So just and conclusive is this reasoning that the long task of the absolute predestinarians has been to devise VIII.— 1 1
some expedient by which unconditional election and reprobation may be shown to be compatible with the divine attributes and with all known divine decrees. Several have been tried. (1.) Perhaps the most legit- imate of them all is that adopted by those divines who consider the divine will the ground of all rational and moral qualities and distinctions. If, as these divines affirm, nothing is rational or irrational, just or unjust, right or wrong, except that for the time being it is God's will that it should be so, then evidently an arbi- trary damnation of innocent beings may be just as right and proper an act as any other. If he wills it to be right, then it is right, however it may seem to us. Hence, on this scheme, we have only to suppose that God wills an act to be right to render it perfectly prop- er and consistent for him to perform it. Only on this hypothesis can irrespective predestination be success- fully defended. (2.) Another class of divines, unable to adopt this bold principle (according to which God is able to abrogate the moral law as easily as the old cere- monial one of the Jews), yet forced to mitigate in some way the revolting horrors of an irrespective reprobation, have sought relief in the following scheme : Men, con- sidered inpuris naturalibus, in themselves only, were in- capable of anything supernatural. Only by the aid of supernatural and divine grace could their nature be con- firmed and strengthened if it should remain in its integ- rity, or restored if it should become corrupt. To illus- trate his grace, God determined by an immutable de- cree to elect certain men, so viewed, to participancy in his grace and glory. To show his sovereign freedom, he determined to pass by the remainder (prceteritio7i), and not communicate to them that divine aid requisite to keep them from sin; then, when the persons passed by become sinners, he proposes to demonstrate his justice by their damnation. How much real relief this device affords may be seen by consulting Arminius, Declaration of Sentiments, or Watson, Institutes, pt. ii, ch. xxviii. (3.) Another expedient sometimes employed in the construc- tion of a predestinarian theodicy is to regard sin as a mere negation. As brought forward by Dr. Chalmers (Institutes, pt. iii, ch. v), it might be viewed as a mod- ification of the last-mentioned. Both fail to vindicate even the justice of God, since in each case the finally damned are damned solely for failing to do what they have no ability, natural or vouchsafed, to perform. (4.) A fourth scheme is called sublapsaiianism. In this the fall of man was antecedent in the order of the divine decrees to election and reprobation. All men are viewed as personally guilty of Adam's sin and justly obnoxious with him to eternal death. From this mass God sov- ereignly and graciously elected some unto life for a dem- onstration of his mercy ; the rest he reprobated to ever- lasting woe for a demonstration of his justice. In all this it is claimed that there was nothing inconsistent with God's character, since all might justly have been damned. It happens, however, that few are ready to acquiesce in this all-important premise, to wit, that all the descendants of Adam are justly obnoxious to eternal death on account of his sin, hence the conclu- sion avails nothing to most men. Failing in all these ingenious contrivances to harmonize unconditional pre- destination with God's known attributes and principles of administration as moral governor, the abettors of the doctrine usually come finally (5) to bare assertion. They maintain the unconditionality of election and reproba- tion on the one hand, and on the other the perfect jus- tice and benevolence of God and adequate agency of man, without attempting to reconcile the two. They resolve the palpable contradiction into a mere "mys- tery," and imperiously shut every opponent's mouth with the misemployed Scripture, " Who art thou that repliest against God ?"
As our limits do not admit of a methodical examina- tion of the various passages of Scripture in which Cal- vinists find their doctrine asserted or assumed, we shall be obliged to refer the reader to Watson, and to those
PREDESTINATION
498
PPEPESTI NATION
commentators who have not devoted themselves to Bib- lical interpretation merely as an advantageous polem- ical agency. We only remark, in passing, that no fact is more striking it significant in the whole history of Scripture exegesis than the steady gravitation of all Bound expositors to the exegetical views of the early Remonstrants. Tholuck gratefully acknowledges his Obligation to them, and even Prof. Stuart quite as oftt d follows Grotius as Calvin, [ndeed, he confesses that he cannot find irrespective election in Rom. viii, 28 30, nor can he see "how it is to be made out" on rational grounds {Com. Excursus, x. 177). In like manner he adopts the interpretation of Rom. vii. 5 25, w Inch it cost Arminius so much to establish, and believes the time is coming " w hen there will be but one opinion among in- telligent Christians about the passage in question, as there was but one before the dispute of Augustine with Pelagius" I Excursus, vii).