garded, as either partially or wholly a fignrative representation, or as being an ancient fable or fiction.

Notices. Fred. Ulr. Calixti, Tractatus theolog. de vario hominis statu. Helmst. 1695. 4to. (Is. Peyrerii, Praeadamitae; 1655. 8vo.) Fausti Socini, Disput, de statu primi hominis ante lapsum; Racov. 1609. 4to. and in the Biblioth. fratr. Polon. On the perfection of the first men; (German,) in (Junge's) Philosoph. and Theolog. papers, vol. 1. p. 207. On the propagation of the divine

image, and on the apostasy, and its consequences; (in German,) Ibid vol. II. p. 1 and 153. Eichhorn's History of the creation; (in German,) published by J. Ph. Gabter, II vol. 8vo. 1792–93. (Hadriani Beverland, Peccatum originale xar' ¿oxnv sic dictum; Eleutherop. 1678. 8vo. Eden: that is, Contemplations on Paradise, and the events that transpired there; (in German,) with a preface, by C. F. Bahrdt; Francf. 1772. 8vo.

J. Kant, Supposed commencement of the history of man: (German;) in the Berlin Monthly Journal, vol. VII. P. I.

The allegorical exposition of the three first chapters of Genesis, and particularly of the apostasy, represented in their falsehood; (in German,) by J. Balth Lüderwald; Helmst.

1781.

J. G. Rosenmüuller, Explanation of the history of the apostasy; (Gerinan,) in the Repertory for biblical and orient, literature; vol. V. p. 158 &c.

The most ancient Theodicée; or explanation of the three first chapters of the Ante-Mosaic history; (in German,) by W. A. Teller; Jena 1805. 8vo.

SEC. 185. Hereditary sin.

The doctrine of the Protestant churches respecting hereditary sin, was as strong, as Augustine ever advanced; for, the milder statements of Zwingle, were not regarded. It did not indeed deprive men avowedly of liberty; but it made them absolutely unfitted to perform any thing morally good, and deserving of damnation. It was decided, however, in the Formula of Concord, in opposi

tion to Matthias Flacius, that hereditary sin is not a part of the substance of man. The Council of Trent, on account of the prevailing differences in the bosom of the Catholic church, did not venture to establish a definition of hereditary sin; so that different explanations of it, continued to be given; for the Dominicans and Augustinians held more closely with Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, while the Franciscans and Jesuits departed farther from them. The Socinians rejected hereditary sin, altogether: and the Arminians would not allow of a connate desert of punishment, and an unfitness for what is good. Attempts were made, in the Protestant churches, to render the imputation of Adam's sin more comprehensible. Joshua de la Place rejected the immediate imputation of it; but his idea was not embraced, by his own church, or that of Switzerland. At last, several voices were raised in England, against hereditary sin; as those of John Locke, Thomas Burnet, and John Taylor. Daniel Whitby would derive the universal prevalence of sin, from man's mortality; which Adam's transgression had brought upon all his posterity. In Germany, the foundation for a change of sentiments, was laid by the LeibnitzianWolfian philosophy; and subsequently, Toellner and Eberhard directly assailed the doctrine of hereditary sin, and its imputation: and notwithstanding Seiler, and others, advocated the other side; it became more and more common, to trace the sinfulness of mankind, not from the apostasy of Adam, but as Jerusalem does, from the influence of the senses. Even those theologians, who, like Reinhard and Storr, continue to maintain the existence of hereditary sin, have abandoned the old doctrine of the church, in some very important particulars. The Kantean hypothesis, of a radical evil in human nature, continued no longer, than the charm of its novelty endured: yet it has contributed to establish the principle, that every sin originates from a man's own fault.

Notices, Jos. Placaei, Theses de statu hominis lapsi ante

gratiam; Salm. 1640.. Ejusd. Disp. de imputatione primi peccati Adami; 1655. Dan. Whithby, Tractatus de imputatione divina pecati Adami posteris ejus in reatum; Lond. 1711. and revised by J. S. Semler; Halae 1775. 8vo. John Taylor, The Scriptural doctrine of original sin; in German, from the 3d Eng. ed. Francf. and Lips. 1769. J. G. Toellner, On hereditary sin, and the goodness of human nature; (in German.) in his Theological Inquiries, Vol. I. P. ÌI. Judas Iscariot, or Evil considered in its connexion with Good; (in German,) by C. Daub; Heidelb. 1816 -18. 8vo. P. 1. and P. II. sec. 1 and 2.

SEC. 186. Grace and predestination.

On the doctrine concerning grace, Luther followed the views of Augustine, in all their extent; and he defended them, with great earnestness, against Erasmus. Melanchthon, at first, expressed similar sentiments; but he gradually drew back, and would not exclude the personal activity of men. This change in Melanchthon, seems to have reacted upon Luther, who at last, did not disapprove of the idea of his friend; and in his later writings, he speaks of universal grace. The theory of Melanchthon, (that of co-operation,) when advanced by Victorinus Strigel, at Jena, was violently assailed by Matthias Flacius, and his coadjutors. In the mean time, John Calvin, though not without strong opposition, had introduced into the Genevan church, the doctrines of unconditional decrees, and of special grace; which were either discarded, or esteemed unimportant, by the first Swiss reformers; and he was able to gain over the other Swiss divines, to these doctrines. Between one of his adherents, Jerome Zanchius, and John Marbach, a Lutheran divine of Strasburg, a contest ensued, on this subject; but it was soon dropped. The Formula of Concord excluded the personal activity of man, in his conversion, and rejected the doctrine of co-operation. But, as the authors of this creed, maintained the universality of divine grace, and disapproved of unconditional decrees, they found themselves under an embarrassment; from

which they knew not how to free themselves, though they understood how to conceal it.

Notices. Des. Erasmi, Diatribe de libero arbitrio ; s. Collatio cum M. Luthero; Basil. 1524.-Mart. Lutheri, de servo arbitrio Liber, contra Erasmum; Vitenb. 1525. (cum annotatt. editus a Seb. Schmidio; ed. 2. cum praefatione apologet. Jo. Joach. Zentgravii; Argentor. 1707. 4to.)-Erasmi, Hyperaspistes, diatribe adv. Servum arbitr. Lutheri; Bas. 1626.—On the doctrinal views of the first Reformed divines; (German,) in J. Conr. Füsslin's Preface to the 3d and 4th volumes of his Contributions to the history of the Swiss churches and their reformation.--Consensus pastorum ecclesiae Genevensis de aeterna Dei praedestinatione; in Calvini Opp. T.VII. p.

683.

SEC. 187. Continuation.

In the conference of Montbelliard A. D. 1586, the doctrine of election was brought under warm discussion, between James Andrea and Theodore Beza; and the contest with Samuel Huber, completed the separation between the Calvinists and the Lutherans. During these contests, the Lutheran divines discovered, and Aegidius Hunnius explained, a way to reconcile the total unfitness of man for what is good, and the sole efficiency of divine grace, with the rejection of unconditional decrees: and this was, to assume that, men can resist preventing grace. In the mean time, warm contests had arisen among the Reformed, especially in the Netherlands. The Arminians would not allow the Calvinistic theory, of unconditional election, special grace, irresistable influences of grace, and of saint's perseverance, to be urged upon the whole church. But the erudition of Simon Episcopius, and the unwearied activity of John Wytenbogart, had to succumb to the power of the opposite party, who were supported by the civil authorities; and the national Synod of Dort, solemnly established those Calvinistic doctrines.

Notices. Acta colloquii Montisbelligartensis; Tub. 1587. 4to.-Thodori Bezae, Responsio ad Acta col. Mont. Ge

nevae 1587. 4to.-Epitome colloquii Montisbell. Tub. 1588. 4to.-Aegidii Hunnii, Tractatus de providentia Dei, et aeterna praedestinatione; Francf. 1597. 8vo.Acta synodi Dordrechti habitae; Hanov. 1620. 4to.Acta et scripta synodalia Dordracena ministrorum Remonstrant. Harderv. (1620.) 4to.

SEC. 188. Further disagreement in the Reformed churches respecting these doctrines.

Notwithstanding the decisions at Dort, diversity of opinions continued. Those decisions approved the sentiments of the Infralapsarians; and also, did not reject those of the Supralapsarians. The Brandenburg divines acknowledged the universality of grace. And in France, likewise, a hypothetical universality was held forth, by John Cameron and Moses Amyraud; approved, by the French synods at Alençon A. D. 1637, and Charenton A. D. 1645; warmly contested, by Andrew Rivet and others; and defended, by John Daillé and David Blondel. The Dutch theologians looked upon this opinion, as very suspicious; and the Swiss divines endeavored, to guard against it, by the Formula Consensus. In England, the Episcopal church, more and more, went over to the doctrine of universal grace; and even the Swiss, after the time of Alphonsus Turretin, began either to abandon the old particularism, or to consider the whole subject of the controversy, as unimportant. In Germany, Lange and Waldschmidt exchanged the last controversial pieces, on this subject; and even Samuel Endemann, strongly as he once held to the doctrinal views of his church, did not hesitate, to reject the doctrine of unconditional decrees, with most of its dependant doctrines. (The very recent attempts at union of the Lutherans and Reformed in Germany, have occasioned a renewed examination of these doctrines, by the holy Scriptures.)

Notices. Jo. Cameronis, Defensio de gratia et libero arbitrio; Salmur. 1624. 8vo.-Traité de la predestination et de ses principales dependances; par Moyse Amyraud;