1. Dr. Nevin (^Mercersburgh Review, April, 1857, not writing from the Arminian point of view) compares the New-Testament idea of election with the Calvin- istic as follows: "Are the references to the idea of election in the New Testament such, as a general thing, that they may be fairlj^ construed in the known and established sense of the Calvinistic dogma; or are they so circumstanced and conditioned as to require plainly a different interpretation ? On this point there is no rotim for anj' serious doubt. The New-Testa- ment doctrine of election, as it meets us, for instance, in the epistles of St. Peter, and rules continually the thinking and writing of St. Paul, is something essen- tiall}' different from the doctrine of election which is presented to our view in Calvin's Institutes. The proof of this is found sufficiently in one single consid- eration. The Calvinistic election involves, beyond the possibility of failure, the full salvation at last of all those who are its subjects ; there is no room to con- I ceive of their coming short of this result in any single j instance, made certain as it is in the form of a specific I purpose and predetermination in the divine mind from all eternity. Election and glorification, the l)eginning and the end of redemption, are so indissolubly bound together that they may be considered different sides only of one and the same fact. The 'elect' in Cal- vin's sense have no power really to fiill from grace, or come short of everlasting life. But, plainly, the ' elect' of whom the New Testament speaks, the ' chos- en and called of God' in the sense of St. Peter and St. Paul, are not supposed to possess any such advan- tage ; on the contrary, it is assumed in all sorts of waj-s that their condition carries with it, in the present ■world, no prerogative of certain ultimate salvation whatever. They may forget that thoy were purged from their old sins, lose the benelit of their illumina- tion, make shipwreck of their faith, and draw back to everlasting perdition. They have it in their power to throw away the opportunities of grace, just as much as it lies in the power of men continually to waste in like manner the opportunities of more nature. Their salvation is, after all, hypothetical, and suspended upon conditions in themselves which are really liable to fail in every case, and which Avith many do eventually fail in fact. Hence occasion is supposed to exist, in the sphere of this election itself, for all sorts of exhorta- tion and warning to those who are the subjects of it, having the object of engaging them to 'make their calling and election sure.' The tenor of all is, 'Walk worthy of your vocation. Onl}' such as endure unto the end shall be saved. So run that ya may obtain.' Plainly, we repeat, the two conceptions are not the same. The difterence here brought into view is such as to show unanswerabl}' that the Calvinistic dogma is one thing, and the common New-Testament idea of election altogether another. The Calvinistic election terminates on the absolute salvation of its subjects ; that forms the precise end and scope of it, in such sort that there is no room to conceive of its failing to reach this issue in any single case. The N.-T. elec- tion, as it enters into the thinking of St. Peter and St. Paul, terminates manifestly on a state or condition short of absolute salvation. Whatever the distinction maj' involve, for those who are its subjects, in the wry of saving grace, it does not reach out at once to the full issue of eternal life. The fact it serves to estab- lish and make certain for them is of quite another character and kind ; it sets them in the way of salva- tion, but it does not make their salvation sure."
2. ]\Iartensen {ChriMian Dogmndat, Edinb. 1866), a modern I^utb2~an divine, remarks that Calvin " con-
founds predestination with the election of grace. The separation which is only temporal he made eternal, be- cause he laid its foundations in the eternal counsel of God. God, according to him, made from eternity a twofold election, because he hath foreappointed certain persons to faith and to blessedness, and certain others to unbelief and everlasting damnation. This awful election he further maintained to be purelj' uncondi- tional, and thus he mistook the true relations between the divine and the human. . . . From Calvin's point of view man has no history — at least so far as history includes the idea of a temporal and free life in which what is as j'et undecided will be decided ; all is de- cided beforehand — existence, life, destiny. . . . The true basis of the doctrine of election is given in the Lutheran doctrine of universal grace and conditional decrees" (§ 206-210).
o. Browne, bishop of Ely, in his Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles (N. Y. 1865, 8vo), gives a pretty full history of the doctrine of election, and maintains, in substance, the theorj' of "ecclesiastical election," viz. that, as the "Jews of old were God's chosen peo- ple, so now is the Christian Church ; that any bap- tized member of the Church is one of God's elect, and that this election is from God's irrespective and un- searchable decree. Here, therefore, election is to baj> tismal privileges, not to final glory ; and the elect are identical with the baptized ; and the ' election' consti- tutes the Church" (p. 402). His conclusion, from an examination of the passages of Scripture bearing on the question, is, "that the revelation which God has : given us concerns his will and purpose to gather to- ! gether in Christ a Church chosen out of the world, and that to this Church, and to every individual mcmlier of 1 it, he gives the means of salvation. That salvation, I if attained, will be wholly due to the favor of God, ] which first chooses the elect soul to the blessings of i the baptismal covenant, and afterwards endues it with ; power to live the life of faith. If, on the other hand, ! the proffered salvation be forfeited, it will be in conse- quence of the faults and wickedness of him that rejects I it. Much is said in Scripture of God's will that all i shall be saved, and of Christ's death as sufficient for all men ; and we hear of none shut out from salvation I but for their own faults and demerits. More than this cannot with certainty be inferred from Scripture, I for it appears most probable that what we learn there I concerns only predestination to grace, there being no ' revelation concerning predestination to glory" (p. 442). See also, for views somewhat similar, Faber, Primitive Doctrine of Election (New York, 1840, 8vo) ; Fry, Essay on Election (Lond. 1864). For the further literature, see Arminian'ism ; Predestination.