man to a future state, which is contrary to the
Scriptures. If infants, therefore, are thus redeemed and sanctified
in their nature, and are before death made " meet for the inherit-
ance of the saints in light ;" so that in this world they are nlaced

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 391

in the same relation to Christ as an adult believer, who derives
sanctifying influence from him, they are therefore the members of
his Church, — they partake the grace of the covenant, and are
comprehended in that promise of the covenant, " I will be to them
a God, and they shall be to me a people." In other words, they
are made members of Christ's Church, and are entitled to be recog-
nised as such by the administration of the visible sign of initiation
into some visible branch of it. If it be asked, " Of what import
then is baptism to children, if as infants they already stand in a
favourable relation to Christ ]" the answer is, that it is of the same
import as circumcision was to Abraham, which was " a seal of the
righteousness of the faith which he had yet being imcircumcised :"'
it confirmed all the promises of the covenant of grace to him, and
made the Church of God visible to men. It is of the same import
as baptism to the Eunuch, who had faith already, and a willing-
ness to submit to the rite before it was administered to him. He
stood at that moment in the condition, not of a candidate for intro-
duction into the Church, but of an accepted candidate ; he was
virtually a member, although not formally so, and his baptism was
not merely a sign of his faith, but a confirming sign of God's cove-
nant relation to him as a pardoned and accepted man, and gave
him a security for the continuance and increase of the grace of
the covenant, as he was prepared to receive it. In like manner, in
the case of all truly believing adults applying for baptism, their rela-
tion to Christ is not that of mere candidates for membership with
his Church, but that of accepted candidates, standing already in a
vital relation to him, but about to receive the seal which was to
confirm that grace, and its increase in the ordinance itself, and in
future time. Thus this previous relation of infants to Christ, as
accepted by him, is an argument for their baptism, not against it,
seeing it is by that they are visibly recognised as the formal mem-
bers of his Church, and have the full grace of the covenant con-
firmed and sealed to them, with increase of grace as they are fitted
to receive it, besides the advantage of visible connexion with the
Church, and of that obligation which is taken upon themselves by
their parents to train them up in the nurture and admonition of
the Lord.

In both views then, " of such is the kingdom of God," — members
of his Church on earth, and of his Church in heaven, if they die in
infancy, for the one is necessarily involved in the other. No one
can be of the kingdom of God in heaven, who does not stand in a
vital sanctifying relation to Christ as the head of his mystical body,
the Church, on earth ; and no one can be of the kingdom of God

392 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES, [PART

on earth, a member of his true Church, and die in that relation,
without entering that state of glory to which his adoption on earth;
makes him an heir, through Christ.

4. The argument from apostolic practice next offers itself. Tha>i
practice was to baptize the houses of them that believed.

The impugners of infant baptism are pleased to argue much from
the absence of all express mention of the baptism of infants in the
New Testament This however is easily accounted for, when it is
considered that if, as we have proved, baptism took the place of cir-
cumcision, the baptism of infants was so much a matter of course,
as to call for no remark. The argument from silence on this sur>-
ject is one which least of all the Baptists ought to dwell upon, since,,
as we have seen, if it had been intended to exclude children from
the privilege of being placed in covenant with God, which privilege
they unquestionably enjoyed under the Old Testament, this extra-
ordinary alteration, which could not but produce remark, required
to be particularly noted, both to account for it to the mind of an
affectionate Jewish parent, and to guard against that mistake into
which we shall just now show Christians from the earliest times
fell, since they administered baptism to infants. It may further be
observed, that, as to the Acts of the Apostles, the events narrated
there did not require the express mention of the baptism of infants,
as an act separate from the baptism of adults. That which called
for the administration of baptism at that period, as now, when the
Gospel is preached in a heathen land, was the believing of adult
persons, not the case of persons already believing, bringing their
children for baptism. On the supposition that baptism was admin-
istered to the children of the parents who thus believed, at the same
time as themselves, and in consequence of their believing, it may
be asked how the fact could be more naturally expressed, when it
was not intended to speak of infant baptism doctrinally or distinctly,
than that such a one was baptized, " and all his house ;" just as a
similar fact would be distinctly recorded by a modern Missionary
writing to a Church at home practising infant baptism, and having
no controversy on the subject in his eye, by saying that he baptized
such a Heathen, at such a place, with all his family. For, without
going into any criticism on the Greek term rendered house, it cannot
be denied that, like the old English word employed in our transla-
tion, and also like the word family, it must be understood to com-
prehend either the children only, to the exclusion of the domestics,
or both.

If we take the instances of the baptism of whole "houses," as
recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, they must be understood as

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 393

marking- the common mode of proceeding; among; the first preach-
ers of the Gospel when the head or heads of a family believed, or
as insulated and peculiar instances. If the former, which, from
what may be called the matter of course manner in which the cases
are mentioned, is most probable ; then innumerable instances must
have occurred of the baptizing of houses or families, just as many
in fact as there were of the conversion of heads of families in the
apostolic age. That the majority of these houses must have included
infant children is therefore certain, and it follows that the Apostles
practised infant baptism.

But let the cases of the baptism of houses mentioned in the New
Testament be put in the most favourable light for the purpose of
the Baptists ; that is, let them be considered as insulated and pecu-
liar, and not as instances of apostolic procedure in all cases where
the heads of families were converted to the faith, still the Baptist is
obliged to assume, that neither in the house of the Philippian jailer,
nor in that of Lydia, nor in that of Stephanas, were there any infants
at all, since, if there were, they were comprehended in the whole
houses which were baptized upon the believing of their respective
heads. This at least is improbable, and no intimation of this pecu-
liarity is given in the history.

The Baptist writers, however, think that they can prove that all
the persons included in these houses were adults ; and that the
means of showing this from the Scriptures is an instance of " the
care of Providence watching over the sacred cause of adult bap-
tism ;" thus absurdly assuming that even if this point could be made
out the whole controversy is terminated, when in fact this is but
an auxiliary argument of very inferior importance to those above-
mentioned. But let us examine their supposed proofs. "With
respect to the jailer," they tell us, that " we are expressly assured,
that the Apostles spoke the word of the Lord to all that were in
his house ;" which we grant must principally, although not of neces-
sity exclusively, refer to those who were of sufficient age to under-
stand their discourse. And " that he rejoiced, believing in God
with all his house ;" from which the inference is, that none but
adult hearers, and adult believers, were in this case baptized. If so,
then there could be no infant children in the house ; which, as the
jailer appears from his activity to have been a man in the vigour of
life, and not aged, is at least far from being certain. But if it be a
proof in this case that there were no infant children in the jailer's
family, that it is said, he believed and all his house ; this is not the
only believing family mentioned in Scripture from which infants
must be excluded. For, to say nothing of the houses of Lydia

394 THEOLO'GICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and Stephanas, the nobleman at Capernaum is said to have be-
lieved " and all his house" John iv, 53 ; so that we are to conclude
that there were no infant children in this house also, although his
sick son is not said to be his only offspring, and that son is called by
him a child, the diminutive term zsaidtov being used. Again, Corne-
lius is said, Acts x, 2, to be "one that feared God, and all his house."
Infant children therefore must be excluded from his family also;
and also from that of Crispus, who is said to have " believed on the
Lord with all his house ;" which house appears, from what imme-
diately follows, to have been baptized. These instances make it
much more probable that the phrases " fearing Cod with all his
house," and " believing with all his house," include young children
under the believing adults, whose religious profession they would
follow, and whose sentiments they would imbibe, so that they might
be called a Christian family, than that so many houses or families
should have been constituted only of adult persons, to the entire
exclusion of children of tender years. In the case of the jailer's
house, however, the Baptist argument manifestly halts ; for it is not
said, that they only to whom the word of the Lord was. spoken
were baptized ; nor that they only who "believed" and "i^jpiced"
with the iailer were baptized. The account of the baptism is given
in a separate verse, and in different phrase : " And he took them
the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes, and was bap-
tized, he, and all his" all belonging to him, " straightway ;" where
there is no limitation of the persons who were baptized to the adults
only by any terms which designate them as persons "hearing," or
" believing."

The next instance is that of Lydia. The words of the writer of
the Acts are, "Who when she was baptized, and her house." The
great difficulty of the Baptists is, to make a house for Lydia with-
out any children at all, young or old. This, however, cannot be
proved from the term itself, since the same word is that commonly
used in the Scripture to include children residing at home with
their parents : " One that ruleth well his own house, having his
children in subjection with all gravity." It is however conjectured,
first, that she had come a trading voyage, from Thyatira to Philippi,
to sell purple ; as if a woman of Thyatira might not be settled in
business at Philippi as a seller of this article. Then, as if to mark
more strikingly the hopelessness of the attempt to torture this pas-
sage to favour an opinion, " her house" is made to consist of jour-
neymen dyers, " employed in preparing the purple she sold ;"
which, however, is a notion at variance with the former ; for if she
was on a mere trading voyage, if she had brought her purple goods

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 395

from Thyatira to Philippi to sell, she most probably brought them
ready dyed, and would have no need of a dying establishment,
To complete the whole, these journeymen dyers, although not a
word is said of their conversion, nor even of their existence, in the
whole story, are raised into " the brethren," (a term which mani-
festly denotes the members of the Philippian Church,) whom Paul
and Silas are said to have seen and comforted in the house of
Lydia, before they departed !

All, however, that the history states is, that " the Lord opened
Lydia's heart, that she attended unto the things which were spoken-
of Paul," and that she was therefore " baptized and her house."
From this house no one has the least authority to exclude children,
even young children, since there is nothing in the history to war-
rant the above mentioned conjectures, and the word is in Scripture
used expressly to include them. All is perfectly gratuitous on the
part of the Baptists ; but, whilst there is nothing to sanction the
manner in which they deal with this text, there is a circumstance
strongly confirmatory of the probability that the house of Lydia,
according to the natural import of the word rendered house or
family,, contained children, and that in an infantile state. This is,
that in all the other instances in which adults are mentioned as
having been baptized along with the head of a family, they are
mentioned as " hearing," and " believing," or in some terms which
amount to this. Cornelius had called together " his kinsmen and
near friends ;" and while Peter spake, " the Holy Ghost fell on all
them which heard the ivord," " and he commanded them to be bap-
tized." So the adults in the house of the jailer at Philippi were
persons to whom " the word of the Lord" was spoken ; and
although nothing is said of the faith of any but the jailer himself, —
for the words are more properly rendered, " and he, believing in
God, rejoiced with all his house," — yet is the joy which appears to
have been felt by the adult part of his house, as well as by himself,
to be attributed to their faith. Now, as it does not appear that the
Apostles, although they baptized infant children, baptized unbe-
lieving adult servants because their masters or mistresses believed,
and yet the house of Lydia were baptized along with herself, when
no mention at all is made of the Lord " opening the heart" of these
adult domestics, nor of their believing, the fair inference is, that
" the house" of Lydia means her children only, and that being of
immature years they were baptized with their mother according to
the common custom of the Jews, to baptize the children of prose-
lyted Gentiles along with their parents, from which practice
Christian baptism appears to have been taken.

396 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [FART

The third instance is that of " the house of Stephanas," men-
tioned by St. Paul, 1 Cor. i, 16, as having been baptized by himself.
This family also, it is argued, must have been all adults, because
they are said in the same Epistle, chap, xvi, 15, to have "addicted
themselves to the ministry of the saints," and further, because they
were persons who took " a lead" in the affairs of the Church, the
Corinthians being exhorted to " submit themselves unto such, and
to every one that helpeth with us and laboureth." To understand
this passage rightly, it is however necessary to observe, that Stepha-
nas, the head of this family, had been sent by the Church of Corinth
to St. Paul at Ephesus, along with Fortunatus and Achaicus. In
the absence of the head of the family, the Apostle commends " the
house," the family, of Stephanas to the regard of the Corinthian
believers, and perhaps also the houses of the two other brethren
who had come with him ; for in several MSS. marked by Gries-
bach, and in some of the versions, the text reads, " Ye know the
house of Stephanas and Fortunatus," and one reads also, " and of
Achaicus." By the house or family of Stephanas, the Apostle
must mean his children, or, along with them, his near relations
dwelling together in the same family ; for, since they are com-
mended for their hospitality to the saints, servants, who have no
power to show hospitality, are of course excluded. But, in the
absence of the head of the family, it is very improbable that the
Apostle should exhort the Corinthian Church to " submit," eccle-
siastically, to the wife, sons, daughters, and near relations of Ste-
phanas, and, if the reading of Griesbach's MSS. be followed, to the
family of Fortunatus, and that of Achaicus also. In respect of
government, therefore, they cannot be supposed "to have had a
lead in the Church," according to the Baptist notion, and especially
as the heads of these families were absent. They were however
the oldest Christian families in Corinth, the house of Stephanas at
least being called " the first fruits of Achaia," and eminently dis-
tinguished for " addicting themselves," setting themselves on system,
to the work of ministering to the saints, that is, of communicating
to the poor saints ; entertaining stranger Christians, which was an
important branch of practical duty in the primitive Church, that in
every place those who professed Christ might be kept out of the
society of idolaters ; and receiving the ministers of Christ. On
these accounts the Apostle commends them to the special regard
of the Corinthian Church, and exhorts " tva xai t>;ji,s»s vifvraMytfds 70%
Toisrois, that you range yourselves under and co-operate with them,
and with every one," also, " who helpeth with us, and laboureth ;"
the military metaphor contained in s<r«fo:v in the preceding verse

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 397

being here carried forward. These families were the oldest
Christians in Corinth ; and as they were foremost in every good
word and work, they were not only to be commended, but the
rest were to be exhorted to serve under them as leaders in these
works of charity. This appears to be the obvious sense of this
otherwise obscure passage. But in this, or indeed in any other
sense which can be given to it, it proves no more than that there
were adult persons in the family of Stephanas, his wife, and sons,
and daughters, who were distinguished for their charity and hospi-
tality. . Still it is to be remembered, that the baptism of the oldest
of the children took place several years before. The house of
Stephanas " was the first fruits of Achaia," in which St. Paul began
to preach not later than A. D. 51, whilst this Epistle could not be
written earlier at least than A. D. 57, and might be later. Six or
eight years, taken from the age of the sons and daughters of Ste-
phanas, might bring the oldest to the state of early youth, and as to
the younger branches would descend to the term of infancy, pro-
perly so called. Still further, all that the Apostle affirms of the
benevolence and hospitality of the family of Stephanas is perfectly
consistent with a part of his children being still very young when
he wrote the Epistle. An -equal commendation for hospitality and
charity might be given in the present day, with perfect propriety,
to many pious families, several members of which are still in a state
of infancy. It was sufficient to warrant the use of such expressions
as those of the Apostle, that there were in these Corinthian families
a few adults, whose conduct gave a decided character to the whole
"house." Thus the argument used to prove that in these three
instances of family baptism, there were no young children, are
evidently very unsatisfactory; and they leave us to the conclusion,
which perhaps all would come to in reading the sacred history,
were they quite free from the bias of a theory, that " houses," or
" families," as in the commonly received import of the term, must
be understood to comprise children of all ages, unless some explicit
note of the contrary appears, which is not the case in any of the
instances in question.

5. The last argument may be drawn from the antiquity of the
practice of infant baptism.

If the baptism of the infant children of believers was not prac-
tised by the Apostles and by the primitive Churches, when and
where did the practice commence 1 To this question the Baptist
writers can give no answer. It is an innovation, according to
them, not upon the circumstances of a sacrament, but upon its
essential principle ; and yet its introduction produced no struggle ;

Vol. III. 42

398 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

was never noticed by any general or provincial council ; am I
excited no controversy ! This itself is strong presumptive proof
of its earhj antiquity. On the other hand, we can point out the
only ancient writer who opposed infant baptism. This was Ter-
tullian, who lived late in the second century ; but his very opposi-
tion to the practice proves, that that practice was more ancient
than himself; and the principles on which he impugns it, further
show that it was so. He regarded this sacrament superstitious]}" -
he appended to it the trine immersion in the name of each of the
persons of the Trinity ; he gives it gravely as a reason why infants
should not be baptized, that Christ says, " Suffer the little children
to come unto me," therefore they must stay till they are able to
come, that is, till they are grown up ; " and he would prohibit the
unmarried, and all in a widowed state, from baptism, because of"
the temptations to which they may be liable." The whole of this i.«
solved by adverting to that notion of the efficacy of this sacrameiu
in taking away all previous sins, which then began to prevail, so
that an inducement was held out for delaying baptism as long as
possible, till at length, in many cases, it was postponed to the
article of death, under the belief that the dying who received this
sacrament were the more secure of salvation. Tertullian, accord-
ingly, with all his zeal, allowed that infants ought to be baptized if
their lives be in danger, and thus evidently shows that his opposition
to the .baptism of infants in ordinary, rested upon a very different
principle from that of the modern. Anti-paedobaptists. Amidst all
his arguments against this practice, Tertullian, however, never
ventures upon one which would have been most to his purpose,
and which might most forcibly have been urged had not baptism
been administered to infants by the Apostles and their immediate
successors. That argument would have been the novelty of the
practice, which he never asserts, and which, as he lived so early,
he might have proved, had he had any ground for it. On the
contrary, Justin Martyr, and IrenEeus, in the second century, and
Origen in the beginning of the third, expressly mention infant bap-
tism as the practice of their times, and, by the latter, this is assigned
to apostolical injunction. Fidus, an African bishop, applied to
Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, to know, not whether infants were
to be baptized, but whether their baptism might take place before
the eighth day after their birth, that being the day on which circum-
cision was performed by the law of Moses. This question was
considered in an African synod, held A. D. 254, at which sixty-six
bishops were present, and " it was unanimously decreed, ' that it
was not necessary to defer baptism to that day; and that the grace

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. -399

of God, or baptism, should be given to all, and especially to infants.'"
This decision was communicated in a letter, from Cyprian to Fi-
dus.(4) We trace the practice also downwards. In the fourth
century, Ambrose says, that "infants who are baptized, are reformed
from wickedness to the primitive state of their nature ;"(5) and at
the end of that century, the famous controversy took place between
Augustine and Pelagius concerning original sin, in which the uni-
form practice of baptizing infants from the days of the Apostles was
admitted by both parties, although they assigned different reasons
tor it. So little indeed were Tertullian's absurdities regarded, that
he appears to have been quite forgotten by this time ; for Augustine
says he never heard of any Christian, catholic or sectary, who
taught any other doctrine than that infants are to be baptized. (6)
Infant baptism is not mentioned in the canons of any Council ; nor
is it insisted upon as an object of faith in any creed ; and thence
we infer that it was a point not controverted at any period of the
ancient Church, and we know that it was the practice in all esta-
blished Churches. Wall says, that Peter Bruis, a Frenchman, who
lived about the year 1030, whose followers were called Petrobrus-
sians, was the first Anti-predobaptist teacher who had a regular
congregation. (7) The Anabaptists of Germany took their rise in
the beginning of the fifteenth century ; but it does not appear that
there was any congregation of Anabaptists in England, till the year
1 640. (8) That a practice which can be traced up to the very first
periods of the Church, and has been, till within very modern times,
its uncontradicted practice, should have a lower authority than
Apostolic usage and appointment, may be pronounced impossible.
It is not like one of those trifling, though somewhat superstitious,
additions, which even in very early times began to be made to the
.sacraments ; on the contrary, it involves a principle so important
as to alter the very nature of the. sacrament itself. For if personal
faith be an essential requisite of baptism in all cases ; if baptism be
a visible declaration of this, and is vicious without it ; then infant
baptism was an innovation of so serious a nature, that it must have
attracted attention, and provoked controversy, which would have
led, if not to the suppression of the error, yet to a diversity of prac-
tice in the ancient Churches, which in point of fact did not exist,
Tertullian himself allowing infant baptism in extreme cases.

The benefits of this sacrament require to be briefly exhibited.
Baptism introduces the adult believer into the covenant of grace,

(4) Cyp. Ep. 59. (5) Comment, in Lucam, c. 10. (6) De Pecc. Men.

cap. 6. (7) Hist. Part 2, c. 7. (8) Bishop Tomline's Elements.

400 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and the Church of Christ ; and is the seal, the pledge, to him, on
the part of God, of the fulfilment of all its provisions, in time and
in eternity ; whilst, on his part, he takes upon himself the obliga-
tions of steadfast faith and obedience.

To the infant child, it is a visible reception into the same cove-
nant and Church, — a pledge of acceptance through Christ, — the
bestowment of a title to all the grace of the covenant as circum-
stances may require, and as the mind of the child may be capable,
or made capable, of receiving it ; and as it may be sought in future
life by prayer, when the period of reason and moral choice shall
arrive. It conveys also the present " blessing" of Christ, of which
we are assured by his taking children in his arms, and blessing
them ; which blessing cannot be merely nominal, but must be sub-
stantial and efficacious. It secures, too, the gift of the Holy Spirit
in those secret spiritual influences, by which the actual regeneration
of those children who die in infancy is effected ; and which are a
seed of life in those who are spared, to prepare them for instruction
in the word of God, as they are taught it by parental care, to incline
their will and affections to good, and to begin and maintain in them
the war against inward and outward evil, so that they may be
divinely assisted, as reason strengthens, to make their calling and
election sure. In a word, it is, both as to infants and to adults, the
sign and pledge of that inward grace, which, although modified in
its operations by the difference of their circumstances, has respect
to, and flows from, a covenant relation to each of the three persons
in whose one name they are baptized, — acceptance by the Father,
— union with Christ as the head of his mystical body, the Church,
— and "the communion of the Holy Ghost." To these advan-
tages must be added the respect which God bears to the believing
act of the parents, and to their solemn prayers on the occasion, in
both which the child is interested ; as well as in that solemn engage-
ment of the parents which the rite necessarily implies, to bring up
their child in the nurture and admonition of the Lord*

To the parents it is a benefit also. It assures them that God
will not only be their God ; but " the God of their seed after
them ;" it thus gives them, as the Israelites of old, the right to
covenant with God for their " little ones," and it is a consoling
pledge that their dying infant offspring shall be saved ; since he
who says, "Suffer little children to come unto me," has added,
" for of such is the kingdom of heaven." They are reminded by
it also of the necessity of acquainting themselves with God's cove-
nant, that they may diligently teach it to their children ; and that,
as they have covenanted with God for their children, they are

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 401

bound thereby to enforce the covenant conditions upon them as
they come to years, — by example, as well as by education ; by
prayer, as well as by profession of the name of Christ.
III. The mode of baptism remains to be considered. '
Although the manner in which the element of water is applied
in baptism is but a circumstance of this sacrament, it will not be a
matter of surprise to those who reflect upon the proneness of men
to attach undue importance to comparative trifles, that it has pro-
duced so much controversy. The question as to the proper subjects
of baptism is one which is to be respected for its importance ; that
as to the mode has occupied more time, and excited greater feeling,
than it is in any view entitled to. It cannot, however, be passed
over, because the advocates for immersion are often very trouble-
some to their fellow Christians, unsettle weak minds, and some-
times perhaps, from their zeal for a form, endanger their nwn
spirituality. Against the doctrine that the only legitimate mode of
baptizing is by immersion, we may first observe that there are
several strong presumptions.

1 . It is not probable, that if immersion were the only allowable
mode of baptism, it should not have been expressly enjoined.

2. It is not probable, that in a religion designed to be universal,
a mode of administering this ordinance should be obligatory, the
practice of which is ill adapted to so many climates, where it
would either be exceedingly harsh to immerse the candidates,
male and female, strong and feeble, in water ; or, in some places,
as in the higher latitudes, for a great part of the year, impossible.
Even if immersion were in fact the original mode of baptizing in
the name of Christ, these reasons make it improbable that no
accommodation of the form should take place, without vitiating
the ordinance. This some of the stricter Baptists assert, although
they themselves depart from the primitive mode of partaking of
the Lord's Supper, in accommodation to the customs of their
country.

3. It is still more unlikely, that in a religion of mercy there
should be no consideration of health and life in the administration
of an ordinance of salvation, since it is certain that in countries
where cold bathing is little practised, great risk of both is often
incurred, especially in the case of women and delicate persons of
either sex, and fatal effects do sometimes occur.

4. It is also exceedingly improbable, that in such circumstances
of climate, and the unfrequent use of the bath, a mode of bap-
tizing should have been appointed, which, from the shivering, the
"jobbing, and other bodily uneasiness produced, should distract the

42*

402 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

thoughts, and unfit the mind for a collected performance of a reli-
gious and solemn act of devotion.

5. It is highly improbable that the three thousand converts at
the Pentecost, who, let it be observed, were baptized on the same
clay, were all baptized by immersion ; or that the jailer and " all
his" were baptized in the same manner in the night, although the
Baptists have invented " a tank or bath in the prison at Philippi"
for that purpose.

Finally, it is most of all improbable, that a religion like the
Christian, so scrupulously delicate, should have enjoined the
immersion of women by men, and in the presence of men. In
an after age, when immersion came into fashion, baptisteries, and
rooms for women, and changes of garments, and other auxiliaries
to this practice, came into use, because they were found necessary
to derp.nc.y ; but there could be no such conveniences in the first
instance ; and accordingly we read of none. With all the arrange-
ments of modern times, baptism by immersion is not a decent
practice ; there is not a female, perhaps, who submits to it, who
has not a great previous struggle with her delicacy ; but that, at
a time when no such accommodations could be had as have since
been found necessary, such a ceremony should have been con-
stantly performing wherever the Apostles and first preachers
went, and that at pools and rivers, in the presence of many spec-
tators, and they sometimes unbelievers and scolfers, is a thing not
rationally credible.

We grant that the practice of immersion is ancient ; and so are
many other superstitious appendages to baptism, which were
adopted under the notion of making the rite more emblematical
and impressive. We not only trace immersion to the second
century, but immersion three times, anointing with oil, signing
with the sign of the cross, imposition of hands, exorcism, eating
milk and honey, putting on of white garments, all connected with
baptism, and first mentioned by Tertullian ; the invention of men
like himself, who with much genius and eloquence had little judg-
ment, and were superstitious to a degree worthy of the darkest
ages which followed. It was this authority for immersion which
led Wall, and other writers on the side of infant baptism, to sur-
render the point to the Anti-paedobaptists, and to conclude that
immersion was the Apostolic practice. Several national Churches
too, like our own, swayed by the same authority, are favourable to
immersion, although they do not think it binding, and generally
practise effusion or sprinkling.

Neither Tertullian nor Cyprian was, however, so strenuous for

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 403

immersion as to deny the validity of baptism by aspersion or effusion.
In cases of sickness or weakness they only sprinkled water upon
the face, which we suppose no modern Baptist would allow. Clinic
baptism too, or the baptism of the sick in bed, by aspersion, is
allowed by Cyprian to be valid ; so that " if the persons recover
they need not be baptized by immersion." (9) Gennadius of Mar-
seilles, in the fifth century, says, that baptism was administered in
the Gallic Church, in his time, indifferently by immersion or by
sprinkling. In the thirteenth century, Thomas Aquinas says,
" that baptism may be given, not only by immersion, but also by
effusion of water, or sprinkling with it." And Erasmus affirms,(l)
that in his time it was the custom to sprinkle infants in Holland
and to dip them in England. Of these two modes, one only was
primitive and Apostolic. Which that was we shall just now con-
sider. At present it is only necessary to observe, that immersion
is not the only mode which can plead antiquity in its favour ; and
that, as the superstition of antiquity appears to have gone most in
favour of baptism by immersion, this is a circumstance which
affords a strong presumption, that it was one of those additions to
the ancient rite which superstition originated. This may be made
out almost to a moral certainty, without referring at all to the
argument from Scripture. The " ancient Christians," the "primi-
tive Christians," as they are called by the advocates of immersion,
that is, Christians of about the age of Tertullian and Cyprian, and
a little downward, — whose practice of immersion is used as an
argument to prove that mode only to have had Apostolic sanction,
— baptized the candidates naked. Thus Wall in his History of
Baptism : " The ancient Christians, when they were baptized by
immersion, were all baptized naked, whether they were men, wo-
men, or children. They thought it better represented the putting
off of the old man, and also the nakedness of Christ on the cross ;
moreover, as baptism is a washing, they judged it should be the
washing of the body, not of the clothes." This is an instance of
the manner in which they affected to improve the emblematical
character of the ordinance. Robinson also, in his History of
Baptism, states the same thing : " Let it be observed, that the
primitive Christians baptized naked. There is no ancient histo-
rical fact better authenticated than this." " They, however," says
Wall, " took great care for preserving the modesty of any woman
who was to be baptized. None but women came near till her
body was in the water ; then the Priest came, and putting her

(O)Epist. 69. (l)Epist. 76.

404 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

head also under water, he departed, and left her to the women."
Now, if antiquity be pleaded as a proof that immersion was the
really primitive mode of baptizing, it must be pleaded in favour of
the gross and offensive circumstance of baptizing naked, which
was considered of as much importance as the other ; and then we
may safely leave it for any one to say whether he really believes
that the three thousand persons mentioned in the Acts of the
Apostles were baptized naked ? and whether, when St. Paul bap-
tized Lydia, she was put into the water naked by her women,
and that the Apostle then hastened " to put her head under water
also, using the form of baptism, and retired, leaving her to the
women" to take her away to dress 1 Immersion, with all its appen-
dages, dipping three times, nakedness, unction, the eating of milk
and honey, exorcism, &c, bears manifest marks of that disposition
to improve upon God's ordinances, for which even the close of the
second century was remarkable, and which laid the foundation of
that general corruption which so speedily followed.

But we proceed to the New Testament itself, and deny that
a single clear case of baptism by immersion can be produced
from it.

The word itself, as it has been often shown, proves nothing.
The verb, with its derivatives, signifies to dip the hand into a dish,
Matt, xxvi, 23 ; to stain a vesture with blood, Rev. xix, 13; to
wet the body with dew, Dan. iv, 33 ; to paint or smear the face
with colours ; to stain the hand by pressing a substance ; to be
overwhelmed in the waters as a sunken ship ; to be drowned by
falling into water ; to sink, in the neuter sense ; to immerse totally ;
to plunge up to the neck ; to be immersed up to the middle ; to
be drunken with wine ; to be dyed, tinged, and imbued ; to wash
by effusion of water ; to pour water upon the hands, or any other
part of the body ; to sprinkle. A word then of such large appli-
cation affords as good proof for sprinkling, or partial dipping, or
washing with water, as for immersion in it. The controversy on
this accommodating word has been carried on to weariness ; and
if even the advocates of immersion could prove, what they have
not been able to do, that plunging is the primary meaning of the
term, they would gain nothing, since, in Scripture, it is notoriously
used to express other applications of water. The Jews had " divers
baptisms" in their service ; but these washings of the body in or
with water, were not immersions, and in some instances they were
mere sprinklings. The Pharisees " baptized before they ate," but
this baptism was " the washing of hands," which in eastern coun-
tries is done by servants pouring water over them, and not by

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 405

dipping : — " Here is Elisha, the son of Shaphat, who poured water
on the hands of Elijah," 2 Kings iii, 1 1 ; that is, who acted as his
servant. In the same manner the feet were washed : " Thou
gavest me no water upon, s*i, my feet," Luke vii, 44. Again, the
Pharisees are said to have held the "washing" or baptism "of
cups and pots, brazen vessels, and of tables ;" not certainly for the
sake of cleanliness, (for all people hold the washing or baptism of
such utensils for this purpose,) but from superstitious notions of pu-
rification. Now, as " sprinkling" is prescribed in the law of Moses,
and was familiar to the Jews, as the mode of purification from
uncleanness, as in the case of the sprinkling of the water of sepa-
ration, Num. xix, 19, it is for this reason much more probable that
the baptism of these vessels was effected by sprinkling, than by
either pouring or immersion. But that they were not immersed,
at least not the whole of them, may be easily made to appear ;
and if "baptism" as to any of these utensils does not signify
immersion, the argument from the use of the word must be aban-
doned. Suppose then, the pots, cups, and brazen vessels, to have
been baptized by immersion ; the " beds" or couches used to
recline upon at their meals, which they ate in an accumbent
posture, couches which were constructed for three or five persons
each to lie down upon, must certainly have been exempted from
the operation of a " baptism" by dipping, which was probably
practised, like the " baptism" of their hands, before every meal.
The word is also used by the LXX, in Dan. iv, 33, where Nebu-
chadnezzar is said to have been wet with the dew of heaven,
which was plainly effected, not by his immersion in dew, but by
its descent upon him. Finally, it occurs in 1 Cor. x, 2, " And
were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea ;" where
also immersion is out of the case. The Israelites were not
immersed in the sea, for they went through it, " as on dry land ;"
and they were not immersed in the cloud, which was above them.
In this case, if the spray of the sea is referred to, or the descent of
rain from the cloud, they were baptized by sprinkling, or at .most
by pouring ; and that there is an allusion to the latter circum-
stance, is made almost certain by a passage in the song of Deborah,
and other expressions in the Psalms, which speak of " rain," and
the " pouring out of water," and " droppings" from the " cloud"
which directed the march of the Jews in the wilderness. What-
ever, therefore, the primary meaning of the verb " to baptize" may
be, is a question of no importance on one side or the other. Leav-
ing the mode of administering baptism, as a religious rite, out of
the question, it is used generally, at least in the New Testament,

406 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

not to express immersion in water, but for the act of pouring or
sprinkling it ; and that baptism, when spoken of as a religious rite,
is to be understood as administered by immersion, no satisfactory
instance can be adduced.

The baptism of John is the first instance usually adduced in
proof of this practice : — The multitudes who went out to him were
"baptized of him in Jordan;" they were therefore immersed.

To say nothing here of the laborious, and apparently impossible,
task imposed upon John, of plunging the multitudes, who flocked
to him day by day, into the river ; and the indecency of the whole
proceeding when women were also concerned ; it is plain that the
principal object of the Evangelist, in making this statement, was
to point out the place where John exercised his ministry and bap-
tized, and not to describe the mode ; if the latter is at all referred
to, it must be acknowledged that this was incidental to the other
design. Now it so happens, that we have a passage which relates
to John's baptism, and which can only be fairly interpreted by
referring to his mode of baptizing, as the first consideration ;
a passage, too, which John himself uttered at the very time he was
baptizing " in Jordan." " I indeed baptize you with water unto
repentance ; but he that eometh after me is mightier than I : he
shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Our trans-
lators, in this passage, aware of the absurdity of translating the
preposition ev, in, have properly rendered it with; but the advo-
cates of immersion do not stumble at trifles, and boldly rush into
the absurdity of Campbell's translation, " I indeed baptize you in
water, he will baptize you in the Holy Ghost and fire." Unfor-
tunately for this translation, we have not only the- utter senseless-
ness of the phrases baptized, plunged in the Holy Ghost, and plunged
in fire, to set against it ; but also the very history of the completion
of this prophetic declaration, and that not only as to the fact that
Christ did indeed baptize his disciples with the Holy Ghost and
with fire, but also as to the mode in which this baptism was effect-
ed : " And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire,
and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with the
Holy Ghost." Thus the baptism of the Holy Ghost and of fire
was a descent upon, and not an immersion into. With this too
agree all the accounts of the baptism of the Holy Spirit : they are
all from above, like the pouring out or shedding of Avater upon the
head ; nor is there any expression in Scripture which bears the
most remote resemblance to immersing, plunging in the Holy
Ghost. When our Lord received the baptism of the Holy Ghost,
"tbe Spirit of God descended like a clove, and lighted upon

KOURTH.] -theological institutes. 407

him." When Cornelius and his family received the same gift,
" the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word ;" " and
they of the circumcision that believed were astonished, because
that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy
Ghost," which, as the words imply, had been in like manner
"poured out on them." The common phrase, to "receive" the
Holy Ghost, is also inconsistent with the idea of being immersed?
plunged into the Holy Ghost ; and finally, when St. Paul connects
the baptism with water, and the baptism with the Holy Ghost
together, as in the words of John the Baptist just quoted, he
expresses the mode of the baptism of the Spirit in the same man-
ner : " According to his mercy he saved us by the washing of
regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost ; which he shed
on us abundantly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour," Titus iii,
5, 6. That the mode therefore in which John baptized was by
pouring water upon his disciples, may be concluded from his using"
the same word to express the pouring out, the descent, of the Spirit
upon the disciples of Jesus. For if baptism necessarily means
immersion, and John baptized by immersion, then did not Jesus
baptize his disciples with the Holy Ghost. He might bestow it
upon them, but he did not baptize them with it, according to the
Immersionists, since he only "poured it upon them," " shed it upon
them," caused it " to fall upon them ;" none of which, according
to them, is baptism. It follows, therefore, that the prediction of
John was never fulfilled, because, in their sense of baptizing, none
of the disciples of Jesus mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles ever
received the Holy Ghost but by effusion. This is the dilemma into
which they put themselves. They must allow that baptism is not
in this passage used for immersion ; or they must deny that Jesus
ever did baptize with the Holy Ghost.

To baptize "in Jordan," does not then signify to plunge in the
river of Jordan. John made the neighbourhood of Jordan the
principal place of his ministry. Either at the fountains of some
favoured district, or at some river, baptize he must because of the
multitudes who came to his baptism, in a country deficient in
springs, and of water in general ; but there are several ways of
understanding the phrase "in Jordan," which give a sufficiently
good sense, and involve no contradiction to the words of John
himself, who makes his baptism an effusion of water, to answer to
the effusion of the Holy Spirit, as administered by Jesus. It may
be taken as a note of place, not of mode. " In Jordan," therefore,
the expression of St. Matthew is, in St. John, " in Bethabara,
beyond," or situate on, " Jordan, where John was baptizing ;" and

408 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

this seems all that the expression was intended to mark, and is
the sense to be preferred. It is thus equivalent to " at Jordan,"
"at Bethabara, situate on Jordan;" at being a frequent sense
of sv. Or it may signify that the water of Jordan was made use of
by John for baptizing, however it might be applied ; for we should
think it no violent mode of expression to say that we washed our-
selves in a river, although we should mean, not that Ave plunged
ourselves into it, but merely that we took up the water in our
hands, and applied it in the way of effusion. Or it may be taken to
express his baptizing in the bed of the river, into which he must
have descended with the baptized, in order to take up the water
with his hand, or with some small vessel, as represented in ancient
has reliefs, to pour it out upon them. This would be the position
of any baptizer using a river at all accessible by a shelving bank ;
and when within the bed of the stream, he might as truly be said
to be in the river, when mere place was the principal thing to be
pointed out, as if he had been immersed in the water. The Jordan
in this respect is rather remarkable, having, according to Maun-
drell, an outermost bank formed by its occasional "swellings."
The remark of this traveller is, " After having descended the out-
ermost bank, you go a furlong upon a level strand, before you
come to the immediate bank of the river." Any of these views of
the import of the phrases " in Jordan," " in the river of Jordan,"
used plainly with intention to point out the place where John
exercised his ministry, will sufficiently explain them, without
involving us in the inextricable difficulties which embarrass the
theory, that John baptized only by immersion. To go indeed to
a river to baptize, would in such countries as our own, where
water for the mere purpose of effusion may readily be obtained
out of cisterns, pumps, &c, very naturally suggests to the simple
reader, that the reason for John's choice of a river was, that it
afforded the means of immersion. But in those countries the case
was different. Springs, as we have said, were scarce, and the
water for domestic purposes had to be fetched daily by the women
in pitchers from the nearest rivers and fountains, which rendered
the domestic supply scanty, and of course valuable. But even if
this reason did not exist, baptism in rivers would not, as a matter
of course, imply immersion. Of this we have an instance in the
customs of the people of Mesopotamia, mentioned in the Journal
of Wolfe, the Missionary. This sect of Christians call themselves
" the followers of St. John the Baptist, who was a follower of
Christ." Among many other questions, Mr. Wolfe inquired of
one of them respecting their mode of baptism, and was answered,

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 409

" The Priests or Bishop baptize children thirty clays old. They
take the child to the banks of the river ; a relative or friend holds
the child near the surface of the water, while the Priest sprinkles
the element upon the child, and with prayers they name the
child."(2) Mr. Wolfe asks, "Why do they baptize in rivers'?"
Answer : " Because St. John the Baptist baptized in the river
Jordan." The same account was given afterwards by one of their
Bishops or High Priests : " They carry the children after thirty
days to the river, the Priest says a prayer, the godfather takes
the child to the river, while the Priest sprinkles it with water."
Thus we have in modern times river baptism without immersion ;
and among the Syrian Christians, though immersion is used, it
does not take place till after the true baptismal rite, pouring water
upon the child in the name of the Trinity, has been performed.

The second proof adduced by the Immersionists is taken from
the baptism of our Lord, who is said, Matt, iii, 16, "to have gone
up straightway out of the water." Here, however, the preposition
used signifies from, and avs/37] ato r* vdaros, is simply " he went up
from the water." We grant that this might have been properly said
in whatever way the baptism had been previously performed ; but
then it certainly in itself affords no argument on which to build the
notion of the immersion of our Saviour.

The great passage of the Immersionists, however, is Acts viii,
38, 39 : " And they went down both into the water, both Philip
ind the Eunuch, and he baptized him ; and when they were come
up out of the water," &c. This is relied upon as a decisive proof
of the immersion and emersion of the Eunuch. If so, however, it
proves too much ; for nothing is said of the Eunuch which is not
said of Philip, " They went down both into the water," — "and
when they were come up out of the water ;" — and so Philip must
have immersed himself as well as the Eunuch. Nor will the pre-
positions determine the case ; they would have been employed
properly had Philip and the Eunuch gone into the water by partial
or by entire immersion, and therefore come out of it on dry land ;
and with equal propriety, and according to the habitual use of the
same prepositions by Greek writers, they would express going to
the water, without going into it, and returning from it, and not out
of it, for sis is spoken of place, and properly signifies at, or it indi-
cates motion towards a certain limit, and, for any thing that appears
to the contrary in the history of the Eunuch's baptism, that limit
may just as well be placed at the nearest verge of the water as in

(2) Journal, vol. ii, p. 311.

Vol. III. 43

410 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the middle of it. Thus the LXX say, Isa. xxvi, 2, " The King sent
Rabshakeh from Lachish, as, to Jerusalem," certainly not into it,
for the city was not captured. The sons of the Prophets " came,
W, to Jordan to cut wood," 2 Kings vi, 4. They did not, we sup-
pose, go into the water to perform that work. Peter was bid to
" go, z>s, to the sea, and cast a hook," not surely to go into the sea ;
and our Lord, Matt, v, 1, rtwent up, s«s, to a mountain," but not
into it. The corresponding preposition *x, which signifies, when
used of place, from, out of, must be measured by the meaning of s»s«
When sis means into, then s* means out of; but when it means
simply to, then sx can express no more than from. Thus this
passage is nothing to the purpose of the Immersionists.

The next proof relied upon in favour of immersion, is John
iii, 22, 23 : " After these things came Jesus and his disciples into
the land of Judea, and there he tamed with them and baptized ;
and John also was baptizing in iEnon, near to Salim, because
there was much water there, and they came and were baptized."
The Immersionists can see no reason for either Jesus or John
baptizing where there was much water, but that they plunged their
converts. The true reason for this has however been already
given. Where could the multitudes who came for baptism be
assembled] Clearly, not in houses. The preaching was in the
fields ; and since the rite which was to follow a ministry which
made such an impression, and drew together such crowds, was
baptism, the necessity of the case must lead the Baptist to Jordan,
or to some other district, where, if a river was wanting, fountains
at least existed. The necessity was equal in this case, whether
the mode of baptism were that of aspersion, of pouring, or of
immersion.

The Baptists, however, have magnified iEnon, which signifies
ike fountain of On, into a place of " many and great waters."
Unfortunately, however, no such powerful fountain, sending out
many streams of water fit for plunging multitudes into, has ever
been found by travellers, although the country has been often
visited ; and certainly if its streams had been of the copious and
remarkable character assigned to them, they could not have
vanished. It rather appears, however, that the " much water,"
or "many waters," in the text, refers rather to the whole tract
of country, than to the fountain of On itself; because it appears
to be given by the Evangelist as the reason why Jesus and his
disciples came into the same neighbourhood to baptize. Different
baptisms were administered, and therefore in different places. The
baptism administered by Jesus at this time was one of multitudes ;

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 411

this appears from the remark of one of John's disciples to his
Master, " He that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou
barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to
him." The place or places too, where Jesus baptized, although in
the same district, could not be very near, since John's disciple
mentions the multitudes who came to be baptized by Jesus, or
rather by his disciples, as a piece of information ; and thus we
rind a reason for the mention of the much water, or many waters,,
with reference to the district of country itself, and not to the single
fountain of On. The tract had probably many fountains in it,
which, as being a peculiarity in a country not generally so distin-
guished, would lead to the use of the expression, " much water,"
although not one of these fountains or wells might be sufficient to
allow of the plunging of numbers of people, and probably was not.
Indeed if the disciples of Jesus baptized by immersion, the Immer-
sionists are much more concerned to discover " much water,"
"many waters," "large and deep streams," somewhere else in the
district than at iEnon ; because it is plain from the narrative, that
the number of candidates for John's baptism had greatly fallen off
at that time, and that the people now generally flocked to Christ.
Hence the remark of John, verse 30, when his disciples had
informed him that Jesus was baptizing in the neighbourhood, and
that " all men came to him, — " He must increase, I must decrease."
Hence also the observation of the Evangelist in the first verse of
the next chapter, " The Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and.
baptized more disciples than John."

As these instances all so plainly fail to serve the cause of immer-
sion, we need not dwell upon the others. The improbability of
three thousand persons being immersed on the day of Pentecost,
has been already mentioned. The baptism of Saul, of Lydia, of
the Philippian jailer, and of the family of Cornelius, are all instances
of house baptism, and, for that reason, are still less likely to have
been by plunging. The Immersionists, indeed, invent " tanks," or
" baths," for this purpose, in all these houses ; but, as nothing of
the kind appears on the face of the history, or is even incidentally
suggested, suppositions prove nothing.

Thus all the presumptions before mentioned, against the prac-
tice of immersion, lie full against it, without any relief from the
Scriptures themselves. Not one instance can be shown of that
practice from the New Testament ; whilst, so far as baptism was
emblematical of the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, the doctrine
of immersion wholly destroys its significance*. In fact, if the true
mode of baptism be immersion only, then must we wholly give up

412 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

the phrase, the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which in any other mode
than that of pouring out was never administered.

The only argument left for the advocates of immersion is the
supposed allusion to the mode of baptism contained in the words
of St. Paul, Rom. vi, 3, 4 : " Know ye not that so many of us as
were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death ?
Therefore we are buried with him by baptism, into death ; that, like
as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father,
even so we also should walk in newness of life." It is necessary,
however, to quote the next verses also, which are dependent upon
the foregoing, "For if we have been planted together," still by
baptism, "in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the like-
ness of his resurrection ; knowing this, that our old man is cru-
cified with him, that the body of sin .might be destroyed, that
henceforth we should not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed
from sin," v, 5-7. Why then do not the advocates of immersion
go forward to these verses, so inseparably connected with those
they are so ready to quote, and show us a resemblance, not only
between baptism by immersion, and being buried with Christ ; but
also between immersion, and being " planted with Christ 1" If the
allusion of the Apostle is to the planting of a young tree in the.
earth, there is clearly but a very partial, not a total immersion in
the case ; and if it be to grafting a branch upon a tree, the
resemblance is still more imperfect. Still further, as the Apostle
in the same connexion speaks of our being "crucified with
Christ," and that also by baptism, why do they not show us how
immersion in water resembles the nailing of a body to a cross ?

But this striking and important text is not to be explained by a
fancied resemblance between a burial, as they choose to call it, of
the body in water, and the burial of Christ ; as if a dip or a plunge
could have any resemblance to that separation from the living, and
that laying aside of a body in the sepulchre, which burial implies.
This forced thought darkens and enervates the whole passage,
instead of bringing forth its powerful sentiments into clearer view.
The manifest object of the Apostle in the whole of this part of his
Epistle, was to show, that the doctrine of justification by faith
aione, which he had just been establishing, could not in any true
believer lead to licentiousness of life. " What then shall we say 1
Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound 1 God forbid \
How shall we that are dead to sin, live any longer therein ?" The
reason then which is given by the Apostle why true believers can-
not continue in sin, is, that they are " dead to sin," which is his
answer to the objection. Now, this mystical death to sin he pro*

FOURTH. J THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 413

ceeds to attribute to the instrumentality of baptism, taking it
to be an act of that faith in Christ of which it was the external
expression ; and then he immediately runs into a favourite com-
parison, which under various forms occurs in his writings, some-
times accompanied with the same allusion to baptism, and sometimes
referring only to " faith" as the instrument, — a comparison between
the mystical death, burial, and resurrection of believers, and the
death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. This is the comparison
of the text ; not a comparison between our mystical death, and
baptism ; nor between baptism, and the death and burial of Christ ;
either of which lay wide of the Apostle's intention. Baptism, as an
act of faith, is, in fact, expressly made, not a figure of the effects
which follow, as stated in the text, but the means of effecting them.
" Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
Christ, were baptized into his death ;" we enter by this means into
the experience of its efficacy in effecting a mystical death in us ;
in other words, we die with him, or, as it is expressed in verse 6,
" Our old man is crucified with him." Still further, " by baptism,"
Ski ts (3a.irri(fiiuros, through, or by means of, baptism, "we are buried
with him ;" we not only die to sin and the world, but we are sepa-
rated wholly from it, as the body of Christ was separated from the
living world, when laid in the sepulchre ; the connexion between
sin and the world and us is completely broken ; and those who are
buried and put out of sight are no longer reckoned among men ;
nay, as the slave (for the Apostle brings in this figure also) is by
death and burial wholly put out of the power of his former master,
so, " that we should not serve sin ; for he that is dead is freed from
sin." But we also mystically rise with him ; "that like as Christ
was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we
also should walk in newness of life," having new connexions,
new habits, new enjoyments, and new hopes. We have a similar
passage in Col. ii, 12, and it has a similar interpretation : "Buried
with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him, through
the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the
dead." In the preceding verse the Apostle had been speaking of
the mystical death of Christians, under the phrase, "putting off
the body of the sins of the flesh ;" then, as in his Epistle to the
Romans, he adds our mystical burial with Christ, which is a
heightened representation of death ; and then also, our rising
again with Christ. Here too all these three effects are attributed
to baptism as the means. We put off the body of sins " by the
circumcision of Christ," that is, as we have seen, by Christian
circumcision or baptism ; we are buried with him bv baptism ;

43*

414 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

jv being obviously used here, like 6ut, to denote the instrument ;
and by baptism we rise with him into a new life.

Now, to institute a comparison between a mode of baptism and
the burial of Christ, wholly destroys the meaning of the passage ;
for how can the Apostle speak of baptism as an emblem of Christ's
burial, when he argues from it as the instrument of our death unto
sin, and separation from it by a mystical burial ? Nor is baptism
here made use of as the emblem of our own spiritual death, burial,
and resurrection. As an emblem, even immersion, though it
might put forth a clumsy type of burial and rising again, is want-
ing in not being emblematical of death ; and yet all three, our
mystical death, burial, and rising again, are distinctly spoken of,
and must all be found represented in some type. But the type
made use of by the Apostle is manifestly not baptism, but the
death, the burial, and the resurrection of our Lord ; and in this
view he pursues this bold and impressive figure to even the verge
of allegory, in the succeeding verses : " For he that is dead is
freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that
we shall also live with him : Knowing that Christ being raised
from the dead dieth no more ; death hath no more dominion over
him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once ; but in that he
liveth, he liveth unto God ; likewise reckon ye also yourselves
to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus
Christ our Lord."

In the absence therefore of all proof, that, in any instance found
in the New Testament, baptism was administered by immersion ;
with so many presumptions against that indecent practice as have
been stated ; with the decisive evidence also of a designed corres-
pondence between the baptism, the- pouring out, of the Holy Spirit,
and the baptism, the pouring out, of water ; we may conclude,
with confidence, that the latter was the Apostolic mode of admi-
nistering that ordinance ; and that first washing, and then immer-
sion, were introduced later, towards the latter end of the second
century, along with several other superstitious additions to this
important sacrament, originating in that " will-worship" which,
presumed to destroy the simplicity of God's ordinances, under
pretence of (3) rendering them more emblematical and impressive.

(3) Baptism, as an emblem, points out, 1. The washing away of the guilt and pol-
lution of sin. 2. The pouring out of the Holy Spirit. In Scripture it is made an
emblem of these two, and of these only. Some of the superstitions above alluded to
sin therefore by excess; but immersion sins by defect. It retains the emblematical
character of the rite as to the washing away of sin ; but it loses it entirely as to the
&ft °f the Holy Ghost; and, beyond the washing away of sin, is an emblem ci

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 415

Even if immersion had been the original mode of baptizing-, we
should, in the absence of any command on the subject, direct or
implied, have thought the Church at liberty to accommodate the
manner of applying water to the body in the name of the Trinity,
in which the essence of the rite consists, to different climates and
manners ; but it is satisfactory to discover that all the attempts
made to impose upon Christians a practice repulsive to the feel-
ings, dangerous to the health, and offensive to delicacy, is destitute
of all scriptural authority, and of really primitive practice.

CHAPTER IV.

The Institutions of the Church. — The Lord's Supper.

The agreement and difference between baptism and the Lord's
►Supper are well stated by the Church of Scotland in its Cate-
chism : " The sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper
agree, in that the author of both is God ; the spiritual part of
both is Christ and his benefits ; both are seals of the same cove-
nant ; to be dispensed by Ministers of the Gospel, and none
other ; and to be continued in the Church of Christ until his
second coming." " These sacraments differ, in that baptism is to
be administered but once with water, — and that even to infants ;
whereas the Lord's Supper is to be administered often, in the
elements of bread and wine, to represent and exhibit Christ as
spiritual nourishment to the soul, and to confirm our continuance
and growth in him, and that only to such as are of years and
ability to examine themselves."

As baptism was substituted for circumcision, so the Lord's Sup-
per was put by our Saviour in the place of the Passover ; and
was instituted immediately after celebrating that ordinance for the
last time with his disciples. The Passover was an eminent type
of our Lord's sacrifice and of its benefits ; and since he was about
to fulfil that symbolical rite which from age to age had continued
to exhibit it to the faith and hope of ancient saints, it could have

nothing fur which we have any scriptural authority to make it emblematical.
Immersion, therefore, as distinct from every other mode of applying water to the
body, means nothing. To say that it figures our spiritual death and resurrection,
has, we have seen, no authority from the texts used to prove it ; and to make a sud-
den pop under water to be emblematical of burial, is as far-fetched a conceit as any
which adorns the Emblems of Quarks, without any portion of the ingenuity.

416 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

no place under the new dispensation. Christ in person became
the true Passover ; and a new rite was necessary to commemorate
the spiritual deliverance of men, and to convey and confirm its-
benefits. The circumstances of its institution are explanatory of
its nature and design.

On the night when the first-born of Egypt were slain, the
children of Israel were commanded to take a lamb for every
house, to kill it, and to sprinkle the blood upon the posts of their
doors, so that the destroying angel might pass over the houses of
all who had attended to this injunction. Not only were the first-
born children thus preserved alive, but the effect was the deliver-
ance of the whole nation from their bondage in Egypt, and their
becoming the visible Church and people of God by virtue of a
special covenant. In commemoration of these events, the feast of
the Passover was made annual, and at that time all the males of
Judea assembled before the Lord in Jerusalem ; a lamb was pro-
vided for every house ; the blood was poured under the altar by
the Priests, and the lamb was eaten by the people in their tents
or houses. At this domestic and religious feast, every master of a
family took the cup of thanksgiving, and gave thanks with his
family to the God of Israel. As soon, therefore, as our Lord,
acting as the master of his family, the disciples, had finished this
the usual paschal ceremony, he proceeded to a new and distinct
action : " He took bread," the bread then on the table, " and
gave thanks, and brake it, and gave it to them, saying, This is
my body which is given for you ; this do in remembrance of me.
Likewise also the cup after supper," the cup with the wine which
had been used in the paschal supper, "saying, This cup is the
New Testament in my blood, which is shed for you ;" or, as it is
expressed by St. Matthew, " and he took the cup, and gave
thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it ; for this is
my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the
remission of sins."

That this was the institution of a standing rite, and not a tempo-
rary action to be confined to the disciples then present with him,
is made certain from 1 Cor. xi, 23-26 : " For I have received of
the Lord that which also I delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus,
the same night in which he was betrayed, took bread, and when
he had given thanks he brake it, and said, Take, eat, this is my
body, which is broken for you ; this do in remembrance of me.
After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped,
saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood ; this do ye,
as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 417

eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death
till he come." From these words we learn, 1. That St. Paul
received a special revelation as to this ordinance, which must
have had a higher object than the mere commemoration of an
historical fact, and must be supposed to have been made for the
purpose of enjoining it upon him to establish this rite in the
Churches raised up by him, and of enabling him rightly to under-
stand its authority and purport, where he found it already appointed
by the first founders of the first Churches. 2. That the command
of Christ, " This do in remembrance of me," which was originally
given to the disciples present with Christ at the last Passover, is
laid by St. Paul upon the Corinthians. 3. That he regarded the
Lord's Supper as a rite to be " often" celebrated, and that in all
future time until the Lord himself should ° come" to judge the
world. The perpetual obligation of this ordinance cannot there-
fore be reasonably disputed.

Of the nature of this great and affecting rite of Christianity,
different and very opposite opinions have been formed, arising
partly from the elliptical and figurative modes of expression
adopted by Christ at its institution ; but more especially from
the influence of superstition upon some, and the extreme of
affected rationalism upon others.

The first is the monstrous theory of the Church of Rome, as
contradictory to the Holy Scriptures, whose words it professes to
receive in their literal meaning, as it is revolting to the senses and
reason of mankind.

" It is conceived that the words, ' This is my body ; This is my
blood,' are to be understood in their most literal sense ; that when
Jesus pronounced these words, he changed, by his almighty power,
the bread upon the table into his body, and the wine into his
blood, and really delivered his body and blood into the hands of
his Apostles ; and that at all times when the Lord's Supper is
administered, the Priest, by pronouncing these words with a good
intention, has the power of making a similar change. This change
is known by the name of transubstantiation ; the propriety of which
name is conceived to consist in this, that although the bread and
wine are not changed in figure, taste, weight, or any other acci-
dent, it is believed that the substance of them is completely
destroyed ; that in place of it, the substance of the body and
blood of Christ, although clothed with all the sensible properties
of bread and wine, is truly present ; and that the persons who
receive what has been consecrated by pronouncing these words,
do not receive bread and wine, but literally partake of the body

418 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

and blood of Christ, and really eat his flesh, and drink his blood.
It is further conceived, that the bread and wine thus changed, are
presented by the Priest to God; and he receives the name of
Priest, because in laying them upon the altar he offers to God a
sacrifice, which, although it be distinguished from all others by
being without the shedding of blood, is a true propitiatory sacrifice
for the sins of the dead and of the living, — the body and blood of
Christ, which were presented on the cross, again presented in the
sacrifice of the mass. It is conceived, that the materials of this
sacrifice, being truly the body and blood of Christ, possess an
intrinsic virtue, which does not depend upon the disposition of him
who receives them, but operates immediately upon all who do not
obstruct the operation by a mortal sin. Hence it is accounted of
great importance for the salvation of the sick and dying, that parts
of these materials should be sent to them ; and it is understood
that the practice of partaking in private of a small portion of what
the Priest has thus transubstantiated, is, in all respects, as proper
and salutary as joining with others in the Lord's Supper. It is fur-
ther conceived, that as the bread and wine, when converted into the
[body and] blood of Christ, are a natural object of reverence and
adoration to Christians, it is highly proper to worship them upon
the altar \ and that it is expedient to carry them about in solemn
procession, that they may receive the homage of all who meet
them. What had been transubstantiated was therefore lifted up
for the purpose of receiving adoration, both when it was shown to
the people at the altar, and when it was carried about. Hence
arose that expression in the Church of Rome, the elevation of the
host, elevatio hostice. But, as the wine in being carried about was
exposed to accidents inconsistent with the veneration due to the
body and blood of Christ, it became customary to send only the
bread ; and, in order to satisfy those who for this reason did not
receive the wine, they were taught that, as the bread was changed
into the body of Christ, they partook by concomitancy of the ,
blood with the body. In process of time, the people were not
allowed to partake of the cup ; and it was said, that, when Jesus
spake these words, ' Drink ye all of it,' he was addressing himself
only to his Apostles, so that his command was fulfilled when the
Priests, the successors of the Apostles, drank of the cup, although
the people were excluded. And thus the last part of this system
conspired with the first in exalting the Clergy very far above the
laity. For the same persons who had the power of changing bread
and wine into the body and blood of Christ, and who presented
what they had thus made, as a sacrifice for the sins of others.

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 419

enjoyed the partaking of the cup, while communion in one kind
only was permitted to the people." (4)

So violently are these notions opposed to the common sense of
mankind, that the ground to which the Romish writers have
always been driven in their defence, is the authority of their
Church, and the necessity of implicit faith in its interpretations
of Scripture ; principles which shut out the use of Scripture
entirely, and open the door to every heresy and fanatical folly.
But for the ignorance and superstition of Europe during the
middle ages, this monstrous perversion of a sacred rite could
not have been effected, and even then it was not established as
an article of faith without many struggles. Almost all writers
on the Protestant controversy will furnish a sufficient confutation
of this capital attempt to impose upon the credulity of mankind ;
and to them, should it need any refutation, the reader may be
referred.

The mind of Luther, so powerful to throw off dogmas which had
nothing but human authority to support them, was, as to the sacra-
ment, held in the bonds of early association. He concluded that
the body and blood of Christ are really present in the Lord's Supper ;
but, aware of the absurdities and self-contradictions of transubstan-
tiation, he laid hold of a doctrine which some writers, in the Romish
Church itself, had continued to prefer to the papal dogma above
stated. This was designated by the term consubstantiation, which
allows that the bread and wine remain the same after consecration
as before. Thus he escapes the absurdity of contradicting the very
senses of men. It was held, however, by Luther, that though the
bread and wine remain unchanged, yet that, together with them, the
body and blood of Christ are literally received by the communicants.
Some of his immediate followers did not, however, admit more on
this point, than that the body and blood of Christ were really pre-
sent in the sacrament ; but that the manner of that presence was
an inexplicable mystery. Yet, in some important respects, Luther
and the Consubstantialists wholly escaped the errors of the Church
of Rome as to this sacrament. They denied that it was a sacrifice ;
and that the presence of the body and blood of Christ gave to it any
physical virtue acting independently of the disposition of the re-
ceiver ; and that it rendered the elements the objects of adoration.
Their error, therefore, may be considered rather of a speculative
than of a practical nature ; and was adopted probably in deference
to what was conceived to be the literal meaning of the words of
Christ when the Lord's Supper was instituted.

(4) Bishop Tomlinb On the Articles.

420 THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

A third view was held by some of Luther's contemporaries, which
has been thus described : " Carolostadt, a professor with Luther in
the University of Wittenberg, and Zuinglius, a native of Switzerland,
the founder of the Reformed Churches, or those Protestant Churches
which are not Lutheran, taught that the bread and wine in the Lord's
Supper are the signs of the absent body and blood of Christ ; that
when Jesus said, ' This is my body, This is my blood,' he used a
figure exactly of the same kind with that, by which, according to
the abbreviations continually practised in ordinary speech, the sign
is often put for the thing signified. As this figure is common, so
there were two circumstances which would prevent the Apostles
from misunderstanding it, when used in the institution of the Lord's
Supper. The one was, that they saw the body of Jesus then alive,
and therefore could not suppose that they were eating it. The other
was, that they had just been partaking of a Jewish festival, in the
institution of which the very same figure had been used. For in
the night in which the children of Israel- escaped out of Egypt, God
said of the lamb which he commanded every house to eat and slay,
' It is the Lord's passover ;'(5) not meaning that it was the action
of the Lord passing over eveiw house, but the token and pledge of
that action. It is admitted by all Christians, that there is such a
figure used in one part of the institution. When our Lord says,
{ This cup is the new covenant in my blood,' none suppose him to
mean the cup is the covenant, but all believe that he means to call
it the memorial, or the sign, or the seal of the covenant. If it be
understood, that, agreeably to the analogy of language, he uses a
similar figure when he says, ' This is my body,' and that he means
nothing more than, ' This is the sign of my body,' we are delivered
from all the absurdities implied in the literal interpretation, to which
the Roman Catholics think it necessary to adhere. We give the
words a more natural interpretation than the Lutherans do, who
consider ' This is my body, as intended to express a proposition
which is totally different, ' My body is with this ;' and we escape
from the difficulties in which they are involved by their forced
interpretation.

"Farther, by this method of interpretation, there is no ground
left for that adoration which the Church of Rome pays to the bread
and wine ; for they are only the signs of that which is believed to
be absent. There is no ground for accounting the Lord's Supper,
to the dishonour of ' the High Priest of our profession,' a new sacri-
fice presented by an earthly Priest ; for the bread and wine are
only the memorials of that sacrifice which was once offered on the

(5) Exod. xii, 11.

FOURTH. j rHEOLOGICAl] INSTITUTES. 421

cross. And, lastly, this interpretation destroys the Popish idea of
a physical virtue in the Lord's Supper ; for if the bread and wine
are signs of what is absent, their use must be to excite the remem-
brance of it ; but this is a use which cannot possibly exist with
regard to any, but those whose minds are thereby put into a proper
frame ; and therefore the Lord's Supper becomes, instead of a
charm, a mental exercise, and the efficacy of it arises not ex opera
operato, but ex opere operantis"

With much truth, this opinion falls short of the whole truth, and
therefore it has been made the basis of that view of the Lord's
Supper which reduces it to a mere religious commemoration of
the death of Christ, with this addition, that it has a natural fitness to
produce salutary emotions, to possess our minds with religious
reflections, and to strengthen virtuous resolutions. Some Divines
of the Church of England, and the Socinians generally, have
adopted, and endeavoured to defend, this interpretation.

The fourth opinion is that of the Reformed Churches, and was
taught with great success by Calvin. It has been thus well epito-
mized by Dr. Hill : —

" He knew that former attempts to reconcile the systems of
Luther and Zuinglius had proved fruitless. But he saw the import-
ance of uniting Protestants upon a point, with respect to which they
agreed in condemning the errors of the Church of Rome ; and his
zeal in renewing the attempt was probably quickened by the sincere
friendship which he entertained for Melancthon, who was the suc-
cessor of Luther, while he himself had succeeded Zuinglius in
conducting the Reformation in Switzerland. He thought that the
system of Zuinglius did not come up to the force of the expressions
used in Scripture ; and, although he did not approve of the manner
in Avhich the Lutherans explain these expressions, it appeared to
him that there was a sense in which the full significancy of them
might be preserved,- and a great part of the Lutheran language
might continue to be used. As he agreed with Zuinglius, in think-
ing that the bread and wine were the signs of the body and blood
of Christ, which were not locally present, he renounced both
transubstantiation and consubstantiation. He agreed farther with
Zuinglius, in thinking that the use of these signs, being a memorial
of the sacrifice once offered on the cross, was intended to produce
a moral effect. But he taught, that to all who remember the death
of Christ in a proper manner, Christ, by the use of these signs, is
spiritually present, — present to their minds ; and he considered this
spiritual presence as giving a significancy, that goes far beyond the
Socinian sense, to these words of Paul : 'The cup of blessing wbiob
Vol. IIT 44

4$g THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PART

we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ 1 the bread
which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ V
It is not the blessing pronounced which makes any change upon
the cup ; but to all who join with becoming affection in the thanks-
giving then uttered in the name of the congregation, Christ is
spiritually present, so that they may emphatically be said to partake,
xoivuvsn, it.BTSX'iv, of his body and blood ; because his body and
blood being spiritually present, convey the same nourishment to
their souls, the same quickening to the spiritual life, as bread and
wine do to the natural life. Hence Calvin was led to connect the
discourse in John vi, with the Lord's Supper ; not in that literal
sense which is agreeable to Popish and Lutheran ideas, as if the
body of Christ was really eaten, and his blood really drunk by any :
but in a sense agreeable to the expression of our Lord in the con-
clusion of that discourse, ' The words that I speak unto you, they
are spirit and they are life ;' that is, when I say to you, ' Whoso
eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in
him ; he shall live by me, for my flesh is meat indeed,' you are to
understand these words, not in a literal but in a spiritual sense.
The spiritual sense adopted by the Socinians is barely this, that the
doctrine of Christ is the food of the soul, by cherishing a life of
virtue here, and the hope of a glorious life hereafter. The Calvin-
ists think, that into the full meaning of the figure used in these
words, there enter not merely the exhortations and instructions
which a belief of the Gospel affords, but also that union between
Christ and his people which is the consequence of faith, and that
communication of grace and strength by which they are quick-
ened in well doing, and prepared for the discharge of every
duty.

"According to this system, the full benefit of the Lord's Supper
is peculiar to those who partake worthily. For while all who eat
the bread and drink the wine may be said to show the Lord's death,
and may also receive some devout impressions, they only to whom
Jesus is spiritually present share in that spiritual nourishment which
arises from partaking of his body and blood. According to this
system, eating and drinking unworthily has a further sense than
enters into the Socinian system ; and it becomes the duty of every
Christian to examine himself, not only with regard to his know-
ledge, but also with regard to his general conduct, before he eats
of that bread and drinks of that cup. It becomes also the duty of
those who have the inspection of Christian societies, to exclude
from this ordinance persons, of whom there is every reason to
believe that they are strangers to the sentiments which it presun-

■ m it 111. J rHEOLOGIOAL INJSTIT1 I &&

poses, and without which none are prepared for holding that com-
munion with Jesus which it implies."(6)

With this view the doctrine of the Church of England seems
mainly to agree, except that we may perhaps perceive in her
services, a few expressions somewhat favourable to the views of
Luther and Melancthon, whose authority had great weight with
Archbishop Cranmer. This, however, appears only in certain
phrases; for the twenty-eighth article declares with sufficient plain-
ness, that " the body of Christ is given, taken, and eaten in the
Supper only after a heavenly and spiritual manner ; and the mean
whereby the body of Christ is received and eaten in the Supper, is
faith." " Some of our early English Reformers," says Bishop
Tomline, "were Lutherans, and consequently they were at first
disposed to lean towards consubstantiation ; but they seem soon to
have discovered their error, for in the articles of 1552, it is ex-
pressly said, ' A faithful man ought not either to believe or openly
confess the real and bodily presence, as they term it, of Christ's
flesh and blood in the sacrament of the Lord's Supper.' This part
of the article was omitted in 1562, probably with a view to give
less offence to those who maintained the corporal presence, and
to comprehend as many as possible in the established Church." (7)
The article as it now stands, and not particular expressions in the
Liturgy, must however be taken to be the opinion of the Church
of England upon this point, and it substantially agrees with the
New Testament.

The sacramental character of this ordinance is the first point
to be established, in order to a true conception of its nature and
import. It is more than a commemorative rite, it is commemorative
sacramentally ; in other words, it is a commemorative sign and
seal of the covenant of our redemption.

The first proof of this may be deduced from our Lord's words
used in the institution of the ordinance : "This is my body, this is my
blood," are words which show a most intimate connexion between
the elements, and that which was represented by them, the sacri-
ficial offering of the body and blood of Christ, as the price of our
redemption ; they were the signs of what was " given for us," sur-
rendered to death in our room and stead, that we might have the
benefit of liberation from eternal death. Again, " This is the New
Testament," or covenant, " in my blood." The covenant itself was
ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is therefore called by St. Paul,
" the blood of the everlasting covenant ;" and the cup had so inti-

(6) Theological Ledum. (7) Exposition of the Articles.

{:J4 PHEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES- [PARI

mate a connection with that covenant, as to represent it and the.
means of its establishment, or of its acquiring validity, — the shedding
of the blood of our Saviour. It is clear, therefore, that the rite of
the Lord's Supper is a covenant rite, and consequently a sacrament ;
a visible sign and seal on the part of Him who made the covenant,
that it was established in, and ratified by, the sacrificial death of
Christ.

As it bears this covenant or sacramental character on the part
of the Institutor, so also on the part of the recipients. They were
all to eat the bread in " remembrance" of Christ ; in remembrance,
certainly, of his death in particular ; yet not as a mere historical
event, but of his death as sacrificial; and therefore the comme-
moration was to be on their part an acknowledgment of the doc-
trine of the vicarious and propitiatory nature of the death of
Christ, and an act of faith in it. Then as to the cup, they were
commanded to drink of it, for a reason also particularly given,
" For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for
many for the remission of sins :" the recognition therefore, implied
in the act, was not merely that Christ's blood was shed ; but that
it was shed as the blood of "the new covenant," and for "the
remission of sins ;" a recognition which could only take place in
consequence of " faith in his blood," as the blood of atonement.
Again, says St. Paul, as taught by the particular revelation he
received as to the Lord's Supper, "For as often as ye eat this
bread, and drink this cup, ye do show or publish the Lord's death
until he come ;" which publication of his death was not the mere
declaration of the fact of " the Lord's death," but of his death,
according to the Apostolic doctrine, as the true propitiation for
sin, the benefits of which were to be received by faith. Thus then
we see in the Lord's Supper, the visible token and pledge of a
covenant of mercy in the blood of Christ, exhibited by God its
author ; and on the part of man a visible acknowledgment of this
covenant so ratified by the sacrifice of Christ, and an act of entire
faith in its truth and efficacy in order to the remission of sins, and
the conferring of all other spiritual benefits. As a sign, it exhibits,
1. The infinite love of God to the world, who gave "his only-
begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him might not perish,
but have everlasting life." 2. The love of Christ, who " died the
just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God." 3. The
extreme nature of his sufferings, which were unto death. 4. The
vicarious and sacrificial character of that death, as a sin offering
and a propitiation ; in virtue of which only, a covenant of grace
was entered into with man bv the offended God. 5. The benefits'

FOURTH.] iHEULOGICAL INSTITUTES- 125

derived from it through believing, " remission of sins ;" and the
nourishment of the soul in spiritual life and vigour, by virtue of a
vital " communion" with Christ, so that it is advanced and per-
fected in holiness, "until he come" to confer upon his disciples
the covenanted blessing of eternal life. As a seal it is a constant
assurance, on the part of God, of the continuance of this covenant
of redemption in full undiminished force from age to age ; it is a
pledge to every penitent who believes in Christ, and receives this
sacrament in profession of his entire reliance upon the merits of
Christ's passion for forgiveness, that he is an object of merciful
regard and acceptance ; there is in it also, as to every one who
thus believes and is accepted, a constant exhibition of Christ as
the spiritual food of the soul, to be received by faith, that he may
grow thereby ; and a renewed assurance of the bestowment of the
full grace of the new covenant, in the accomplishment of all its
promises, both in this life and in that which is to come. In every
celebration, the sign of all these gracious acts, provisions, and
hopes, is exhibited, and God condescends thus to repeat his pledges
of faithfulness and love to the Church of Christ, purchased by his
blood. The members of that Church, on the other hand, renew
their acceptance of, and reliance upon, the new covenant ; they
publish their faith in Christ ; they glory in his cross, his sacrificial
though shameful death, as the wisdom of God, and the power of
God ; they feast upon the true passover victim by their faith, and
they do this with joy and thanksgiving, on account of a greater
deliverance than that of the Israelites from Egypt, of which they
are the subjects. It was this predominance of thanksgiving in
celebrating this hallowed rite, which at so early a period of the
Church attached to the Lord's Supper the title of " The Eu-
charist."

We may conclude this view by a few general observations.

1. The very nature of the ordinance of the Lord's Supper
excludes from participating in it not only open unbelievers, but all
who reject the doctrine of the atonement made by the vicarious
death of Christ for " the remission of sins." Such persons have
indeed tacitly acknowledged this, by reducing the rite to a mere
commemoration of the fact of Christ's death, and of those virtues
of humility, benevolence, and patience, which his sufferings called
forth. If therefore the Lord's Supper be in truth much more than
this ; if it recognise the sacrificial character of Christ's death, and
the doctrine of " faith in his blood," as necessary to our salvation,
this is " an altar of which they have no right to eat" who reject
these doctrines : and from the Lord's table all such persons ought

12t> THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. [PAR!

to be repelled by ministers, whenever, from compliance with custom,
or other motives, they would approach it.

2. It is equally evident that when there is no evidence in persons
of true repentance for sin, and of desire for salvation, according to
the terms of the Gospel, they are disqualified from partaking at
" the table of the Lord." They eat and drink unworthily, and fall
therefore into " condemnation." The whole act is indeed on their
part an act of bold profanation or of hypocrisy ; they profess by
this act to repent, and have no sorrow for sin ; they profess to
seek deliverance from its guilt and power, and yet remain willingly
under its bondage ; they profess to trust in Christ's death for par-
don, and are utterly unconcerned respecting either ; they profess
to feed upon Christ, and hunger and thirst after nothing but the
world ; they place before themselves the sufferings of Christ ; but
when they " look upon him whom they have pierced," they do not
" mourn because of him," and they grossly offend the all-present
Majesty of heaven, by thus making light of Christ, and " grieving
the Holy Spirit."

3. It is a part of Christian discipline in every religious society
to prevent such persons from communicating with the Church.
They are expressly excluded by Apostolic authority, as well as by
the original institution of this sacrament, which was confined to
Christ's disciples ; and ministers would " partake of other men's
sins," if knowingly they were to admit to the Supper of the Lord,
those who in their spirit and lives deny him.

4. On the other hand, the table of the Lord is not to be sur-
rounded with superstitious terrors. All are welcome there who
truly love Christ, and all who sincerely desire to love, serve, and
obey him. All truly penitent persons ; all who feel the burden of
their sins, and are willing to renounce them ; all who take Christ
as the sole foundation of their hope, and are ready to commit
their eternal interests to the merits of his sacrifice and intercession,
are to be encouraged to " draw near with faith, and to take this
holy sacrament to their comfort." In it God visibly exhibits and
confirms his covenant to them, and he invites them to become
parties to it, by the act of their receiving the elements of the
sacrament in faith.

5. For the frequency of celebrating this ordinance we have no
rale in the New Testament. The early Christians observed it
every Sabbath, and exclusion from it was considered a severe
sentence of the Church, when only temporary. The expression
of the Apostle, " as often as ye eat this bread," intimates that the
practice of communion was frequent ; and perhaps the general

FOURTH.] THEOLOGICAL INSTITUTES. 427

custom in this country of a monthly administration, will come up
to the spirit of the ancient institution. That it was designed, like
the Passover, to be an annual celebration only, has no evidence
from Scripture, and is contradicted by the most ancient practice.

6. The habitual neglect of this ordinance by persons who pro-
fess a true faith in Christ, is highly censurable. We speak not now
of Quakers and Mystics, who reject it altogether, in the face of the
letter of their Bibles ; but of many who seldom or never communi-
cate, principally from habits of inattention to an obligation which
they do not profess to deny. In this case a plain command of
Christ is violated, though not perhaps with direct intention ; and
the benefit of that singularly affecting mean of grace is lost, in
which our Saviour renews to us the pledges of his love, repeats
the promises of his covenant, and calls for invigorated exercises of
our faith, only to feed us the more richly with the bread that comes
down from heaven. If a peculiar condemnation falls upon them
who partake " unworthily," then a peculiar blessing must follow
from partaking worthily ; and it therefore becomes the duty of
every minister to explain the obligation, and to show the advan-
tages of this sacrament, and earnestly to enforce its regular ob-
servance upon all those who give satisfactory evidence of "repent-
ance towards God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ."

CONTENTS TO VOLUME III.

PART II— Continued.

CHAP. XXV. Extent of the Atonement 3

XXVI. The same subject continued 26

XXVII. An examination of certain passages of Scripture supposed to limit the

extent of Christ's redemption 87

XXVTII. Theories which limit the extent of the death of Christ 107

XXIX. Redemption, benefits of, 183

PART III. — The Mokals of Christianity.

CHAP. I. The moral law 203

II. The duties we owe to God 216

III. The same subject continued — The Lord's day 247

IV. Duties to our neighbour 265

PART IV. — The Institutions of Christianity.

CHAP. I. The Christian Church SI"

II. The Sacraments 355

III. Baptism 363

IV. The Lord's Supper 415

Index of Texts 428

< > i^noral Index 43?

TEXTS

MORE OR LESS ILLUSTRATED.

Una
1

>. Verses.

1

22
14

7

5
21

6

1

6

7

1

7-14

2
23
10
18

14

3
11

25 26
20
20

12-16
19

6

21 29
15 16
25

31

10 11
49

8
27
D

7
22

7
15 16

22 23
15 16
15 16
11

6
29
43

6

21

7
10
19

GENESIS.

Vol.
1

2

3
2

1

3
2
3
1
2

1
2
1
2

1

2
3
1

2

3

2
1
KY.
2
1
3

2
3
1

3
I

2

3

2
1
3
2

Pages.

225 521
72 187
354
359
232
233
278

68
449

71
457
365
361

35
200

72

520
385
170 187
385
121
543
332
36
290

343
333
343
334
332
272

287
523

71
562
297
307
285
272
204
533
377
202

71

236

69
216
272
420

Chap Verses.

18 24

1
17 19

5 7
11 12

14 4

15 14
16

20 4 5.

31 33
33 4

2 7
14 2 3

32 1

33 6
51 5
58 3
72 5
100 3
104 27
106 30 31
110 1
122 6

8 22

16 4

22 15

29 15

30 4

6 1, &c.

48 16

8 8

9 6

34 16
40 3 6

3
43 8

45 24

46 5
48 16

53 3,&c

18
19

23 5 6

33 6
16

34 2

1 KINGS.

Vol.
2

:s.
2

2

2

1
2

3

2
3
2

1

1

2
3
2

1
2

1

2

3
2

1

Pages.
71

*}

CHRONICLI

4

69

JOB.

6

g

233

233

9
15

233

181 234

236

16

17

181
181

146

90

PSALMS.

f>5

33

49

235

EXODUS.

413

146

3

234

234

7

116

10

521

fW

147

03

LEVITICUS

419

30

73

33
34

PROVERBS

225

37

4

96

r;

234

6

234

15

40

17

ISAIAH.

533

25

NUMBERS.

525
525

0/\

149

EUTERONOS

98

4

15

5

85

6
10
21
0^

525
555

8
4

9R

414

30

95

30

148

31

209

32

1 SAMUEL.

283

90

JEREMIAH

39

2 SAMUEL

43

7
R

5 414
414

9

5 414

19

218

rjLATs ILLUSTRATE!*.

429

1
?8

1. \ CI'-.:-.

2

11

27
19

11

7
5

32

4-7

2

1

4
6

14 15

23

3
11
17
11
20*
31
33

4-6
18

4 5

3-9
13
17-19

15 16
28

1-14
24
28
63
20
19
30

45
32
14

16
35
19

47 4S
20

13 14
47
51

1

3
10
11

'ot. Ill

EZEKIEL.

Vol.
o

1

2

2
2

2

1
2

2
I.
3

O

O

1

3

2

3
2

3

2
3

2
3
1
2

3
2
3
2

3
2

o

Pages.

12

99

219

44

287

45

287

9

DANIEL.

11

f>

HOSEA.

236

19!

4

9

JOEL.

8

o

HAGGAI.

526

149

5

10

I

MICAII.

ZECHAR1AI

MALACHI.

33

225

50

•>

1
3

MATTHEW

521

287

14

8

406

44

7

236

10

144

T>

155

14

108

15

18

295
350

19

182

287
68

206

20

90
298

22
5>4

77
175

°6

305

49

*>R

88

150

10
13

MARK.

303

280
91

m

389

i

LUKE.

8 15

57

q

105

388

10

96

18

398

24
1

JOHN.

277
108

16 67

97

17

28

i

45

Chap. Versos.

14

Vol
2

Pages.
45

15

1

531

49

2

31

3 8

236

22 23

3

410

31

1

536

5 18

o

62

37

43

6 37

o

87

64

2

95

S 58

1

536

10 15

3

11

26

90

29

2

49

33

12 23 24

62

27S

37-40

3

97

41

1

524

13 18

3

91

14 16

2

56

15 16

3

92

19

71

26

2

56

16 15

96

17 5

.. .. 1

539

9

3

11

20 22

2

144

22 23

•*

351

ACTS.
2 39 3

78 385

38

363

5 4

9

156

7 35

298

59

109

8 38 39

3

409

10 41

3

338

13 38 39

2

398

13 15

3

324

38

2

305

48

3

94

14 11

2

12

23

3

338

15 21

238

17 29

2

167

18 9 10

28 25

3

2

I

106
311
525

2

149

o

99

ROMANS.
1 34 2

50

21

120

5 6

3

78

2 28

377

3 10

2

235

21 22

24

415

297 303

25 26

.

287 307

.

398

31

3

250

4 3

2

419

4-8 .

398 421

28

.

281

5 6-8

.

280

-

591 292

430

TEXTS ILLUSTRATED.

Chap. Verses.

12-21

Vol
3

Pages.
126

18 19

2

221 417

421

6 16
3-7

3

185
412

7 l,&c
18

3

2

184 250
237

S 1

237 461

3 4

55

3

188

5-9
17

2

2

237

459

15 16

30

3

463

80

9 l,&c

5

24

9
3

33
22

79

10 13

9

8

19

3

30

11 5

53

6

2

443

7

3

30 53

12 12

224

14 15

12

1
1 2

CORINTHIANS.
2

112

30

416

2 8

311

3 3

236

4 7

3

101

5 3

o

88

6 19 20

297

7 14

3

387

10 9

11 23-26

1

3

557

416

15 35

16 15

194
96 396

2 CORINTHIANS.
3 6 2

155

5 6

3

192

21

2

284 416

18 19

291 294

7 1

3

183

1 6

GALATIANS.

78

2 16

369

21
3 13

19

1

405 429

248 285

297

562

3

369

21

Q

429

27-29

3

372

4 4-6

o

463

21-31

3

56

5 2-4
1 4-6

EPHESIANS.
3

368
73

7

9

288 297

9

3

306
357

2 16

9

294

3 4-6

3

93

4 8

1

556

11

o

320

Chan. Veraes. Vol. Pages.

22-24 2 170 23G

5 2 - 344

25 . 3 291

6 5 - 301

3 4 - 293

PHILIPPIANS.

2 5 2 124

4 6 3 224

COLOSSIANS.

1 14 2 137

14 15 - 100 311

19 - 291

16 - 89

2 9 - 136

10-12 3 372

3 10 2 170

1 THESSALONIANS.

5 23 3 183

2 THESSALONIANS.

2 8 9 1 175

13 14 3 72

16 2 112

1 TIMOTHY.

1 6 2 337

2 6 - 29S

13 14 - 183

6 14 - 92

2 TIMOTHY.

1 6 3 322

9 10 - 80 93

2 19 - 90

4 18 2 117

22 - 112

TITUS.

2 13 2 18

3 7 - 459

5 6 3 407

HEBREWS.

1 1 2 147

2 - 98

3 - 136

1 5 2 35 55

6 - 113

8 - 20

10 - 87

2 14 - 136

3 6 - 55

4 12 - 90

15 - 137

6 4-8 3 15

7 27 2 345

9 13 14 - 345

27 - 346

10 26-31 3 15

11 6 2 377

4 - 355

19 3 365

26 1 557

12 25 26 - 558

13 8 2 87

JAMES.

2 19-23 2 448

1 PETER.

1 2 3 72

3 2 459

)hap. \.
11

fSi -

19
21

Vol.

2

I

3

o

3

2

2

I'ages.
147
297
283
557
373

147

13 101

117

309

286
358

Chap
4

18
2 24

5

3 18

1

20
1 21

2 PETER.

2 1

1

3 18

1 !)

1 JOHN.

g 2

3 12

22

1NDKA. 431

i. Verse.-;. Vol. Pages.

10 2 280

7 1 526

2 JOHN.

1 3 322

JUDE.

4 3 100

REVELATION.

4 5 2 86

8 - 86 95

17 - 85

20 3 355

13 2 85

GENERAL INDEX

Vol. Page.
A

Abel's sacrifice 2 354

Actions, quality of, 1 5

Adam, relation of.tohisdescend-

ants 2 215

3 126

imputation of his sin.. . 2 216

418

3 126

Adam's fall not willed by God. - 158

Adoption, what 2 462

African slavery 3 273

Agency, moral, 1 5

Angel of the Lord, phrase of, . - - 542

Angel of the Church 3 323

Archbishops, origin of - 326

Arianism 2 141

Ark, dimensions of,. . . 1 282

ArticleXVlIofEnglishChurch. 3 139

Articles of faith - 345

Astronomical objections to

Scripture answered 1 267

Atonement, - 229

what, 2 286

objections to, answered - 296
302

extent of, 3 3

Augsburgh Confession 3 139

B

Baptism, form of, 2 150

infant, antiquity of . . 3 397

benefits of,... - 400

mode of, - 401

nature of, - 363

376

obligation of, - 363

of houses - 392

of John - 406

if proselytes - 383

Vol. Page.
Baptism put in the place of cir-
cumcision 3 370

379

subjects of, - 381

Baxterianism - 140

Beasts, clean and unclean 2 352

Believers, true, may perish .... 3 5
Bishops, differ not in order from

Presbyters - 323

328

office of, - 321

succession of, - 328

Blood, prohibition of, 2 362

Body, human, affords proof of

God's existence 1 329

Budhu, religion of, - 24

C

Calling, what, 3 77

85

Calvinistic theories - 107

Calvin's opinions - 108

Casuistry - 212

Cause and Effect, relation of,... 1 303

Causes, kinds of, - 304

Charity, active expression of, 3 267

source of, - 265

universal, - 265

Children, duties of, - 293

government of, - 29S

Christ, acts of, proofs of his

divinity, 2 97

attributes of, divine, 2 84

death of, merits of, ... . - 310

necessary .... - 275

propitiatory. .. - 274

vicarious - 278

died for all men 3 4

humanity of, 2 130

pioexistence of, 1 530

resurrection of, - 163

462

iSUKX

Vol. Page.

Christ, the Creator 2 97

the Jehovah of the Old

Testament 1 541

titles of, 2 3

worship paid to, - 107

Christianity, connects morals

with doctrines. . 3 209

diffusion of, 1 254

effects of, - 257

Church authority, ends of, ... . 3 344

in censures . - 349

in discipline - 347

in doctrine.. - 346

government in, - 318

spiritual.. - 318
persons to

whom committed, . . - 320

of Christ, what, - 317

Reformed, what, - 116

unity of - 332

<'hurches, free associations. . . - 335
laws of Christ impe-
rative upon, - 337

339

liberty in forms of, - 343
share of the people

in government of, - 337
Circumcision, controversy in

primitive Church - 367

remarks on, - 365

Confession, Augsburgh, - 139

Confessions of faith - 345

Conscience, right of, - 282

Councils, origin of, - 345

Covenant, Abrahamic, - 365

D

Deacons, office of, 3 321

Death eternal 2 219

of Christ, necessary .... - 274

not unjust. .. . - 322

propitiatory . . - 274

vicarious - 278

spiritual, - 211

victory over, 3 191

what, as effect of sin... . 2 211

Decrees, object of, 3 119

what, - 154

Diocesses, primitive - 325

Dort, Synod of, . 23

69
130

Duelling, sinfulness of, - 379

Duties of children - 293

of husbands and wives - 286
291

of masters - 299

of parents - 296

of servants - 299

of sovereigns - 307

of subjects . 304

308

we owe to God - 216

E

RroNoiwicAi, justice 3 285

Vol. jfafc'c

Egypt, plagues of, 1 159

187

Elders, office of, 3 321

Election and calling, what,. .. . - 31
eternal and temporal, . . - 61
of the Christian Church - 32

of the Jews - 31

personal and collective, - 33
60

three kinds of, - 28

unconditional, - 48

62
69

unto faith - 76

Emmanuel, title of Christ 2 14

' Episcopacy, matter of pruden-
tial regulation . . 3 329

remarks on, - 321

332
Eternity, attribute of Christ.. . 2 85

Ethical justice 3 270

Evangelists, what, - 320

Evidence, authenticating, 1 99

collateral - 101

254

external, - 75

internal, - 95

223

rational, 99

Evil spirits, power of, - ,175

Exceptions to moral rules 3 211

Excommunication, what, - 318

External duties to God - 224

F

FAiTHjConditionofjustification, 2 437

errors respecting, - 441

imputed for righteousness - 422

justifying, - 429

433
442

not mere belief, - 451

objections to, considered - 438

Fall, account of, historical,. ... - 182

effects of, - 205

traditions respecting,. .. . - 188
Fathers of families invested

with a religious office, 3 235

Fear of God - 222

not servile, - 222

practical effects of, - 223

Foreknow, to, phrase of, - 82

" Form of God," phrase of, 2 127

French Church, confession of, 3 137

G

General tendency, doctrine of, 3 213
Geological objections to Scrip-
ture 1 272

285

Germ-theoryof the resurrection 3 199

God, acts of, 1 291

a title of Christ, 2 9

attributes of, 1 293

demonstrations of, a poste-
riori... - 309

INDEX

idz

Vol. Page.

•>ou,ciemon3lrationsof, a priori, j 366

duties we owe to him. ... 3 21C

eternity of, 1 392

existence of, - 224

289
293
not discovered

by reason,. . - 297

faithfulness of, - 495

goodness of, - 456

holiness of, - 486

2 259

immutability of, 1 442

import of the word, 2 9

justice of, 1 488

2 259

liberty of, 1 449

mercy of, - 484

names of, - 290

necessary existence of, . . - 367

omnipotence of, - 399

omnipresence of, - 405

omniscience of, - 412

prescience of, - 416

V 3 160

perfect, 1 496

proofs of his being - 310

spirituality of, - 380

truth of, - 495

. unity of, - 372

unsearchable, ■ 497

wills all men to be saved, 3 26

wisdom of, 1

Government, an ordinance of

God 3

of Church, spiritual, -

in its pastors, -

resistanceto,iflawful, -

share of the people in, -

Grace of God, resistible -

450

304
318
320
309
337
179

Vol. Page.

Image of God, what, 2 116

Immutability of God, what,... 1 442

3 229

Imputation, what, 2 430

Independent form of Church

government 3 333

Infant baptism - 381

Infants, members of Christ's

Church, • 387

salvation of, 2 221

3 68

Influence, employment of, ... . - 303

Jacob and Esau, case of, 3 34

Jehovah, title of Christ, 2 3

Justice, economical, 3 285

ethical, - 270

political - 304

of God, what, 2 259

Justification, by faith alone,.. .. - 436

concomitants of,.. - 459

explained - 392

just, - 307

310

not at the last day, - 455

not eternal - 400

not imputation of
Christ's right-
eousness, - 401

not sanctification, - 401

444

pardon of sin. .. . - 397

Popish notion of, - 441

St. James and St.

Paul reconciled

on doctrine of, - 447

H

Heathens, case of, 3

morals of, 1

religions of, -

state of religious
knowledge among, -

Heylin, Dr., defended, 3

Holiness, what, -

Holy Spirit, divinity of, 2

influence of, 1

personality of, — 2

procession of, -

witness of, -

four opi-
nions respecting, -
Husband and wife, duties of,. . 3

Hypostatical union 2

I

Identity, personal. 3 201

177
58
63

46
134
223
145
150
240
143
145
150
143
463

465
286
290
129

K

Keys, power of, 3

King of Kings, title of Christ, 2

Language, analogical, 2

figurative, -

Law, moral, subject of revela-
tion 1

Liberty, right to, 3

Life, right to,.

what, 1

Liturgies 3

Logos, whence derived, 2

Lord, a title of Christ, -

Lord's day 3

Lord's Supper, a sacrament,. . -
different views of, -

nature of, -

obligatory -

Love of God, duty of, -

nature of, -

philosophic and
Christian, . . . . -

350
27

347
348

10
271
282
270
275
384
241

74
6
247
423
417
417
416
217
218

219

434

Vol. Page.

M

Magianism 1 42

Mohammed, success of, - 255

Man, fallen state of, - 225

fall of, 2 159

liberty of, 1 478

primitive state of, 2 164

why created, - 176

moral freedom of, - 191

effects of his fall, - 205

his own fault if not saved, 3 7

Marriage - 286

ends of, - 286

both a civil and reli-
gious contract 3 289

Masters, duties of, 3 299

Memra, title of Christ 2 72

Merits of Christ - 210

Men, duty of all, to believe the

Gospel, 3 6

Mercy, works of, 3 268

Miracles, definition of, 1 78

possible - 79

their authenticating

character - 80

credible - 84

office of, - 97

of Scripture - 158

objectionsto,answered - 169

pretended, 183

Moral virtue, ground on which

Christianity places it, 3 216

agency 1 5

obligation - 72

3 212

government 2 160

principles of, - 257

law 3 203

established by the

Gospel - 204

philosophy - 208

use of, - 210

precepts, reasons of,. ... - 210

rules, exceptions to, . ... - 211

sense - 212

Murder, what, - 277

self, - 275

Mysteries 1 264

N

Nature, human, corruption of, 2 225

Neighbours, duties to, 3 265

O

Obligation, what 3 214

Objections to the Scriptures

answered 1 259

Omnipotenee,attribute of Christ 2 95

Omnipresence - 87

Omniscience - 90

Oracles, heathen.. 1 180

189

Vul. Pagg
Ordination of Presbyters from

the Jews 3 325

Origin of Archbishops - 326

Primates - 326

Original sin 2 205

P

Pardon ofsinnotbyprerogative 2 265

399

Parents 3 296

Parishes, primitive, - 326

Pastors, office of, - 320

334

authority of, - 337

Patriarchs, faith of, 2 367

rise of, 3 326

Penance, ancient, - 353

Person, what, 1 500

Pharaoh, case of, 3 37

Philosophical objections to Mo-
saic account of creation and

deluge 1 272

Political justice 3 304

Polygamy - 287

Potestas, SoypaTtKv, - 344

iiaraKTiKr], - 347

SiaKpiTiKri, - 349

Potter, power of, over the clay. - 42

Power, origin of, - 304

Praise, duty of, - 246

Prayer, efficacy of, upon others - 231

ejaculatory, - 232

enjoined - 224

family, - 233

forms of, - 241

consistent with Divine

wisdom, - 230

objections to, - 228

private, - 233

public, - 238

reason of, - 225

right of - 190

what, - 224

whether it has moral

influence, - 226

whether opposedto pre-
destination, - 228

Precepts, general application

of, - 211

moral and positive,.. . 2 196

Pre-damnation 3 120

Predestination, what - 84

origin of, - 117

Presbyters, office of, - 321

of same order as

Bishops - 323

328

Pretention - 120

Primates, origin of, - 326

Property, right of, - 271

" 280

Prophecy 1 92

double sense of, - 196

objections to evidence of, - 21 1

scriptural - 191

iiio

v ol. Page.

lJropiiets, taise, 1 215

office of, 3 320

Propitiation, what, 2 286

Q
Quality of actions 1 5

R

Reason, weakness of, 1 16

74
use and limitation of, - 102
Reasons on which moral pre-
cepts rest 3 210

Reconciliation, what, 2 290

Rectitude, what, 3 214

Redemption 2 257

297

free - 302

illustration of God's

righteousness. ... 2 307

Regeneration, what, - 444

459

Religion, natural, 1 20

corruption of, among

heathen nations.. .. - 45

Repentance 2 267

not regeneration. . - 460
Reprobation, absolute, contrary

to the Divine attributes 3 64

Resurrection of the body - 194

199

Reverence of God 3 222

Revelation, characters of a, ... 1 66

evidences of, - 73

necessary - 10

46
58
63

Revolution of 1688 3 315

Righteousness, imputed, doc-
trine of, considered 2 401
Arminius's opinion . . - 410
Calvin's view of, ... . - 408
Mr. Wesley's view of, - 411

Rights, natural, 3 270

of conscience - 282

of liberty - 271

281

of life - 270

275

of property - 271

280

S

Sabbath, obligation of, 3 247

observance of, - 261

recreations upon, ... - 264

Sabellianism 2 14^

Sacraments, number of, 3 355

different views of

their nature, - 358

of baptism - 363

of Lord's Supper .. - 415

seals - 361

sisrns - 361

Vol. Page.

Sacrament what, 3 356

Sacrifices 2 326

a patriarchial rite 350

354

Divine appointment of, - 383

expiatory, - 328

human, 1 63

of Abel 2 354

of the law, - 330

primitive, - 351

types - 338

Sanctification 3 183

Satisfaction, opinions concern-
ing, 2 313

Scientia Media 3 162

Scotland, Church of. Calvinistic - 138

Scriptures, antiquity of, 1 113

credibility of, - 153

genuineness of, 119

testimonies to, - 132

harmony of, - 245

manner of, - 253

moral tendency of, . - 246

preservation of, 144

style of, , - 252

Serpent the devil 2 199

Servants, duties of, 3 299

Sin a debt, how, 2 304

impulsive cause of Christ's

sufferings - 281

imputation of, - 216

original, - 159

in what it consists, - 244

Slavery 3 271

African, - 273

among the Hebrews ... - 272

in Christian States - 273

Slaves, duties of Christian go-
vernments respecting, - 273

Son of God, title of Christ, .... 2 28

Son, only-begotten, - 45

Soul, traduction of, - 249

Sovereign, duties of, ) 3 307

Sovereignty of God - 174

Space 1 371

State, intermediate, 3 191

Subjects, duties of, - 304

308

Sublapsarianism - 121

Submission to God - 216

Suicide - 275

Supralapsarianism ...'. - 119

Synagogues, rulers of, - 324

modes of worship in, - 324

T

Thanksgiving, duty of, 3 246

Traditions of the Heathen 1 38

Trinity - 49S

importance of the doctrine, - 503

proofs of, from Scripture,.. - 519

Trust in God 3 220

friendship with God,

necessary to, - 221

436

Vol. Page.
Truth, origin of, among the

Heathen 1 27

Types ■ 197

U

Unity of the Church 3 332

Universal charity, source of, . . - 265
active expres-
sion of - 267

Vaudois, opinions of, on pre-
destination 3 137

Virtue, what 3 214

Virtues in the unregenerate . . 2 250

W

Vol. Page.

Westminster Confession 3

Wife, duties of, -

Will, freedom of, -

of God, source of moral

obligation -

Word, title of Christ 2

World, the extent of the term, 3
Worship, supreme and inferior 2

ends of, 3

family, -

public, , -

138

286

291

24

167

213
16

67
8
121
239
233
238

THE END.

Date Due

'***"**'*•*— Wire*

MAR 2 5 '8J

1

jHiTWWWB^W^

MAYS ^

P^-rt^

f>

PRINTED

IN tJ. S. A.