Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

conformable to the 11th and 12th Articles of our Church. For, we see that, although, in the 11th Article, it is asserted that we are justified by faith alone, and not for own works or deservings; yet, in the 12th, good works, which follow after justification, are said to be pleasing and acceptable ́to God, and ought to be esteemed as certain a sign of a lively and effectual faith as the fruit is of a lively and flourishing tree. The distinction that is observed between works done before andthose done after justification, in the two articles, is so very striking, as plainly to shew, that the former of them is relative only to those works which precede our reception into the covenant of God, through Christ, and is, indeed, the sense of St Paul; and the latter to those which are, on ought to be, subsequent to our being made Christians, and which this article (in conformity to St James) asserts to spring out necessarily of a true and lively faith, i. e. such a faith as has its effects and operations in the heart, and grows up into a uniform and steady principle of love and obedience. In the same sense are the words of St Augustin to be understood, as they are quoted by Bishop Bull, in his Harm. Apost. Diss. ult. c. iii.: "Bona opera sequuntur justificatum, non præcedunt justificandum." Although that author, to favour his own hypothesis, endeavours to wrest them from their plain and obvious meaning." Halifax's Sermon on Rom. iii. 28, p. 57, 58, 60, 61.

"I call works a necessary condition of our justification; because, most certain it is, that the only meritorious cause thereof is the satisfaction of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. But, in the Gospel-covenant, to which we are now admitted by baptism, faith and works are the conditions ; to the performance of which, through the power of his grace, God has annexed the promises of redemption; and, without the performance of which, a right to those promises can neither be acquired nor preserved. That faith is such a necessary condition all Christians are agreed." Bishop Horne's Sermons.

"The 13th Article says, "that works done before the grace of Christ and the inspiration of the Spirit are not pleasant to God, for as much as they proceed not of faith in Christ." But the preceding article, that "good works, which are the fruits of faith and follow after justification, are pleasing and acceptable to God, in Christ, as they spring out, necessarily, of a true and lively faith. Here is an essential difference between works and works; between the works of an unconverted heathen and those of a baptized Christian; between works performed before the grace of Christ and works performed in consequence of that grace. The word justification, as it was used at the reformation, was considered as synonimous with baptism. In Cranmer's Necessary Doctrine, in the article of justification, baptism is mentioned "as the way by which God hath determined that man, being of age, and coming to Christendom, should be justified. According to this idea by our justification is primarily to be understood our admission into Christianity, because it was sometimes used in that sense by the sacred writers. This admission into the Christian covenant is sometimes distinguished by the title of man's first justification; and because, by this justification, man is placed in a way to be eternally happy, he is therefore frequently said to be then saved. "By grace are ye saved," says the apostle, Ephes. ii. 8, which Mr Locke has shewn applies to admission into the Gospel-covenant." Daubeny's Append. vol. i. 181, &c.

"Man is justified, either when delivered from the slavery of sin, and put in a way of obtaining happiness under the Christian religion, which is sometimes called being saved, or when, at last, his salvation is fixed for eternity. As these two instances of the justification of mankind have been sometimes confounded, and the confusion has occasioned disputes, divines and our Church have called the admission into Christianity our first justification, and our salvation after death our final justification." Hey, Artic. 11, sect. 14.

"Thomas Aquinas held absolute predestination, and Luther, who had in his youth studied the system of Thomas, retained the doctrine, (which was also the doctrine of Wickliffe,) or rather carried it still farther. About this time we had here a set of people called Gospellers; they thought, that, if they magnified Christ much, and depended on his merits and intercession, they could not perish, which way soever they led their lives. The doctrine of predestination having been generally taught by the reformers, many of this sect began to make strange inferences from it; reckoning, that, since every thing was decreed, and the decrees of God could not be frustrated, therefore men were to leave themselves to be carried by these decrees. This drew some into great impiety of life and others into desperation. The Germans soon saw the ill effects of this doctrine: Luther changed his mind about it, and Melancthon openly wrote against it." Burnet's History and Jortin's Dissert. 95, 96.

"Pierre Martyr vint en Angleterre, 1547, où il avoit été invité par l'Archevêque de Canterbury, du consentement du roi; et il fut chargé d'enseigner la Théologie à Oxford. Il fut accompagné, dans ce voyage, par Bernardin Ochin." Sleidan, vol. ii. p. 445.

And Courayer says in his note that, "Pierre Martyr avoit plus de penchant pour l'opinion de Zwingle, sur l'eucharistie, que pour celle de Luther." And, in a following note, p. 495, he says, "que les ministres d'Edouard VI. ne songeroient à rien le moins qu'à introduire le Lutheranisme en Angleterre."

"Predestinatio in omnibus unius modi est, aut variat. Si unius modi, aut simpliciter conditionata est, in quâ propositum pendet a præscientia, vel simpliciter absoluta, in quâ præscientia nititur proposito. Varia autem fuerit, si partim hujus, partim illius sit generis; hujus in infantibus et aliquibus adultis, ubi naturam prævenit gratia; illius in adultis aliis, ubi natura prævenit gratiam. Postrema hæc semipelagianorum sententia erat; media fuit Augustini. Prima subdividi debet. Nam Dei propositum vel nititur præscientia eorum, quæ proveniunt a viribus gratiæ, ut Catholici communiter. docuerunt, vel eorum, quæ fluunt a virtute naturæ, idque vel secundum omnes actus, ut voluit Pelagius, vel solum quod ad fidem, et initium operum justitiæ ex fide, ut Julianus existimabat. Ex his satis liquet semipelagianorum fuisse sententiam, homines a Deo ad gratiam eligi, secundum præscientiam fidei et sanationis desiderium, quæ et primo Augustini sententia fuit. - Græci patres semper, et patrum Latinorum illi, qui ante Augustinum vixerunt, dicere solent eos esse prædestinatos ad vitam quos Deus pie recteque victuros prævidit. Verum non intellexere præscientiam

eorum,

66

eorum, quæ homo acturus erat ex viribus naturæ, sed quæ facturus esset ex viribus gratiæ, tum prævenientis, tum subsequentis; eoque antiquitatis ille consensus nihil, vel Pelagianos vel semipe lagianos juvat. Nam patres merita intelligunt ex Gratia viribus profecta. Fidei, quoque, ex cujus prævisione electionem factam dicunt, tam initium quam consummationem gratiæ viribus debere arbitrantur. Et quamvis communis ante Augustinum sententia fuit causam prædestinationis ad gratiæ incrementum et gloriam dari ex parte hominis, non tamen putarunt dari ejus causam secundum omnes gratiæ effectus, cum saltem prima gratia, ex qua ipsum fidei initium et imperfecta boni cupiditas oritur, non detur propter aliquid in homine prævisum, sed ex Dei liberalitate confertur. Et sic sensit Augustinus ipse priusquam adversus Pelagium scriberet; sic enim ille lib. quæst. 83, super illud, "dilexi Jacob, Esau odio habui; cujus cult, miseretur et quem vult, indurat," inquit, "verum hæc voluntas Dei injusta esse non potest, venit enim de occultissimis meritis." Et lib. ad Simplicianum primo, quæst. 2. "Nemo eligitur, nisi jam distans ab illo qui rejicitur. Unde quod dictum est, quia elegit nos ante mundi constitutionem," non video, quomodo sit dictum, nisi præscientia, scilicet meritorum, i. e. fidei et operum pietatis, Neque retractavit hæc Augustinus. Sed ut fortius premeret Pelagium communi patrum, et a se jam episcopo defensa sententia appendicem hanc annexuit, quod gratia uni præ altero offeratur, inque uno magis quam alio efficax sit, id ab absoluto Dei decreto provenire. Nihilominus hanc sententiam minime potuit Augustinus Catholicis omnibus persuadere. Siquidem eorum aliqui absolutum salvandi decretum reprehendebant, ut incertum, alii ut falsum, utrique ut novum, nec prædicandum. Sed si duos actus in Deo distinguimus, quorum priori, qui est intellectus, prævideat, quid libere acturus sit homo pro hac illâve, aliâ item, aliâve rerum constitutione; posteriori autem, qui est voluntatis, præ ordine alio quem eligere poterat, eum eligat, quem nunc elegit, parebit, duas istas sententias de prædestinatione divina, quarum una conditionatum statuit prædestinationem, altera absolutam, posse conciliari. Nam quatenus decretum de hoc illove salvando aut damnando, factum non est sine prævia scientia, et consideratione eorum, quæ homo pro arbitrii libertate, seu bene ex viribus gratiæ, seu male ex naturæ corruptione acturus esset, fatendum est illud niti præscientia Dei conditionatà, nec alios esse electos, quam in quibus gratiæ suæ auxilia efficacia esse prævidit. Sed si intueamur, ut Deus liberrimus alium occasionum, auxiliorumque ordinem eligere potuerit, secundum quem, qui nunc libere credit, et perseverat, libere aut non crediturus, aut non perseveraturus erat, negari non potest, eo respectu prædestinationem factam esse ex absoluto decreto conferendi illa media, per quæ deus hominem certo salvandum prævidit. Et satis liquet illum de prædestinatione absoluta solum incidentem, non principalem fuisse controversiam, et Augustinum non fuisse ursurum dogma de absoluto decreto, si Pelagius et ejus reliquiæ recedere voluissent ab ipso doctrina quâ statuunt, gratiam secundum merita dari; quod etiam illi docent, qui dicunt fidei initium et perseverantiam esse ex nobis. Nec patres ante Augustinum, vel alii, qui conditionatum prædestinationis decretum docent, idcirco diffitentur esse insuper decretum quoddam sublimius ανεξιχνίαςον και ανεξερεύνητον, quod versatur circa administrationem mediorum ordinatorum ad salutem, ut ad alios sermo evangelii mittatur, ad alios non mittatur. Sed qui absolutum decretum docebant, patiebantur eos, qui id improbarent, suo sensu abundare, hoc solo contenti, ut si dogma de absoluto decreto odiose ab iis traduci, atque impias inde conclusiones elici viderent, animose et voce et

scriptis responderent. Etsi voluntas Dei in se sit simplicissima, tamen ratione objecti duplex est, quia absolute vult et simpliciter, quomodo creare mundum voluit. Vide Ps. cxv. 3. Aliqua item vult cum conditione, quæ idcirco in effectum non prodeunt, nisi conditione impletà, quomodo omnes homines salvari vult, sed per et propter Christum fide apprehensum. Atqui non omnes fide apprehendunt Christum. Quo respectu tales in æternum statuit damnare. De conditionatâ illa Dei voluntate exstant longe plurima apud veteres Scriptores, vide Theophilum, Clementem, Origenem, Ambrosium, Chrysostomum, et Augustinum ipsum, cujus quarta interpretatio apostoli verborum, 1 Tim. ii. 4 est, quod loquitur apostolus de voluntate antecedente et conditionatâ ; quomodo judex voluntate antecedente vult hominem omnem vivere, hoc est, quatenus considerat hominem ante peccatum, sed voluntate consequente vult, hunc vel illum morte mulctari, quatenus nempe spectat, ut adulterum, seu homicidam. Nam post Pelagii exortam hæresin sic scribit, "Vult Deus omnes homines salvos fieri, et in agnitionem veritatis venire;" non sic tamen, ut eis adimat liberum arbitrium, quo vel male vel bene utentes justissime judicentur. Quod cum fit, Infideles quidem contra voluntatem Dei faciunt, cum ejus evangelio non credunt, nec ideo tamen eam vincunt, verum se ipsos fiaudant magno et summo bono, malisque pænalibus implicant, experturi in suppliciis potestatem ejus, cujus in donis misericordiam contem serunt." Lib. de spiritu et litera, ad Marcellinum, cap. 23. "Operæ est pretium audire Anselmum, qui, quam Chrysostomus et Damascenus primam et antecedentem vocant voluntatem, eam ipse appellat voluntatem misericordiæ, quamque illi nominant voluntatem secundam, hanc idem vocat justitiæ voluntatem. Sic enim scribit in Matt vi. "Duæ sunt voluntates in Deo, una misericordiæ, quæ non est cogens, nec aliquid libero arbitrio aufert, quâ omnes homines vult salvos fieri, quod tamen in libera voluntate illorum positum est. Est alia quæ est de effectibus rerum. Quæ autem est de effectibus, alia ést permittens, alia approbans. Permittens est, quod efficiat malum, quandocunque vult; approbans autem est, quod faciat bonum, quandocunque vult. Itaque homines resistunt voluntati misericordia, et non resistunt voluntati justitiæ." Sed ex his et similibus patrum locis, quibus Christus universorum hominum Salvator ex Apostolo Paulo dicitur, non hoc sic intelligi debet, quasi reapse effecerit, ut omnes actu serventur; sed quia omnia effecit necessaria, ut servari possent. Nam quamquam non omnes ingrediantur salutis viam, causa tamen hæc Christi non est, cum is viam patefecerit; sed culpa eorum, qui ingredi nolunt." Extracts from Vossius de Hist. Pelag. See books 6 and 7.

[ocr errors]

"Absoluta prædestinatio primo directe invertit Sacram Scripturam. Vide Mar. xvi. 16; Joan. i. 16, 36. Secundo: comparata est omnem religionem extinguere, producendo in aliis securitatem carnalem, et in aliis desperationem; et omnem pietatis sectandæ et impietatis fugiendæ curam extinguit. Tertio: evertit meritum Christi. Quarto: invertit naturalem ordinem; quia statuit decretum de æterna salute ac damnatione illius, de cujus creatione Deus nullum fecit decretum. Et doctrina de absoluta reprobatione pugnat cum Dei sanctitate, justitia, sinceritate, sapientia, et amore." Limborch, Theol. Christ. lib. iv. c. 2, 6.

"Sententiam Augustini iisdem plane difficultatibus gravatam fuisse, quibus prædestinatòrum sententia gravari solet, satis clare docet Prosper, in epist. ad Augustinum; "Hæc sententia et lapsis

curam

curam resurgendi adimit, et sanctis occasionem torporis adfert, eo quod in utramque partem superfluus labor sit, si neque rejectus ullâ industriâ possit intrare, neque electus ullâ negligentiâ possit excidere. Quoquo enim modo se egerint, non posse aliud erga eos quam Deus definivit accidere, et sub incerta spe cursum non posse esse constantem; cum si aliud habeat prædestinantis electio, cassa sit annitentis intentio. Removeri itaque omnem industriam, tollique virtutes, si Dei constitutio humanas præveniat voluntates, et sub hoc prædestinationis nomine fatalem quandam induci necessitatem, aut diversarum naturarum dici Dominum conditorem, si nemo aliud possit esse quam factus est." Episcop. Resp. ad Def. Cam. c. iii.

“Si historia omnium retro sæculorum videatur, omnes qui vocantur orthodoxi patres ita adstruxerant divinæ gratiæ necessitatem, ut libertati arbitrii nihil derogaverint, et contra libertati arbitrii ita sunt patrocinati, ut gratiæ divinæ primas semper ac potiores partes in conversione hominis dederint. Unde consequenter deinde elicitur eos omnes prædestinationem ad gloriam nullam aliam statuisse, quam quæ secundum præscientiam aut prævisionem fidei est. Neque vero Origini recte hanc sententiam, ut primo Authori, attribuit Beza, tanquam si reliqui patres ab eo velut hæresiarcha in errorem abducti fuissent, aut Pelagio multo post secuturo imprudentes famulati essent. Fuit enim hæc unanimis et constans adeoque seria omnium pæne patrum, qui ante Pelagium, imo ipsum Origenem vixerunt, sententia; imprimis quoties Magis, Gnosticis, Valentinianis, Marcionitis, aliisque fati patronis, sese opponebant. Ita Prosper: "Pæne omnium par invenitur et una sententia, quâ propositum et prædestinationem Dei secundum præscientiam receperunt, ut ob hoc Deus alios vasa honoris, alios vasa contumelia fecerit, quia finem unicujusque præviderit, et sub ipso gratiæ adjutorio, in qua futurus esset voluntate et actione, præscieret. Augustinum etiam ipsum quod attinet, etsi is, ut a Pelagio quam longissime recederet, nonnunquam in alterum extremum abreptus videatur, tamen certum est ab eo nunquam hoc caput aut negatum aut oppugnatum fuisse; alioquin enim quorsum liberum arbitrium tam aperte tam constanter adseruisset, aut quo titulo illud adserere potuisset? Sed quicquid sit de Augustini mente quæ adeo obscura videtur multis in locis, ut nullæ nunc fere in lucem exeant sententiæ, licet distantes toto cælo, quæ illius authoritate sese non venditent ac commendent, nemini unquam crimen hæreseos Pelagiana impactum fuit a synodo ulla, eo nomine quod prædestinationem secundum præscientiam factam statuerit." Episcop. in Rom. c. xi. 33.

"It is not to be denied, but that the seventeenth Article seems to be framed according to St Austin's doctrine, and it is very probable that those who penned it meant that the decree was absolute; but yet, since they have not said it, those who subscribe the Articles do not seem to be bound to any thing that is not expressed in them. The three cautions, that are added to it, do likewise intimate that St Austin's doctrine was designed to be settled by this Article. Though others do infer, from these cautions, that the doctrine laid down in the Article must be so understood as to agree with these cautions; and therefore they argue, that, since absolute predestination cannot consist with them, that therefore the Article is to be otherwise explained. The remonstrant side have this farther to add, that the universal extent of the death of Christ seems to be very plainly affirmed

a

« PoprzedniaDalej »