IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 2 m I- III 2.0 1.8 1.25 1.4 ||||i/s ^ 6" ► V] ^^^^ w ^ >, 7 o>, > > '/ /^ Photographic Sciences Corporation 33 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, NY. 14580 (716) 872-4503 CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques Th to The Institute has attempted to obtain the best ori'^inal copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographicaily unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. □ D D D n n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur r~1 Covers damaged/ Couverture endommagie Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurie et/ou pelliculAe I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur □ Coloured inic (i.e. other than blue or blacit)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Reli6 avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge ir.t6rieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte. mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 filmdes. L'Institut a microfilm* le meilleMr exemplaire qu'il lui a M possible de se prrcurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-Atre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mtthode normale de filmage sont indiqute ci-dessous. □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagies □ n Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculies Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages ddcoiories, tachetdes ou piqu6es Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es Showthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ C^ialitd Indgale de {'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppl^mentaire I I Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t^ film6es A nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. Th po of filr Or be th< sic oti fif) sic or Th shi Til w^ Ml dif em be< rig rec mc D Additional comments:/ Commentaires supplimentaires.- This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est film* au taux de reduction indiqui ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here hes been reproduced thenke to the generosity of: Nationei Library of Canada L'exempiaire filmi fut reproduit grAce d la gAn4ro8it6 de: Bibliothdque nationale du Canada The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont M reproduites avec le plus grand soin. compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de l'exempiaire filmA, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printf>d or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprim6e sent filmte en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniire page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmto en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la derniire page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^ (meaning "CON- TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE". le symbols V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s A des taux de reduction diff^rents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmi i partir de I'angle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche ft droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images ndcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mdthode. 1 2 i 3 61-^^ ff^ J^^: If- ■^ ^, tj gi .f?*.'.) 'j^'' '^^ • ^ 0^7^ • ^)l Ar^/rCA^^^^, C'^^<>>y-^ r ,d, by an ill nrimher obedience ;st of man- to eternal nd imije'ri- B that the of Calvin- , it is much pponents of itions of its our readers did sc for rculation of tation " and Id, like him, alvinism, if, ations, they ,nd love for ^titled to be ^ ,nt Calvinist k upon the ming within admitting of 'ools that his kt, erring like ig Calvinists out reference } ■4 to the views maintained by those whom candour will regard as the proper representatives of Calvinism, would go far to excuse such representations as that of the Sedan professor. But, OS a matter of fact, Calvinists, as such, hold no view in relation to the salvation of some and the perdition of others, except what, they feel warranted in believing, must be held by every intelligent Christian. We need say nothing about the relative number of the saved and those who are finally lost; respecting which Calvinism pronounces no judgment, though Jonathan Edwards and other eminent Calviniste believe that the whole number of the saved will, notwithstanding all present appearances to the contrary, greatly exceed the number of those who finally perish. But we cannot without some difficulty understand how any intelligent Christian can allow himself to represent Calvinists as believing that men are elected to salvation, " without any regard to their faith and obedience whatsoever," and that they are appointed to eternal damnation, " without any regard to their unbelief and impeni- tence." We hope to take up in the articles that follow, the con- sideration of misconceptions in relation to particular doctrines. In the meantime, we shall endeavour to present the belief of Calvinists in relation to the salvation of some and the per- dit\on of others, in such a way as to indicate where the divergence between Calvinists and their opponents really lies, and to facilitate the rectifying of misconceptions in reference to particular points of doctrine. With this view, let us take a particular case, say that of Peter and Judas the traitor. On the supposition, which all will allow to be sufficiently w^ell grounded, that the one is saved and the other eternally lost, the Calvinist believes that while on Judas himself lies the blame of his own perdition, Peter cannot, and will not, ascribe his salvation to anything in himself, but only to the free and altogether unmerited grace or favour of God. He believes that Peter must and will ascribe his salvation to God's doing for him what He might not have done, and what He has not done for Judas. The Calvinist is not unaware of the difficulties involved in the conviction that he has in the matter. On the contrary, he will frankly admit that in believing as he does, he is face to face with mystery that, so far as he can see, is unfathomable to creature intelligence. But he feels himself shut up to his conviction, notwithstanding the difficulty attach- ing to it, and he believes he can see greater and far more serious 8 difficulties in the opposite view. Even in relation to the things that God uses as means to promote men's spiritual interests, the Calvinist, recognizinjy the hand of God in the possession by some ot* advantages which are not possessed by others, cannot but see that the difference involves much that human reason cannot fathom, But, apart from this, he cannot content him- self, as some do, with the notion that, up to a certain point, Peter and Judas had a common experience in respect of Divine influence supernaturally affecting their minds, or, otherwise expressed, that God, by His Spirit working in them, conferred on Peter and Judas alike grace sufficient for their salvation ; and that having so done, He did no more, but left it entirely to themselves to yield to or to resist the Divine influence, Peter being saved because he yielded, and Judas lost because he resisted. He does not, indeed, deny an experience of inward supernatural influence that may be short of what is saving, and that may be common to those who are saved with those who are lost ; but he believes (and may I not say that, as a Christian, he feels constrained to believe ?) that however far such ommon experience may extend, the action of the soul, in yielding to the Divine influence, is itself the result of the forthputting of a Divine power in the soul, determining its action. He does not deny that there is an act of the soul in connection with which a man's spiritual experience becomes distinctively saving : but he believes that that act is gracioUsly and Divinely determined. No reasonable man, we freely admit, can overlook the diffi- culty involved in the view now presented. But while it is the view that contains the essential germ of Calvinism, the difwculty involved in it is surely a difficulty that confronts a man, not because he is a Calvinist, but because he is a Chris- tian, in the highest sense of the term, i.e., a man spiritually quickened and savingly enlightened and renewed. Surely if I am a Christian in this sense — if, that is, I have passed through a spiritual experience, resulting in my having reason to believe that I am in a state of salvation, or if, still otherwise expressed, I have yielded to the Divine influence made to bear upon me, I cannot but believe that this is the result of God's doing for me what he might justly not have done, and what He has not done for the man who is not in a state of salvation. In my oiun salvation is wrapped up what is to me the mystery of all mysteries. But deep as the mystery is, my own salvation, according to the view I have of what consti- 9 le things rests, the jssion by •s, cannot m reason tent hini- lin point, of Divine otherwise conferred salvation ; it entirely influence, st because irience of )f what is javed with ay that, as Dwever far ihe soul, in ,ult of the •mining its the soul in ;e becomes graciously (k the diffi- while it is vinism, the confronts a is a Chris- spiritually 8urely if lave passed ving reason 11 otherwise lade to bear Lilt of God's 2, and what )i salvation. to me the tery is, my what consti- I I tutes the essence of Calvinism, compels me to be a Calvinist, inasmuch as I clearly see that I owe my salvation to God's doing that for me which He has not done for others, and but for which I had surely, but not the less justly, perished even as they. How can it be otherwise when I see *' 'Twas the same grace that made the feast That sweetly forced me in ; Else I had still refused to taste. And perished in my sin ( " ■' Who maketh thee to differ from another ? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive ?" IT.— HUMAN DEPRAVITY. While it is chiefly in relation to tli(? subject of predestina- tion or election that Calvinism is .misrepresented in such a way as to lead many to regard it as unreasonable and morally pernicious, those who apprehend aright the essential connection and inter-dependence of the several points on which issue is joined between Calvinists and their opponents, will see that all their ditlerencos turn radically on the view that is taken of man's condition as a sinner. It cannot but be that our views of the Divine action in man's salvation will corres- pontl with, and be determined by, the views we have of the condition from which that action delivers him. What God does for the sinner in saving him, must be precisely what his actual conditicm makes it needful to be done to put him in a state ,of salvation. W^e pi'opose, therefore, in considering in detail prevalent misconceptions of Calvinism, to begin with those of its teaching on the subject of human depravity. It may be well, however, before proceeding, to say that it must be understood that, in these articles, we assume not only the Divine authority of Scripture and its distinctive character as an inspired record of Divine revelation, but tho.se views of God that are implied in the doctrine of the Trinity, as it has always been held by the great body of professing Christians. We are not now dealing cither with sceptics or with Socinians. We are making a wciU-meant endeavour to disabuse the minds of Christian bretliren, who have been unhappily led to believe that we entertain views that in reality we ahhor and repudiate. These, we take it for granted, will assent to our statement that our views of the Divine action in our salvation- -whether it be the action that, in accordance with our common views of 10 Scripture teaching, we ascribe to the Father, or to the Son, or to the Holy Spirit, will essentially depend on what we believe to be man's condition (i8 a sinner, or on what we believe to be implied in the fact of human depravity. The French theologian, whose misrepresentation of the Calvinistic doctrine of election we quoted in our first article, gives the following as an " abbreviation " of the views of the Synod of Dort in reference to man's fallen condition : — " That by Adam's fall his posterity lost their free w^W, being put to an unavoidable necessity to do, or not to do, whatsoever they do, or do not, whether it be good or evil ; being thereunto predesti- nated by the eternal and effectual decree of God." And this or similar misrepresentations being inconsiderately accepted, as they very generally are, the Calvinistic system is charged with making God the author of sin, as placing man under a physical necessity of sinning, and then punishing him eternally for sinning, do what he may or can to avoid it. It is not needful, in the cause of Calvinism, to deny that inconsiderate and unwarrantable statements have been made on this subject, by its professing adherents. But no man can present such a view of Calvinistic doctrine as is given in the above quotation, without being open to the charge of want of candour, or of culpable ignorance of the sentiments of those who are entitled to be considered the proper exponents of the system. When a man says that Calvinists believe that, " by the fall of Adam men have lost their free will" and are " put to an unavoidable necessity to do or not to do whatsoever they do or do not," etc., he ought to know that he is using words fitted to produce a false impression. Who can believe the honesty of a well-in- formed man who would thus misrepresent the teaching of the pious and learned men whose actual teaching is, that " by the fall man does not cease to be man, endowed with intellect and will," and that " sin, which has pervaded the whole human race, has not taken away the nature of the human species, but depraved and spiritually stained it" ; " so that even this Divine grace of regeneration does not act upon men like stocks and trees, nor take«away the properties of his will, or violently compel it while unwilling ; but it spiritually quickens, heals, corrects, and sweetly, and at the same time powerfully, inclines it, so that whereas before, it was wholly governed by the rebellion and resistance of the flesh, now prompt and sincere obedience of the spirit may begin to reign, in which the renewal of our spiritual will and our liberty truly consist ?" 11 the Son, or , we believe elieve to be bion of the first article, iews of the on :— " That ng put to an iver they do, nto predesti- ." And this ely accepted, n is charged nan under a liin eternally t. It is not inconsiderate 1 this subject, resent such a ;->ve quotation, candour, or of lo are entitled tem. When a fall of Adam n wnavoidahle jr do not," etc., I to produce a y of a well-in- ieaching of the s, that " by the h intellect and whole human lan species, but that even this men like stocks rill, or violently quickens, heals, erfully, inclines averned by the npt and sincere i^ in which the :uly consist ?" While Calvinists emphasize the fact of man's sjnritual death — while, that is, they believe that human depravity includes all that is implied in man's being described as truly and totally " dead in trespasses and sins," they do not believe that spiritual death involves the loss of any distinctively human power or capacity. They believe that it involves the perver- sion of men s powers, under the control of dispositions of mind contrary to the will or law of God. They do, indeed, believe that the will of fallen man is in bondage ; but it is a bondage that he freely consents to and chooses and that is jdeasing to him. They believe, in other words, that in respect of his spiritual condition, sin has the complete rule of him, Satan leading him " captive at his will," the chains by which he holds him in captivity being his own lusts or depraved dispositions of mind. Notwithstanding his retention, in his fallen state, of I all distinctively human powers, in virtue of which God deals with him as a rational and accountable being, they believe he is spiritually dead — as truly and properly dead spiritually as a man is dead physically when the animal life is extinct. They recognize spiritual death as a fact, just as they recognize \ physical death. And they believe it may and does co-exist ? with the full vigour both of the animal and of the intellectual life. (See 1 Tim. v., 6.) And not only so, but they see, in the misdirected energies of the animal ancf the intellectual life, the very emphasis of the evidence of the spiritual death which is the universal condition of humanity, apart from its par^-^ipa- tion in the gracious provision announced in the Scriptures. It is not at all needful that we should either define spiritual death or prove its existence. It is enough, in view of the design of these articles, to say that when a Calvinist speaks of a man as being spiritually dead, he means that his spiritual condition is such that the forthputting of Divine power, i.e., of a power distinctively Divine or that God only can pat forth, is necessary to his being brought into the condition which is the opposite of spiritual death — the condition of being spiritually alive or living. As we arc here at the root of the whole ccmtroversy between , Calvinists and their opponents, we would be especially careful to guard against all misapprehension. The Calvinist, let it be distinctly understood, does not deny man's capability of much that is noble and praiseworthy, or his capacity of high and noble things in the various relations of humanity, in this pres-' .ent world, any more than he denies man's rationality. And I i 12 I i he knows that God will not dispense with man's use of the powers with which he is endowed, but will, in all His deal- ings with him, deal with him in accordance with his constitu- tion ; saving him, therefore, in the way of imparting to him such knowledge of Himself as He sees to be needful to his trusting Him, and to his turning to Him from his sins in the assurance of forgiveness. But he believes, with good reason, he is assured, that all God's dealing with him fails as to any saving result in his personal experience, apart from the forth- putting in his soul of a power distinctively Divine, such as is put forth in creation or in the resurrection of the dead. Ho sees that apart from the forthputting of this power, men are " as the horse or as the mule, which have no understanding " — that, possessed of rationality, they act irrationally in the things of God. Ho does not pretend to know the mode of the Divine operation : no man, no creature can understand the mode of operation that is distinctively Divine. But there is such a mode of operation, and there are things impossible to other operation. One of these, the Calvinist believes, is the sinner^ regeneration or spiritual quickening. He believes that his condition, as fallen, is such that Almighty power is needed to his personal salvation, and that his passing from death to life is the result only of the forthputting of power distinctively Divine, put forth, we know not how, back of and beyond all our powers of observation, by Him who " speaks and it is done," who "commands and all things stands fast." III.— HUMAN DEFUAYITY— (Continued). . There are many who attach no such idea to spiritual death as Calvinists do. To many, spiritual death is not a dis- tinct and awful reality. In their view, to speak of the sinner as bemg spiritually dead, is to use a strong figure expressive merely of moral weakness and imperfection. That man, as fallen, is spiritually dead does not, in their estimation, imply that he cannot attain to regeneration or come into a state of salvation by the use of the powers which, in his fallen state, he still possesses ; or that he cannot turn to God, except as the result of the operation in his soul of a power distinctively Divine, such as is put forth in creation, etc. We would be careful not to be misunderstood and to avoid all misrepresentation of the views of others. But we cannot but see that there are many who admit the necessity of Divine influences of some kind, in order to men's conversion and salvation, but who 13 \ use of the ,11 His deal- his constitu- •ting to him sedful to his s sins in the good reason, lis as to any )m the forth- le, such as is le dead. He wer, men are rstanding " — in the things af the Divine the mode of ;re is such a sible to other is the sinner's ieves that his r is needed to (1 death to life r distinctively nd beyond all laks and it is t." lued). I to spiritual bh is not a dis- : of the sinner ure expressive That man, as imation, imply into a state of his fallen state, , except as the ictively Divine, >uld be careful presentation of that there are uences of some ation, but who ,■■■* I nevertheless appear to come short of a right apprehension of the necessity of an operation distinctively Divine in regenera- tion. For they hold that, in order to a man's embracing the Saviour, nothing is needed beyond such influences as are com- mon to those who embrace the Saviour with those who reject Him ; and that one man's yielding to the Saviour while another rejects Him, is not to be ascribed to the forthputting of a power in the one case that is not put forth in the other, but entirely to an act of the human will equally competent to both. Here we, as Calvinists, are at issue with them : not, indeed, denying an experience of common Divine influences, or over- looking an act of the human will in yielding to or resisting and rejecting the Saviour ; but believing that the act of the will in yielding to and embracing the Saviour is to be ascribed only to the operation in the soul of a power distinctively Divine, such as that to which we ascribe creation or the raising of the dead. If our readers keep in mind the principle that our views of the Divine action in man's salvation will depend upon the views we entertain respecting man's actual condition as a sin- ner ; and that, according to the view of Calvinists, founded, as they believe, on a correct interpretation of Scripture and of the facts of human nature in the light of Scripture, man's con- dition as a sinner is one of spiritual death, they should not, we think, have any great diflSculty in seeing that Calvinists, as a matter of consistency, are shut up to the acceptance of the several particular doctrines of their system. And especially they can hardly help seeing, almost at a glance, that if their views of what is implied in spiritual death be granted, there can be no denying of their doctrine of efficacious or (as it is sometimes called) irresistible grace, though the latter term is apt to be misunderstood and requires explanation. Before proceeding, however, to consider the " point," whose consideration naturally comes next in order after that of the teaching of Calvinism on the subject of human depravity, it may be well to obviate certain misconceptions of Calvinism, involved in confounding or associating it with certain doctrines that have been matters of controversy from time immemorial, ; and in improperly ascribing to the views we have already presented difficulties that are not peculiar to Calvinism. ! From statements already made, it will be apparent, we think, to all candid persons, that those are mistaken who con- found or associate Calvinism with fatulism. Calvinism gives 14 no countenance to the notion that it is vain for a man to exert himself, in the way of using appropriate and available means, with a view to the accomplishment of any desirable end. As little does it give any countenance to the notion that man is under any pkyaical necessity of sinning. Rather, it holds such a necessity to be impossible. Any necessity of sinning under which a man lies, is, according to Calvinism, a moral necessity, such as does not lessen his responsibility or extenu- ate his sin. That a man is so morally corrupt, or so much the slave of evil propensities, that he cannot but sin, and cannot embrace the Saviour and turn from his sins to God is, every reasonable person will admit, something altogether different from his acting under the compulsion of an iron physical necessity, as fatalism teaches and Calvinism utterly denies. It is proper also to caution our readers against the error of confounding or associating the spiritual, bondage of the sin- ner, that Calvinism teaches, with the doctrine known under the name of philosophical necessity. Calvinists differ among themselves in regard to that doctrine, some being strongly opposed to it. There are, in(^eed, anti-Christian writers of the present day who beiieve it to be the essence of Calvinism, and who are probably incapable of seeing their mistake. The germ and starting point of Calvinism, as a religious system or system of Christian doctrine, lies in man's fallen condition. Any necessity of sinning or inability to do right, other than that involved in the fact that man is " dead in trespasses and sinsj" is outside of Calvinism, which, while it affirms of man all the liberty that is essential to full responsibility, raises no questions of a metaphysical kind in relation to the freedom of the human will. As a system, it is built upon the recognition of the fact that, created in the " image of God," man, in his fallen state, up to the time of his spiritual quickening or regeneration by the spirit of God, is properly and totally dead in sin, destitute of all power to do what is spiritually good, totally unable to save himself, dead to all that has power to move the spiritually quickened soul. In reference to difficulties which some suppose to be pecu- liar to Calvinism, it is known to many that men of the highest name, who have no sympathy with Calvinism, have pointed out the mistake of thinking that that system lies under any peculiar obligation to give a satisfactory account of the exis- tence and continuance of moral evil or sin. Calvinists do not profess to be able to solve the mystery of moral evil ; and other ■'v 4 .)• 'Jktkm 15 m to exert ible means, B end. As lat man is r, it holds of sinning m, a moral or extenu- much the md cannot )d is, every er different m physical ^ denies, ihe error of of the sin- lown under lifFer among ng strongly riters of the : Calvinism, stake. The s system or 1 condition. 1, other than jspasses and rms of man by, raises no ! freedom of recognition man, in his lickening or totally dead itually good, as pov^^er to B to be pecu- f the highest lave pointed 3 under any of the exis- dnists do not dl ; and other difficulties that may appear to be involved in their distinctive doctrines should, they believe, not count for much in the > judgment of a reverent and humble mind. They see that, as a matter of fact, God, whom they believe to be infinitely good and wise as well as almighty, has permitted certain of His intelligent creatures to fall by sin into a state of helpless ruin, from which, they believe, He is under no obligation of justice to deliver them. They accept what they believe to be the Scripture account of the entrance of sin into the world, accord- ing to which the human race was placed under such a consti- tution of things, that the first man's renunciation of his subjection to God has fatally affected his posterity. They are grateful for the light they have ; and they believe that, while God has an unquestionable right to establish connec- tions among His creatures, in virtue of which their moral conduct, good or bad, shall affect others as well as themselves, the ultimate issue will make it manifest that He overrules for good all the evil He permits, making it the occasion and the means of displaying His goodness, wisdom, righteousness, and power in a way and to an extent beyond what is possible, apart from the existence of a state of things which, meantime, is the occasion of perplexing thoughts. IV.— EFFICACIOUS GRACE. We trust the ground is now cleared for the removal from candid and considerate minds of misconception of the peculiar teaching of Calvinism. Dealing, as we now do, with those who accept the Scriptures as a record of Divine revelation, and who have reason to believe that they have themselves personal experience of Divine saving power in connection with their knowledge of Christian truth, we think they should not have any great difficulty in seeing that the particular doctrines of Calvinism must, if rightly apprehended, be, as a matter of con- sistency, accepted by those who believe that man's condition, as a sinner, is such that his salvation is impossible otherwise , than by the forthputting of power distinctively Divine. And ; though we fear there will always be some disposed to misrep- 'i resent, and even vilify, the doctrines of Calvinism, we hope I there are others who, seeing and feeling as we do on the sub- f ject of human depravity, will not be hard to convince that f there is nothing in Calvinism to which they can consistently A make objection. Those who are opposed to us on that subject * we must, at this point, take leave of, with the expression of le our sincere regret that they do not see what is to us one of the most patent of all facts, our perception of which depends not so much upon our observation of other men's principles of action as upon our study of ojir own moral condition in the light of Scripture. * If man's condition as a sinner is such as Calvinists believe it to be, nothing, one would think, can be more evident than that he must owe his personal salvation to the exercise of a power beyond and above his own, or that of any creature — a power that God only can put forth — or, using the language employed in controversy on the subject, to tlie efficacious grace of God — sometimes spoken of as vrresistihle grace, though, as already said, this tex*m needs explanr'ion. For, without explanation, the word may appear to give colour of justice to the misconception that continues current respecting our teaching on the subject. Tilenus, in full consistency, indeed, with his misrepresentation quoted in our second paper, but not the less unfairly, represents Calvinists as holding " that God, to save His own elect from the corrupt mass, doth beget faith in them, by a power equal to that whereby He created the world and raised up the dead ; in so much that such unto whom He gives grace cannot reject, and the rest being reprobate, cannot accept it." Now, of course, Calvinists do hold that God puts forth or applies His own omnipotence or almighty power in man's regeneration. They do so, because they believe that no other power is adequate to it. And they do hold that the application of that power is actually effica- cious in the regeneration of the man who is the subject of it. But the matter is totally misconceived by those who represent Calvinists as teaching that a man is regenerated and brought into a state of salvation, and, we may add, kept in it, in spite of himself, or in opposition to his own resistance of 1 'ivine influences, or even notwithstanding his own carelessness and indifference. For, according to the Calvinistic view, efficacious grace — the grace that saves — or the application of the Divine omnipotence in regeneration, or the communication of spiritual life, is not the influence that the sinner resists, but the grace that makes him cease resistance, the grace that so operates in his soul that his disposition towards God and His Christ is changed, the grace that makes hirti ivilling to be saved in God's own way. It is, perhaps, hardly needful to call atten- tion to the aniTnus of the abbreviator in expressing himself as if it was a ridiculous thing to suppose the need of omnipotence no 17 io us one of lich depends principles of lition in the inists believe evident than exercise of a y creature — a the language he efficacious dstihle grace, mr'ion. For, rive colour of snt respecting 1 consistency, • second paper, sts as holding upt mass, doth t whereby He so much that L and the rest irse, Calvinista n omnipotence T do so, because it. And they actually effica- e subject of it. who represent ed and brought t in it, in spite mce of l>ivine arelessness and ^iew, efficacious 1 of the Divine iion of spiritual 5, but the grace t so operates in i His Christ is to be saved in .1 to call atten- ssing himself as of omnipotence in so small a matter as man's regeneration. It is surely not necessary to say that the need of ])ivine power depends not on the quantity of the work to be done, but on the nature of it. Divine power is as much needed to the existence of an atom as of the universe, and the latter is as easy to it as the former. In view of the explanation now fjiven, one cannot help asking. Why should there be any difficulty in the matter to one who regnrds the sinner as being properly and totality dead f Or, why any hesitation to admit the fact of efficacious grace, breaking down and terminating the sinner's depraved and unreasonable resistance to God ? Or, why should there be any misunderstanding from the u$e of the word irresistihley ;when, from the nature of the case, the subject of the operation |s in such a c(mdition, and the distinctive nature of the opera- ition is such, that active resistance of the subject is impossible ? ■^OY let it be noted that th(! subject of the operation is dead — fndy, pro))erly, and totally dead ; and the operation is the Communication of life by tlie power alone that is capable of feommuiiieating it — i.e., the Divine omnipotence, the power of Him who " speaks and it is done," who " commands and all Ihiiiffs stand fast," who " calls those thinjjs that be not as (^hough they were." What is non-existent cannot resist the ||ower that calls it into being. The dead cannot resist the ower that imparts life. In the same sense and no other, to e same elfect and no other, the man who is spiritually dead Cfannot resist the Divine power that (juickens him, a power whose mode of exorcise is be\'ond our comprehension, and whose actual exercise is not a matter of direct (observation, put known only by its effects, to which Divine power alone is aWoquate. Who that admits the depravity of man, as held by Calvinists, can misunderstand them in their belief that human depravity is such that man stands out against all the influences that ought to move him. until he has undergone a change by tjie forthputting in his soul of a power distinctively Divine ? The Calvinist, as already said, cannot be satisfied with the view of some, that the Ijeliever having been made partaker of I^i^vine influences, in common with others who may not be SflfcVed, yielded to those influences, while the others did not.' There is, he feels, a defect in such an explanation. He may not deny the common influences or the act of the will in yfelding or resisting, but he feels he must go farther and d^per. He cannot resist the conviction that the yielding iiUlielf has a cause out of, beyond, and above himself — a cause 2 I * I I I I i t no other than the torthputtin^ of a Divine power that effectu- ally incliiH^l an?wi^rtohini.and liui to prayer and in a right frame us to diU'er from n ; but (luestions not tell ivhy God her than in that reanoa in hiw- 11. He sees that 1 in Ezek. xxxvi., ipon you, and ye •om all your idols [ o-ive you, and a ill^take away the you an heart of and cause you to udgments and do he is himself the g lothing more than , as he is reminded lis, saith the Lord id confounded for see reasons of & 1 instances of the i remarkable ; but > should fall upon her than others, is conjecture. Witli grace of which ht to a greater or less the instrumentali 19 ties with which his salvation is connected ; but that he should be a man actually in a state of salvation, notwithstanding all the dangers, on his escapes from which, often narrow and marvellous, he looks back with treud)ling gratitude, he cannot but jiscribe to something infinitely beyond his own power to choose and determine wisely and well for his own interests — ;even to nothing less than the exercise of a power distinctively , Divine, respecting the forthputting of which in his own behalf ( he can oidy say : " Even so. Father, for so it seemed good in Thy [sight. v.— ELECTION. The system of (christian doctrine denominated C'alvinism aKsumes, as we have seen, that man in his fallen state is spiritualbj deAid. We may indecil say that the whole system is built on the recognition of the fact that fallen man is properly and totally dead, without a pulse of spiritual life : his state being thus one from which there is no deliverance except as the effect of the forthputting of a power distinctively Divine. A Calvinist, therefore, is one who believes that when a man is saved, or brought into a state of salvation, he is saved only by God's putting forth, in his personal experience, a power that is exclusively His own, such as is put forth in creation or in the communication or restoration of life. He believes that, while this power may be put forth apart from the ijiBxercise of intelligence in the subjects of it, as it is in the case |)f infants and others regenerated by the Holy Spirit, the Ipiritual quickening of creatures possessed of intelligence takes lace in connection with the proper exercise of their intelli- ence and of the moral freedom with which it is associated, ut he believes, not the less, that the same Divine power is ceded for the spiritual quickening of the man whose intelli- ence is developed ever so highly, as much as for that of the uman being of undeveloped intelligence. If, because of the ossession of intelligence, the spiritual quickening is associated ith an act of intelligence and freedom in the one case, as it nnot be in the other, that act, he believes, is only and always e effect of the Divine power imparting spiritual life to the ead soul and determining its choice of Christ. The difficulties necessarily involved in the view which the lalvinist feels shut up to the acceptance of, by his own perience as a Christian, as well as by the teaching of Scrip- re, have been already adverted to, and do not call for further i' to tonsidemtioi). This, however, is the proper place to say that, beyond the point wu have now reached, C'nlvinisni piesents no peculiar difticulty. Rather, if we are satisfied to accept tlie teachini^ of Calvinism up to tl)at point, we must either carry our acceptance further, having only such difficulties to deal with as are not peculiai' to it, or refuse to go further, at the cost of having to deal with difficulties of a much more serious kind. This, we trust, will be apparent as we proceed. Although the doctrine of election hns heen mnde the hatfle- gnmvd of aj-saults upon C^alvinisni, and although it is perhaps mainly in connection with this dcjctrine that it is represented as unreasonable, unscriptural, and unfavourable to morality, objection to Calvinism on the ground of its doctrine of elec- tion is both unreasonable and out of place. For the Calvinist, in his belief of that df Calvinism in nisconception of ilvinism teaches :he powers he is hat he obtains ed about it and I can have oiiy ept as an infer- II the fact that ce Jesus Christ lents, Calvinists ern in his own inciple, that the an's use of the ' believe there is g fui'ther that a the groat salva- y yielding liim- i-ation of Divine e acts of his own ertainly moved ithin him of a mce with a pur- the language of s saved without that he " wills ireio by God's , and that God, kvitli a purpose, it to take it ill villing and run- ' 23 ning," he should be represented as teaching that " willing and running " have no place in the matter of his salvation. ] , VI.— VICARIOUS WORK OF CHRIST. We have seen that to the intelligent and thoughtful < believer, his own salvation is a matter of wonder as well as of = gratitude. That he is himself the subject of the ep^cacious grace of God ; or, in other words, that God, in the exercise of the power that is His alone, has " taken away the stonj'' heart out of his flesh and given him an heart of flesh," while he . might justly have been left to perish, as others, in his sin and unbelief, is a mystery that he cannot fathom. While, through the knowledge of the fact of his spiritual resurrection by the ■ Divine power, he rises to the' assurance of his election, his .; 'predestination to the saving experience which he is the subject , of adds nothinrj to the difficulty which, he freely confesses, ; he cannot conceive any solution of. On the contrary, as a ;' Calvinist, he cannot conceive of his experience being other y than the carrying out of a purpose. Following the ordei- that we have considered most con- ; veiiient in relation to the design we have in view, we come • next tt) the subject of Christ's atonement or His vicarious i tuork — a subject that may perhaps be tliought not to call for ' special consideration in connection with our present design, • inasmuch as, while the Calvinistic view of it will be generally admitted to be in harmony with the other teachings of Calvin- ism, any objection to which the Calvinistic view is supposed to be open is not much unlike what is urged against election. . W^e are persuaded, however, that there exists, to no small extent, very serious misconception as to what is really _ important in connection with the vicarious %vork of Christ — the portion of His priestly work that, in the belief of all for whom we now write, constitutes Him our Saviour. It is well known that Calvinists difl'er among themselves in reference to what is called the extent of the atoi^cvient of Christ. Some believe that while the death of Christ has secured many important benefits to the human race at large, it is proper to say that, confining our regard to the death of yChrist as the divinely appointed means of salvation, He died I only for those who are actually saved ; and others though holding firmly the other teachings of Calvinism, believe that he died for all men — for those who are not saved as well tis Mil for (and some may even say, equally and alike with) those who are saved. We shall assume, however, that the former is the view strictly consistent with Calvinism as a system. It would be aside from our purpose in these articles to argue the point, our design being not otherwise to vindicate the views of Calvinism than by endeavoring to obviate misconceptions respecting them. But it accords with this design to call atten- tion to the fact that the difierence between Calvinists and their opponents on the subject of the extent of Christ's atone- ment, implies a difference of view in relation to the 2>^«6*e that His vicarious work has in man's salvation. Those who believe that Christ died for those who are not saved equally and alike with those who are saved, must have views of the nature, design and results of Christ's work, in laying down His life, very different from the views of those who believe that He died only for those who are saved. In the judgment of Calvinists, the difference is of a very serious nature. There are certain points relating to Christ's vicarious work in relation to which, we may assume, there is a general agree- ment among Christians. They are generally agreed that it is the divinely appointed, way of salvation. Even those who are most opposed to Calvinism will allow that, on supposition that God would save sinful men, it is, using the language of the Apostle to the Hebrews, "becoming" that He should do so in the way that the Scriptures so fully indicate, and that, so far as we can see, it would not be " becoming" that men should be saved by the mere forthputting of power on the part of God, or otherwise than by the obed/ience unto death of the Son of God. All, except such as we have already taken leave of, believe that, in point of fact, according to Divine appointment, there is no way of salvation for any human being but Christ's vicarious work — His atoning or sacrijicial death ; and that God has, from the beginning, always or in every case, had respect to it, in saving sinners. And there is, we believe, an equally general agreement among Christians that the need of the vicarious work of Christ in order to salvation arises out of ih.^ justice of (tO(Z as the Moral Ruler. "It became Him, /or whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bring- ing many sons unto glory to make the Captain of their salva- tion pe7'fect through sufferings." But while there is so far a general agreement as to the place that the work of Christ has in our salvation, the Calvinist who is consistent, according to our opinion, in his view of the matter now before us, ascribes ^ 25 ike with) those lat the former is IS a system. It cles to argue the 2ate the views of ! misconceptions iign to call atten- 1 Calvinists and if Christ's atone- to the place that hose who believe jqually and alike s of the nature, g down His life, ho believe that the judgment of lature. i's vicarious work a general agree- agreed that it is Even those who it, on supposition ; the language of le should do so in i, and that, so far lat men should be the part of God, th of the Son of r taken leave of, k^ine appointment, being but Christ's death ; and that I every case, had is, we believe, an s that the need of ition arises out of became Him, /or things, in bring- lin of their salva- ! there is so far a ork of Christ has tent, according to before us, ascribes ^much more to the atoning death of Christ than those do who |believe that Christ died for all men. Those who believe that fChrist died for all men do not and cannot believe that His leath secured the salvation of all men, or actually obtained iheir salvation. They cannot consistently do more than believe ihat it made their salvation possible. But Calvinists believe fbhat Christ's death actually secured the salvation of all who are saved. They believe, in other words, that God having a ipurpose of salvation towards fallen man, the obedience unto death of the Son of God, in our nature assumed for that end, is, so to spe^k, the Divine action by which the salvation of all who are saved is obtained for them. It is, in their view, the wo^ that constituted Him the actual Redeemer of His peo- ple^ it is thie tnerltorious cause of their salvation ; the price by which He bought them, and -by which he secured for them all saving good. A Calvinist, therefore, in holding what is Ipalled the limited view of the atonement, does no more than hold that salvation was not obtained for those who never become actual partakers of it. As already said, we do not attempt to argue the correctness of the Calvinistic view. But we consider that it is a matter of some importance that it should be clearly understood, that the really serious difference between Calvinists and their opponents, in relation to the work of Christ, has ntit I'espect to the question. Did Christ die for those only who are saved or for others equally and alike with them ? but to the place that His work has in man's salvation. Holdincf, as the Calvin- ist does, that Christ's work was of such a nature that it secured or actually obtained salvation — including all saving good — he cannot believe that he died for all men alike ; while those who |iold that He died for all indiscriminately cannot believe that "His work was of such a nature as to secure the salvation of iiny, but must believe that it did no more than make salvation possible. Such a view of the work of Christ, Calvinists l>elieve, falls far short of the representations of Scripture respecting its place in human salvation ; and they cannot but regard it as open to objections of the most serit)us kind. These objections, it does not fall within the compass of our design to Consider. The objection to the Calvinistic view that it is fitted to affect the Tiiind of the anxious enquirer after.salva- lion, in the way of making him question his warrant to look |o Christ as his own Saviour, Calvinists cannot regard as |)eing of any weight. They dt» not believe that the knowledge ;< 26 that Christ died for him in particular is needed by the sin- ner in order to his trusting in Christ for salvation, any more than the knowledge of his election is needed. Faith, according to their view, has a sufficient ground in the knowledge that the God whom we have sinned against is " ready to forgive and plenteous in mercy to all that call upon Him," and that C^hrist ia " able to save to the uttermost all that come to God by Him." Not only does faith need no help from the know- ledge of the unrevealfid piirpose of God, or of the secret inten- tion of Christ when He laid down His life to secure our salva- tion ; but it is only in the v. ay of faith responding to the calh of God, addressed to all ivithout distinction, that andean come to the knowledge of things, the knowledge of miich attained otherwise could only be injurious to the soul. || Though we might here close the present article, it may be well to add a word in reference to the relation of .«aving faith to the work of Christ, according to what, so far as we know, is the general view of Calvinists. We may assume that all for whom we now write will admit that saving faith was exercised thousands of years before it could take the Christian form of faith in Christ crucified. The very earliest saving faith in God was, no doubt, iDiplicitly or in germ, faith in Christ crucified, as being faith in God as the God. of s(dvation through sacrifice. The faith of Abel was such as would most surel}' assume the Christian form of faith in Christ crucified, on the communication of the knowledge of Clirist crucified ; because it was the faith of one who, with all the ancient believers, " waited for the consolation of Israel." But that saving faith may have the form of faith in Christ crucifieil, it is, Calvinists believe, needful only that a man see or be satisfied that Christ, in dying, did what, in its nature or in its relation to the law of the Moral Ruler, was fully suffi- cient for bis salvation — so sufficient that God requires no more ill pai-doning sin, and man needs no more to warrant his dependence on Christ as his Saviour. To l^e thus satisfied, it cannot surely be needful that the sinner should know either that God has decreed his salvation, or that Christ secured salvation for him in particular. The wish to pry into these things, (/alvinists alway insist, is foolish and sinful on the part of those who have both the invitations and the commands of God to warrant their acceptance of Christ. And they equally insist that it is only by his acceptance of Christ, as tVeely ofiered to him in the gospel, that the sinner actually comes, or {i 27 Beded by the sin- Ivation, any more Faith, according; knowledge that ready to forgive Him," and that hat come to God ) from the know- the secret inten- secure our salva- iding to the calls', >n, that an V can wledge of miich the soul. H article, it may bei lation of saving what, so far as We may assume mit that saving )re it could take iified. The very iiniilicitly or in h in God as the ith of Abel was ian form of faith the knowledge of >ne who, with all lation of Israel." I faith in Christ y that a man see , in its nature or , was fully suffi- requii'es no more to warrant his thus satisfied, it )uld know either t Christ secured o pry into these inful on the part the commands of ^nd they equally Christ, as tVeely ctually comes, or [could safely attain, to the assurance that God purposed his [salvation, and that Christ secured or obtained it for him pur- suant to the Divine purpose. At the same time, a Calvinist cannot but think that his condition as a believer would be a h/ery unhappy one, were he debarred from believing that Christ, oy His death, had done any more for him than make his sal- tation 'possible or any more for him than for those who 'perish 'Aer'iially. VII.— PERMANENCE OF THE SPIRITUAL LIFE. IThe Calvinistic doctrine respecting the absolute certainty of i\\9fi.nal salvation of all who are ever brought into a state of iaJ(ation by the forthputting of the Divine power in their egeneration or spiritual quickening, is one in reference to which, perhaps as much as in 'reference to any other, many [entertain serious misconceptions ; and it is often represented in terms fitted to produce the impression that its tendency is very injurious in relation to men's spiritual or religious inter- jests. We believe that not a few of its opposers entertain the mistaken notion that Calvinists hold not only that those who [are regenerated cannot finally perish ; but that they may con- ^tinue to be assured of their safety, whatever sins they may be [guilty of, or however careless they may become in relation to Divine things and their own spiritual interests. And, indeed, it is not easy to see how any one can ascribe an injurious tendency to the Calvinistic view, except under such misconcep- tion. Nothing, however, can be more unjust and unwarrant- able than the ascription to Calvinists of any such belief. They do, indeed, believe that God will, in every case, preserve the spiritual life that He has imparted. But they believe that He (loos so in the use of means employed in accordance with man's constitution as a rational creature ; and they also believe that no man, whatever his experience may have been, or however safe he may be in the view of God and in his actual keeping, has or can have any well-grounded and satisfactory assurance of being or having ever been in a state of salvation, if, for the i time being, he has ceased to mortify sin, or is not "giving diligence to make his calling and election sure." A person may be guiltj"^ of great injustice in relation to tlie views of others, without any gross ascription to them of senti- 4 menfs which they do not entertain, or which may be the 4 reverse of what they believe. It can hardly be doubted that . /;-j»tt^ ' 28 > > the abhreviator of Calvinistic doctrine, to whom we have ah'eady had occasion to refer, is guilty of such injustice when he represents tlie whole teaching of Calvinism on the subject of the perseverance of the saints as being comprehended in the summary, " That " those who ha'^e been made partakers of saving grace "can never fall from it finally or totally, not- withstanding the most enormous sins they can commit." We fear there is under this and similar representations a desire to convey the impression that a man, according to Calvinistic teaching, is warranted to consider himself perfectly safe in committing any sin, however great, on the ground that he has experienced regeneration. Whether or not, we are not wth- out reason to think that such an impression is largely pi'^al- ent, notwithstanding the fact that, as already stated, CalviHsts believe that no man can have any well-grounded assurance of his regeneration while he is not mortifying his sins. Not to insist further on this, it is to be noted that such representa- tions as that above quoted fail to do justice to Calvinism by leaving out, whether intentionally or not, the Calvinist's ascription of the believer's safety to the grace and power of God alone. No one can be said to give a fair representation in the matter when he says, " Calvinists believe in men's con- tinuance in a state of safety in spite of all evil-doing," instead of saying, as he ought to do, " Calvinists believe that God will not permit any of His people to wander 'permanently from the way of truth, righteousness, and salvation." Calvinists do not profess to be able to draw a line beyond which the believer may not wander, or to specify a time within which he will be reclaimed. They know, alas ! that he may go very far astray and be very long a wanderer from God. But they believe that God will keep His eye upon him and His arm about him, and that He will eventually overrule for good his wanderings and his falls, and that He will do so in such a way as shall not lead him to think more lightly of the evil that is overruled for his good and the good of others. On the contrary, they believe He will do so in the way of making the wanderer bitterly regret his sin and folly, and of making his falls a means of humbling him and breaking him from reliance on other strength than God's, and of weaning him from the world. In view of the well-known fact that Calvinists are very far from holding the doctrine of the sinless perfection of believers, insisted on by some who traduce them, they cannot reasonably be thought to ascribe the security of God's people *'*'''^IBB gpBB«BWI|jl|l«il»ii!»llilll |i I' 29 vhom wo have I injustice when II on the subject rehended in the le partakers of or totally, not- i commit." We iions a desire to ^ to Calvinistic erfectly safe in und that he has e are not wth- largely p:^al- ;ated, Calvillsts ed assurance of is sins. Not to uch representa- o Calvinism by the Calvinist's e and power of • representation 3 in men's con- -doing," instead e that God will mmtly from the alvinists do not ch the believer hich he will be very far astray they believe arm about him, his wanderings ray as shall not is overruled for contrary, they the wanderer his falls a mm reliance on rom the w^orld. inists are very perfection of m, they cannot )f ( lod's people ing ^ito any desert on their part or any strength inherent in them, or io anything but the grace and power of God. They believe ^hat the sin which dwelli/ in all believers would make their 'Continuance in a gracious state impossible, were it not for the constant gracious forthputting of the Divine power in their behalf and in them. They know too well, as a matter of fact, that believers may be seduced or violently carried away by the devil, the world, and the flesh, into the commission of very grievous sins — sins exceedingly offensive to (Jod, worthy of death, as all sin is, and greatly wounding the conscience, and depriving the soul of the comfort of the assurance of a gracious state. But they believe that Scripture warrants the persi|^sion that while Ood, righteously and for reasons that We cg-n partially understand, permits His people thus to stray, Be will in no case fail to deal with them in such a way as to prevent their final apostasy. They cannot see in this persua- |ion any encouragement to sin, because they know, not only ihat these things subject the children of God to the discipline ^t the rod of Divine correction, but that the loss of all assur- ance of salvation and the revival of apprehension of final , perdition are a ■part of the correction that God employs «to ^U'ck them in their evil career and to reclaim them. Many know from their own sad experience that, while peace can be l?estored in such cases no otherwise than by penitent confession oi sin, as on the occasion of the soul's fiivst return to (Jod, the backslidden believer may be subjected to the experience of j^ore poignant mental distress than what he passed through in Connection with his first conversion — an experience, therefore iltted to make him more humble and careful in his walk for |lu' time to come. In short, while it is true that Calvinists rjegard the persuasion that God will not sufier him to perish eternally as being a most precious and even an essential ©lenient in the believer's assurance of his salvation, it is never to be forgotten that they strenuously insist that no sound assurance can stand with wilful or heedless departure from the Lo}-d, and that if a believer is guilty of the folly of jrrei^ihming lipcm his safety, so as to be less careful in his Christian walk, lie will be made to smart for his presumption. ■ A candid consideration of the ivlu.le teaching of Calvinism on the subject of the perseverance of the saints cannot fail, we <^ink, to impress the mind with the persuasion that it is in strict harmony with the Scripture representation of the believer's filial relation to God. A careful student of the j^ :«) 7nd" and "declare" in such terms that (jod "has ^ordained some to life" and " appointed otliers to perdition," as '?to *' represent Him as consigning to eternal perdition for not |Vielieving in (Christ those whom He had hy His owji decree rvrdairu'd to unbelief." Though it may be freely admitted that Calvinists of the ?j)resent (la}', if they were called anew to formulate their views ^)f Scripture teaching, would, for vari(jus reasons, very pro- il!)ably express themselves in terms somewliat ditt'erent front •those employed two centuries and a half ago, we do not hesi- !jtate to say that injustice is done to the Westminster Stan- ^dards in giving such a representation of theii* teaching. And ;we can assure the writer that Presbyterians can teach and act jis he believes they do, and, at the same time, cordially accept the teachings of their symbolical books. It will be observed <|;hat he makes a two-fold charge against the Confession and atechisms : (1 ) They " make salvation unconditional " ; and 2) they " represent God as consigning," etc. A brief consideration of the former charge will close the ^ resent article. The latter we shall endeavour to deal with in r other. In reference to the statement that our symbolical books I ' make salvation unconditional," the Guardian is mistaken if 16 thinks that we do not, in our teaching, make it uncondi- lional in the same sense as our Confession and Catechisms lo. And we think it should not be difficult to see that they o so, only in the sense in which every genuine Christian ust, as we believe, regard his own salvation as uncondi- ional, and not in the sense which the writer is obviously ttach'ng to the term. We submit that, after what has been id in more than one of our previous articles, it is not neces- ry to illustrate this distinction at any length. It should be nough to re-state the fact that, while back to a certain point, i man's salvation is conditioned on the determinations of his own will as a rational agent under moral government, every Christian mv^st come to a point in his spiritual history behind which there are no conditions. However patent the conditions on which his personal experience of salvation depends, and Biowever long the line of them may be, he must come to rest in prevenient grace. That God has, in His experience, done ^ J.; 84 in accordance with His word, " A new heart will I give you and a now spirit will I put within you," etc., he cannot ascribe to anything that (lod saw in him as a reason why hfi, rather than others, should have Ijeen made the subject of effica- cious grace. On the contrary, ho cordially accepts the remin- der, " Not for your sakos do I this, saith the Lord God, be it known unto you: be ashamed and confounded for your own ways." We believe it cannot be shown that our Standards " make salvation unconditional" in any other sense than that now indicated. The Guardian admits that we " teach that salva- tion is to be otlered to all, and that men are Irtst because they reject it," the individual man's salvation being thus conditioned on the free determination of his will. But so DO OUR Stan- dards. If there is inconsistency anywliere, it is not, as he thinks it is, between our teaching and that of our Standards. And if it be said, we are then inconsistent with ourselves, and our Standards with themselves, our reply to those who say so is, that to maintain their own consistency, they must go fur- ther and charge the alleged inconsistency on the Scriptures. But, in reality, there is, so far, no inconsistency, whatever we may find a little farther on. There is no inconsisf -^ncy between salvation being conditional in one sense or aspect and unconditional in another. The Calvinist, as we have insisted, cannot be satisfied with the view which some think exhausts or sufficiently explains the whole matter. That the gospel being preached to all men indiscriminately and the hearerS of it being in common made partakers of Divine spiritual influ- ences, one man, in the exercise of his free choice, yields to the Divine influence and embraces the oflfered Saviour, while another, in the exercise of the same freedom, resists the Divine influence and rejects Christ, does not, in the judgment of the Calvinist, exhaust the whole matter. While it is contrary to fact that, as one has expressed it recently, " the Word and spirit of God are given alike to all men to whom the gospel is preached " ; yet, even allowing the truth of a statement so manifestly unwarrantable, the Calvinist, as a Christian, can- not be persuaded that there is nothing behind or beyond " his own free act." That he has yielded to the Divine influence, instead of resisting it as others, is, he believes, the efect of the forthputting of a power distinctively Divine, wliich he also believes might, without any injustice on God's part, not have been put forth in his experience. f' ' i\ ' "^ II I give you annut ascribe rhy he, rather ect of effica- bs the remin- >rd God, be it '^or your own idards " make lan that now ih that salva- because they IS conditioned )0 OUR Stan- is not, as he ur Standards, ourselves, and )se who say so f must go fur- he Scriptures. , whatever we inconsisf ^ncy ! or aspect and have insisted, ;hink exhausts lat the gospel the hearers of spiritual influ- B, yields to the Saviour, while ists the Divine idgment of the is contrary to the Word and m the gospel is J, statement so Ghristian, can- )r beyond " his ivine influence, ,he efect of the wliich he also part, not have 85 We have no desire for controversy, and we have ondea- vourod as mucli as possible to refrain from vindicating the peculiar doctrines of Calvinism, otherwise tlian by being at pains to obviate prevailing misapprehensions. But should any one think our (^ndeavour worthy of notice in the way of ctm- troversy, we beg that, instead of ringing the changes (m the commonplace and stale generalities about electi(m and human freehy, back of and beyond his powers of observation, which is not put forth in the case of such as do not embrace Christ, and the forthputting of which in his own case he cannot but wonder at. If he and wo are as (me here, he will, we are sure, have no little difficulty in showing how he can evade the conclusions of Calvinism ; if wo differ, it were a waste of words to argue the matter further. II.— ELECTION AND PRETERITION— DIFFICULTIES. We have now to deal with the charge brought against the Westminster symbols, that they {viiiually, of course, or, as the Guardian puts it, by " inevitable logical consequence ") "repre- sent God as consigning to perdition for not l)elieving in Christ ,those whom he had by his own decree ordained to unbelief." Here, again, we would say that if there is inconsistency any- where, it is not between our teaching and that of our Stan- dards ; but between one portion of the teaching of the Standards and another. Of course we do not admit that our Standards are open to any such charge of inconsistency with themselves, any more than we can admit that our actual teach- ing is inconsistent with that of our Standards. And we might content ourselves with asking the Guardian to prove ; his charge from the language of the Standards. But consider- \ ing the object we have in view in these papers, we are willing I to be at pains to indicate how it is, as we think, that such dis- : torted views are so often given of the teaching of our Standards. ; It must be borne in mind that it is especially by reflection upon our own Christian experience, in the light of Scripture, 36 that we have a settled and tirin conviction in relation to those views which are disfcinctively Calvinistic. As a matter of fact, we regard the Divine procedure from a point which, while our view from it is very limited, has the great advantage of being a very nafe point of view. We feel we are on safe ground when we have our own religious experience — the actual facts of God's dealings with our own souls — to guide us in our thoughts about His procedure in the actual salvation of sinful Many, however, it seems to us, speak as if we were men. looking at things from God's own point of view, which we feel ourselves utterlv incapable of doing, and as if they themselves could take in the whole range of His vision, being fully per- suaded that He cannot see what they cannot, in relation to difficulties involved in the views which His dealings with our- selves compel our acceptance of. The meaning of this will, we trust, be evident enough to those who pay a due regard to what follows. The l)rethren who differ from us cannot hold more firmly than we do, and that in full and strict accordance with our Standards, that a man's salvation depends on the determina- tion of his own will as a rational creature endowed with moral freedom. So far as our actual teat ag is concerned, the"" Guardian will not dispute this. But -v.iy one who looks into the Standards must see that they also, as much as we, are in full accord with Scripture, in its calls to " repentance towards God and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ." There is, however, another aspect of truth in relation to our salvation that forces itself upon our attention and compels our convic- tion, especially in connection with our own personal religious experience. We cannot but see that our being in a state oi salvation, by our personal compliance with the invitations of the gospel, must be ascribed to God's having put forth in our souls a power that is exclusively His own — a power that He has not put forth in the case of those who are not in a state of salvation, and that, we are persuaded, He might have not put forth in our experience. And so far are we from thinking that we could have charged injustice on God, if He had not made us the subjects of the operation of this power, that, on the contrary, we can never cease to wonder that He did not leave us to perish in our sin and unbelief. That He did not, is to us an unfathomable mystery. Does not the writer in the Guardian feel, as a Christian, just as we do ? Is he not, as we are, at a complete nonplus in reference to 37 questions connected with his own salvation ? Further we cannot but believe that God, in putting forth, for no reason in us that we can see, the power that determined us to embrace Christ, did what He previously purposed to do, or acted in accordance with a purpose, as He did when He converted Saul of Tarsus, and (can we avoid saying?) as He does when He converts others. We are, as we have said, fully aware of the difficulty involved in the views to which we are thus shut up. But we cannot reject on that account, truths which we can see to be of no little importance in connection with our cherishing feelings which we regard as characteristic of genuine Christianity. Apart from details, what we have now stated constitutes the essence and totality of our Calvinism. Is it not, then, unworthy of a Christian controversialist to speak of our confession and catechisms as teaching, " by inevi- table logical consequence," that God ordains men to unbelief and then consigns them to perdition for not believing ? Even in relation to the awful subject of preterit/ion, no one is war- ranted to say either of our teaching or that of our Standards, that it goes farther than the recognition of the simple fact that God permits, or docs not interfere to prevent, men's con- tinuing in a state of unbelief, just as He permits, or does not interfere to prevent, their commission of sin, and the assertion that the permission, in the one case as in the other, is in accordance with a purpose to permit and overrule for good. That God has not permitted Jtim to continue in a state of unbelief, while it is to a Christian a matter of Avondering gratitude, cannot but compel him, one would think, to accept the views which some insist in placing in opposition to certain other truths relating to man's place and agency in the matter of his personal salvation, but which the Calvinist, let it be noted, holds not in opposition but simply in addition to them. Those views, indeed, he freely admits, do seem to involve consequences from which he feels he must shrink, and thus land him in' difficulties which, he confesses, he cannot solve. But, on the other hand, his conviction of the truth, in both aspects of it, is so strong and, he believes, so well- grounded, that he cannot but think that those are mistaken who are so confident in their charge of inconsistency. Con- sideriniT that we cannot ajo far in our reasonings aV)()ut the Being who is the sum of all perfection, without being con- fronted with difficulties in relation to the harmonious operation t'fj I 38 of the infinites, it is surely wise not to be too confident m the assumption that it is impossible for God to determine, or cer- tainly know, future events that depend upon the free agency of men. It is charged by the Guardian that " the greatest intellects of the Calvinistic school have utterly failed to recon- cile the necessitarianism of Calvinistic decrees with human freedom and responsibility." In our judgment, a great intel- lect will neither make the attempt nor demand it, but will see most clearly that such a reconciliation between the two aspects of truth as is here challenged, is beyond the present capacity of man. Probably Edwards will be allowed the first place among the great intellects of the Calvinistic school. The terms in which he closes a discussion on the Divine decrees may remind the Guardian, that he is mistaken in supposing that the ablest defenders of Calvinism are not aware of the point at which the greatest of intellects must acknowledge their weakness. " I wish," says Edwards, " the reader to con- sider the unreasonableness of rejecting plain revelations, because they are puzzling to our reason. There is no greater difiiculty attending this doctrine than the contrary, nor so great. So that though the doctrine of the decrees be mysteri- ous, and attended with difficulties, yet the opposite doctrine is in itself more mysterious, and attended with greater difficul- ties, and with contradictions to reason more evident to one who thoroughly considers these things." We trust the day is not far distant when holding, as we do, with our brethren in relation to man's place and agency, as an intelligent and accountable creature, in the matter of his personal salvation, the views to which we feel ourselves shut up respecting another and higher agency will be iio longer misunderstood, and when, though there are conclusions that may be legitimately drawn from these views, we shall no longer be held responsible for consequences which, though " logically inevitable," in the judgment of some, are so, we believe, only because our vision is human and not Divine. Ill— CLOSING WORDS. In concluding these additional explanations, occasioned by the Christian Guardian's notice of our endeavour to obviate prevailing misconceptions of Calvinism, we would express the hope that we may be excused if we have failed, in any meas- ure, in our efibrt to refrain from everything that might savour 39 of controversy. Though we have found it hardly possible to t^void occasionally making statements of a controversial char- acter, it is in no controversial spirit that we have been at pains to present a just view of the belief of Calvinists, We have been deeply grieved, from time to time, by coming in contact with the most unwarrantable statements respecting our views, and we have been induced to give our thoughts to the public, only because we would like to be of some use, however little, in abating what has of late become, in many quarters, a pre- vailing folly. While many are no doubt sincere in their oppo- sition to Calvinism and in their dread of it, as they apprehend it, we can fully endorse the statements of a letter received from a friend. " I have no desire," he says, " for doctrinal controversy as such ; but I have often been astonished, till familiarity dispelled astonishment, at the prevalance of misconception on this subject. And not only among the more ignorant, for many teachers, preachers, and writers of note take occasion to make a thrust at Calvinism, some of them as.suming that it is a dying creed of the past, so severe and harsh as to be out of sympathy with the warm living Christi- anity of this more free and enlightened dispensation." And he adds : " Many of our people, not able to answer the sneers or plausible attacks and distorted representations, remain silent, with some uncertainty as to the actual facts of the creed which they profess to hold." Fully justified as our imperfect endeavour is by the exis- tence of such a state of things, we feel somewhat confident that no one who has perused with care and in a spirit of candour what we have advanced on the subject, will be disposed to ascribe it to any narrowness of mind or want of Christian charity, that we frankly indicate our conviction that some of our Christian brethren are guilty of a breach of the law of Christ, in the way in which they deal with our acceptance of certain views of divine truth m addition to those important views which they and we hold in common. They cannot but see that we hold as firmly as they do, and value as highly, and teach as distinctly and fully, all the truths respecting God and man, which they hold and prize or regard as important. At the same time we believe that, besides the truths which they and we hold in common, there are certain other views which our own religious experience especially forces upon our atten- tion and conviction ; and we cannot help feeling that a wrong is done to us, when we are set upon and baited, in the way of 40 being incessantly challenged to give a solution of difficulties which, we clearly see, lie in a region so far above us that our inability to solve them is, we insist, not to be regarded as "a reason for rejecting truths which compel our regard, to say nothing more about our views being presented in terms which display, to say the least, a great want of discrimination. "We feel that we can, with all safety, assure those who are continually proclaiming the decadence of Calvinism and pre- dicting its speedy downfall, that their vaticinations will surely fail, so long as there are (we shall not say men of high intel- lect, but) humble and intelligent Christian believers, capable of reflecting on their own religious experience in the light of reason and Scripture. There will always be found among such, those who feel shut up to the acceptance of the views of truth, in relation to which many are hopelessly perplexed because they approach them, in some instances, not by a right method, and in other instances, not in a right spirit. Those who do intelligently accept them feel that they cannot reject them on account of the difficulties connected with them, especially when they see that the sacred writers never hesitate in relation to cither aspect of divine truth, but even put the two in close juxtaposition, without the least suspicion of their inconsistency. Take, for example, the words of Peter: "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknotvledge of God, ye have taken, and by ivicked hands have crucified and slain." "And now, brethern, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers. But those things which God hath before showed by the mouth of all His prophets, that Christ should suffer, He hath so fulfilled" And take further the words of the brethren, after the liberation of Peter and John : " Of a truth against Thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, were gathered together, for to do whatsoever Thy hand and counsel determined before to be done." I presume these will be re- garded as the words of inspiration. And do they not suggest the very difficulty on which the charge of inconsistency is based? Were our design a controversial one, we might multiply quo- tations and references. We might even appeal to the prophetic word at large and its fulfilment. But I submit that more than enough has been said to show how untenable and unsafe is the as- sumption that God cannot soorder things, thatHis determination, or certain foreknowledore, of the future shall not invade the free agency of His intelligent creatures, or affect their responsibility. • 41 Our design, as announced at the outset, has been to give such a representation of Calvinism as might help to free can- did minds from perplexities occasioned by prevailing miscon- ceptions. We have some reason to believe that we have not been employed in a vain attempt. However little hope we have of converting to our views those whose opposition to Calvinism is of a very pronounced kind, we are not altogether without hope that what we have written may lead some Christian brethren to be somewhat more cautious and less positive in their utterances in relation to views which they cannot yet see their way to the acceptance of. It is especially to be deprecated that brethren should make common cause with the caviller in reference to truths which both scripture and our own experience, we think, compel our conviction of. What although we cannot see their full consistency with other truths which, to our minds as well as theirs, rest firmly upon their own distinctive evidence ? They and we are alike agreed that religious cavils have for their ground the impious assumption that man's mind is the measure of God's, and that, were the bat endowed with reason, it would not so much abuse the endowment by making its own power of vision the measure of the eagle's, as the caviller abuses his gift of reason by making the range of his mental vision the measure of God's, and imagining that what is dark and difficult to him is therefore dark and difficult to God. If so, it is surely not asking too much from them, when we beg that, if they cannot yet see their way in relation to a certain class of truths which from our point of view, appear of no small importance, they will give up the use of the stock argument against us, namely, that we cannot solve difficulties which we believe cannot be solved in the meantime. If we are not mistaken, there are indications of the approach of the time when brethren who cannot yet see as we do, in reference to views which we hold in addition, and not in opposition, to the views which they and we hold in common, will not be incessantly appealing to our alleged vain attempts to solve difficulties in which our well-grounded convictions (as we regard them) involve us. They will surely see ere long that we are not quite so foolish as to think that we can place ourselves at the point from which we can clearly trace the hand of God in His govern- ment of creatures whom He has made in His own image, by endowing them with the attribute of moral freedom, and whom He thus, as it were, makes capable of a subordinate provi- 42 dence which it is necessarily, as we believe, not easy to reconcile with His own supreme and all-embracing Providence. We claim no superiority of intellect for ourselves; but we could not help thinking more highly of that of our brethren were they to confine themselves to the direct endeavour to point out the insufficiency of the grounds on which we rest the convictions to which they are opposed, instead of depend- ing mainly upon an argument which we cannot but regard as a weak and worn-out platitude. THE Cri.^T'^''^TAN GUARDIAN ON "MODIFYING T "-ONFESSION OF FAITH.'" The Christian Guardian has been recently directing the attention of "t" readers to the action of the London Presby- tery of the i'^L.^s^i. h 1'. sbyherian Church in relation to the " Westminster' Confesai^u." in an editorial headed " Modify- ing the ' Confession of Faith,' " it is stated that certain modifications or " amendments," were proposed in the Presby- tery and, after discussion, " carried " by a very large majority. Such a statement, we feel sure, cannot be regarded as a correct representation of the action of the Presbytery, as reported in the Christian World, whose report appears in the Review of January 2 1st, and is referred to by the Guardian. And the writer is certainly very greatly mistaken if he flatters himself, as he seems to do, that the Presbytery's action, or similar action elsewhere — such, for example, as was taken five or six years ago by the Synod of the United Presbyterian Church in Scotland — is indicative of a disposition on the part of the Presbyterian Churches to fall away from the distinctive principles of Calvinism. The writer in the Guardian is doubtless well aware of the doctrine of the " Westminster Confession " in reference to the supremacy of Scripture as a rule of faith. In view of its affirmation that " the Supreme Judge, by which all controver- sies of religion are to be determined," " can be no other but the Holy Ghost speaking in the Scripture," and that "all synods or councils since the Apostles' times may err (and many have erred), and are therefore not to be made the rule of faith and practice, but to be used as an help in both," the ready admission by Calvinists that every creed of human composition may be expected to bear, to a greater or less extent, the marks of human imperfection, will not be regarded as significant of 48 doubt or hesitancy in relation to any portion of their creed. Besides this, it should be borne in mind, though perhaps generally overlooked, that, if we rightly apprehend the distinctive character of a creed, we shall, however strong our persuasion may be that its statements are in full accordance with Scripture, be always prepared to find that it is more or less defective as an exhibition of Scripture truth. A creed is to be regu,rded not as a systematic exhibition of Scripture teaching, but rather as an accretion of articles or doctrinal propositions expressed in terms rendered necessary by the erroneous interpretation of Scripture. As one heresy has arisen after another, the Church has found it necessary to state the truth in terms other than those of Scripture, and directly contradictory of those in which error was being taught. The Church's creed is thus neither more nor loss than its views of Scripture truth in opposition to the various errors that have sprung up in the course of her history. It may be said therefore, to present, in a more or less systematic form the attainments that the Church has made in the determination of the doctrinal controversies through which she has passed. To Presbyterians and other " evangelical Calvinists," the Arminian controversy has been determined, as well as other controversies, in which Calvinists and Arminians are found on the same side ; and, so far as we know, there is but little disposition, on the part of 'Titelligent Calvinists, to throw away or even to belittle the attainment which, they believe, has been made in the settlement of that controversy. It may be that our fathers in dealing with Arminian views, have sometimes expressed themselves in terms little litted to conciliate opponents, and even fitted to intensify the repug- nance that some minds have to the truths to which they gave prominence ; and that they did not give to certain im- portant views of divine truth, which were not in controversy at the time, the prominence that they gave to views that were being hotly contested. Admitting so much, little more needs to be said in relation to the " Confession." And so much and nothing more, if even quite so nmch, will, we apprehend, be found by the candid and intelligent reader, in the account given in the Review, of the proceedings of the London Presbytery. We can hardly but think that more than one or two of the readers of the Review will be interested in noting that those proceedings have reference to a state of things almost identical with that indicated in our endeavour, in these columns, to 44 obviate " Misconceptions of Calvinism." As a matter of fact our views are widely miscom >ived and misrepresented. Be- cause we feel shut up, and that .i^pecially by our own experience as Christians, to certain viewy respecting the Divine Sover- eignfr^, we are repiesented by miny as teaching /a/aiism and casting a dark cloud on the wa}' of access to God which the gospel proclaims. In these circumstances, we are called, both in our individual capacity and in our Church Assemblies, to show that our Calvinism is not what many suppose it to be ; and especially that it is not a one-sided syste'm that deduces from one aspect of divine truth the negation of another, but a system which, on the one hand gives emphasis to that aspect of the truth, according to which the Christian ascribes his personal salvation to the sovereign exercise of the Almighty power of God, doing for him what He has not done for other's and might, without injustice, not have done for /lim, and which, on the other hand exhibits, at least equally with that of its opponents, the whole truth in relation to God's dealings with man as a rational agent under moral government and under a dispensation of mercy. If there are Christian brethren who cannot see as we do, while they are glad, with the Guurdian, to " see us coming out clearly on the great truth of the freeness of salvation for all," we trust they will not let themselves be carried away with the idea that our endeavours to vindicate ourselves against misconceptions are indicative of any disposition to modify our views respecting the Divine Sovereignty. They ought to know that it is no new thing for Calvinists to preach the gospel in terms of their Lord's commission. They ought also to know that our Standards give no uncertain sound in relation to the universality of the invitations and commands of the gospel, or in relation to man's responsibility. And, as we have more than once reminded our readers, there is nothing new in relation to the difficulty involved in our acceptance of views that appear to be in conflict with other undoubted truths. Calvinists have all along been familiar with the difficulty ; nor is there the least likelihood of its leading us to renounce our Calvinism ; because that, we believe, would only land us in greater difficulty. It is well, however, that, for the sake of those who misunderstand our position, and for the relief and comfort of those who are. in perplexity through misapprehension, emphasis should, from time to time, be given to the principle that we are on dangerous ground, when, for- 45 getting that God " is God and not man," we will not allow to Him a mode of knowing and acting that transcends our own. Ingenious men of the Calvinistic school, seeing the sure grounds of both orders of truth, will no doubt be always repeating attempts to solve difficulties. But we apprehend the " greatest intellects " will coincide with Edwards, in the quotation made in a former article, and with Locke, when he says, " I cannot have a clearer perception of anything than that I am free : yet I cannot make freedom in man consistent with omnipotence and omniscience in God, though I am as fully persuaded of both as of any truth I most firmly assent to ; and therefore X have long since given off the consideration of that question, resolving all into the short conclusion that if it be possible for God to make a free agent, then man is free, though I see not the way of it." Our readers will see that this is the ground tak-en in the London Presbytery. Surely a little reflection should satisfy the most sanguine Arminian, that he is mistaken in regarding it as indicative of the advance of Arminian sentiment